Nonsurgical home treatment of middle ear effusion and associated hearing loss in children. Part I: clinical trial
Abstract
We conducted a randomized, controlled clinical trial to investigate the efficacy of treatment of persistent middle ear effusion (MEE) and associated hearing loss with a modified Politzer device used in the home setting over a 7-week period. Efficacy was determined by comparing pre-and posttherapy air-conduction thresholds, tympanometric peak pressures, and otoscopic findings. The study group was made up of 94 children (174 ears), aged 4 to 11 years, who had at least a 2-month history of MEE and associated hearing loss. At study's end, patients in the treatment group experienced statistically significant improvements in all measured outcomes; no significant improvements were seen in the control group in all measured outcomes. At study's end, the hearing sensitivity of 73.9% of the treated ears was within normal limits, compared with only 26.7% of the control ears. These findings demonstrate that home treatment of children with persistent MEE and associated hearing loss with the modified Politzer device is highly efficacious.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
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?
In Arick 2005, complete compliance was achieved in 46 of 47 experimental patients (97.9%).
“Complete compliance in 46 of 47 ex- perimental patients (97.9%), moder- ate compliance in remaining patient”
From Autoinflation for otitis media with effusion (OME) in children (2023) · cites this paper as Arick 2005
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Autoinflation for hearing loss associated with otitis media with effusion
Perera, R., Glasziou, P. P., Heneghan, C. J., McLellan, J., & Williamson, I. (2013) · Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews · doi:10.1002/14651858.cd006285.pub2 · Cited by 109 · see citing works
Autoinflation for otitis media with effusion (OME) in children
Webster, K. E., Mulvaney, C. A., Galbraith, K., Rana, M., Marom, T., Daniel, M., Venekamp, R. P., Schilder, A. G., & MacKeith, S. (2023) · Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews · doi:10.1002/14651858.cd015253.pub2 · Cited by 21 · see citing works
- Authors
- Arick, D. S., & Silman, S.
- Affiliations
- New York Eye and Ear Infirmary (US)
- City University of New York (US)
- Venue
- Ear, Nose & Throat Journal
- Publisher
- SAGE Publications
- Published
- 2005-09
- Volume
- 84
- Issue
- 9
- Pages
- 567-578
- ISSN
- 0145-5613 (ISSN-L)
- 1942-7522
- OpenAlex
- W35652691
- Cited by
- 29
- References
- 0
- Citations by year
- 2026: 4 · 2025: 1 · 2024: 1 · 2023: 3 · 2022: 1 · 2021: 2 · 2020: 2 · 2019: 1 · 2018: 2 · 2017: 1 · 2016: 1 · 2015: 2 · 2013: 1
- FWCI
- 1.58
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- Ear Nose & Throat Journal (publishedVersion)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- Funders
- National Institutes of Health (5r44dc003613-03)
- National Institute on Deafness and Other Communication Disorders (5R44DC003613-03)
- Topics
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Otorhinolaryngology › Ear Surgery and Otitis Media
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Oncology › Ear and Head Tumors
- Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Hearing Loss and Rehabilitation
- Keywords
- middle ear effusion, otitis media with effusion, hearing loss, home treatment, conservative treatment, children, air conduction thresholds, tympanometry, otoscopy, treatment efficacy
- MeSH terms
- Acoustic Impedance Tests, Air Pressure, Audiometry, Pure-Tone, Auditory Threshold, Child, Child, Preschool, Eustachian Tube, Hearing Loss, Conductive, Humans, Insufflation, Nose, Otitis Media with Effusion, Otolaryngology, Single-Blind Method, Treatment Outcome
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