Objective evaluation of nonsurgical treatment of prominent ears: A systematic review
- PMID: 37694192
- PMCID: PMC10491642
- DOI: 10.1016/j.jpra.2023.07.002
Objective evaluation of nonsurgical treatment of prominent ears: A systematic review
Abstract
Background: The prominent ear is a type of congenital ear deformity that can be corrected by a variety of nonsurgical treatments, such as splinting and the taping method. However, there is no objective evaluation method that is universally accepted. The aim of this review is to evaluate objective measurement methods that are used in the available literature to analyze nonsurgical treatment of prominent ears.
Methods: A systematic review was performed in the MEDLINE and Embase databases in December 2022 and updated on April 2023 according to Preferred Reporting Items for Systematics and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guideline. Any study using objective measurements (continuous variables such as distance and angle) to evaluate the effect of nonsurgical treatment of prominent ears was included. The Joanna Briggs Institute (JBI) critical appraisal for case series was used for quality assessment.
Results: A total of 286 studies were screened for eligibility, of which five articles were eligible for inclusion. All of the included studies were case series. The helix mastoid distance (HMD) is the most commonly used parameter to measure treatment outcome. Pinna and cartilage stiffness, length, and width were also used, but without clear statistical relevance. HMD was classified into grading groups (i.e. good, moderate, and poor) to evaluate the treatment's effect.
Conclusion: Based on the included studies, objective measurements are rarely used, and when used, they are largely heterogeneous. Although HMD was the most frequent measurement used, all studies used different definitions for the measurement and grouped subsequent outcomes differently. Automated algorithms, based on three-dimensional imaging, could be used for object measurements in the nonsurgical treatment of prominent ears.
Keywords: Ear-well; Nonsurgical treatment; Objective evaluation; Prominent ears; Splinting.
© 2023 The Author(s).
Conflict of interest statement
None.
Figures
References
-
- Choi JY, Jung SC, Sykes JM. Clinical outcome and patients’ satisfaction study after otoplasty using hybrid techniques in adult patients. Journal of Craniofacial Surgery. 2017;28(5):1278–1281. - PubMed
-
- Jones ES, Gibson JAG, Dobbs TD, IS Whitaker. The psychological, social and educational impact of prominent ears: A systematic review. Journal of Plastic, Reconstructive and Aesthetic Surgery. 2020;73(12):2111–2120. - PubMed
-
- Van Wijk MP, Breugem CC, Kon M. A prospective study on non-surgical correction of protruding ears: The importance of early treatment. Journal of Plastic, Reconstructive and Aesthetic Surgery. 2012;65(1):54–60. - PubMed
-
- Pediatrics Group of the Chinese Medical Association O-HaNSB Expert consensus on ear molding for congenital auricular deformation. Chinese Journal of Otorhinolaryngology Head and Neck Surgery. 2019;54(5):4. - PubMed
-
- Muraoka M, Nakai Y, Ohashi Y, Sasaki T, Maruoka K, Furukawa M. Tape attachment therapy for correction of congenital malformations of the auricle: Clinical and experimental studies. The Laryngoscope. 1985;95(2):167–176. - PubMed
Publication types
LinkOut - more resources
Full Text Sources
Miscellaneous