Abstract
A series of 26 patients with diagnosis of otitis externa were given treatment consisting of either drops only or manual aural toilet followed by aural drops. The efficacy in terms of resolution of symptoms and clinical signs were compared. In all but the most minor of cases, adequate curative treatment had to consist of complete aural toilet as well as aural drops. It was also shown that without aural toilet and visualization of the tympanum, more serious middle ear pathology could be missed.
This study indicates that unless the patient is given the opportunity to have his ears properly cleaned, the general practitioner may not only be giving inadequate and ineffective treatment, but he may also be missing serious ear disease.
Full text
PDF
Selected References
These references are in PubMed. This may not be the complete list of references from this article.
- Barton R. P., Wright J. L., Gray R. F. The clinical evaluation of a new clobetasol propionate preparation in the treatment of otitis externa. J Laryngol Otol. 1979 Jul;93(7):703–706. doi: 10.1017/s0022215100087569. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Lambert I. J. A comparison of the treatment of otitis externa with 'Otosporin' and aluminium acetate: a report from a services practice in Cyprus. J R Coll Gen Pract. 1981 May;31(226):291–294. [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- McDonald T. J., Neel H. B., 3rd Symposium. ENT for nonspecialists. External otitis. Postgrad Med. 1975 May;57(6):95–97. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]