Cited by 5Reconstructive Facial Surgery TechniquesCongenital Ear and Nasal AnomaliesCraniofacial Disorders and Treatments

Ear molding therapy of congenital ear anomalies: long-term aesthetic outcomes and caretaker satisfaction.

Alper, David P., Almeida, Mariana N., Craver, Andrew, Hosseini, Helia, De Baun, Heloise M., Moscarelli, Jake, Collar, John L., Parikh, Neil +2 more·2024·Aesthetic Plastic Surgery

Abstract

Introduction Ear molding is a safe, non-surgical approach to treat newborns with congenital ear anomalies. In this study, we aimed to investigate long-term aesthetic outcomes and caretaker satisfaction from ear molding therapy.Methods A retrospective chart review from 2018 to 2020 was conducted for infants who underwent ear molding treatment at our institution. Patient demographics and treatment related variables were collected. Caretakers were surveyed regarding their experience, expectations, and aesthetic outcome at 1 year (short-term) and 3 years (long-term) from treatment. Independent physicians evaluated treatment efficacy. Responses were converted to a Likert scale (1-5), with 5 representing most desirable.Results Overall, 38 of 42 patients participated in our long-term study (90%) for a total of 62 ears. Average follow-up was 3.31 ± 0.50 years after completion of treatment. Mean age at treatment was 23.2 ± 19.7 days with a mean treatment duration of 21.7 ± 7.7 days. Caretakers' satisfaction regarding auricular appearance remained high (short-term: 4.18 vs. long-term: 4.17, p = 0.54) and anticipated social distress decreased over time. Physician aesthetic evaluations were favorable between "somewhat effective" and "very effective" and remained consistent over time (short term: 3.46 vs. long-term: 3.31, p = 0.31). Furthermore, physician evaluations were higher for deformations than malformations (p = 0.04) and in children who began treatment by 30 days old (p = 0.04).Conclusion Caretaker satisfaction from ear molding therapy remained high after long-term follow up, and social distress from the perception of their child's ears decreased with time. Physician aesthetic ratings confirmed efficacy, with better outcomes seen in deformations than in malformations.Level of evidence iv This journal requires that authors assign a level of evidence to each article. For a full description of these Evidence-Based Medicine ratings, please refer to the Table of Contents or the online Instructions to Authors www.springer.com/00266 .

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1007/s00266-023-03523-8

Cites

25 of 25 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • Virtually all studies evaluating ear molding efficacy have focused on short-term results, with follow-up limited to less than a few years.

    “Virtually all studies evaluating ear molding efficacy have focused on short-term results, with follow-up limited to less than a few years.7,9–16”

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

1 of the 26 references couldn’t be matched to a known paper.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Alper, D. P., Almeida, M. N., Craver, A., Hosseini, H., De Baun, H. M., Moscarelli, J., Collar, J. L., Parikh, N., Shah, J., & Alperovich, M.
Affiliations
Yale University (US)
Corresponding author
Alperovich, Michael
Venue
Aesthetic Plastic Surgery
Published
2023-08-11
Volume
48
Issue
7
Pages
1241-1248
ISSN
  • 0364-216X (ISSN-L)
  • 1432-5241
OpenAlex
W4385751955
Cited by
5
References
26
Citations by year
2026: 3 · 2025: 1 · 2024: 1
FWCI
1.34
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Aesthetic Plastic Surgery (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Surgery › Reconstructive Facial Surgery Techniques
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Genetics › Congenital Ear and Nasal Anomalies
  • Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Genetics › Craniofacial Disorders and Treatments
Keywords
congenital ear anomalies, ear deformity, auricular malformation, social distress, treatment timing, infants
MeSH terms
Congenital Abnormalities, Ear, External, Esthetics, Female, Follow-Up Studies, Humans, Infant, Infant, Newborn, Male, Retrospective Studies, Time Factors, Treatment Outcome, Caregivers, Patient Satisfaction

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review