Aural microsuction: an analysis of post-procedure patient safety incidents
- PMID: 37792209
- DOI: 10.1007/s11845-023-03540-1
Aural microsuction: an analysis of post-procedure patient safety incidents
Abstract
Background: Aural microsuction can be associated with delayed syncopal and vertiginous events, which can lead to serious adverse patient safety incidents.
Objective: This article highlights the serious risks associated with microsuction.
Materials and methods: We performed a retrospective review of the hospital risk database over a 2-year period.
Results: Three patients experienced severe adverse events post microsuction. Two patients fell down the stairs after microsuction, with one suffering a lower limb fracture. One patient experienced loss of consciousness and subsequent head trauma post microsuction.
Conclusions and significance: Whilst aural microsuction is universally accepted to be a low-risk procedure, subsequent serious morbidity can occur. Implementation and awareness of local safety policies are imperative to avoid post-procedure injury.
Keywords: Falls; Microsuction; Patient safety.
© 2023. The Author(s), under exclusive licence to Royal Academy of Medicine in Ireland.
Similar articles
-
Nystagmus and Vertigo During Aural Toilet Using Microsuction.Audiol Res. 2025 Mar 19;15(2):33. doi: 10.3390/audiolres15020033. Audiol Res. 2025. PMID: 40126281 Free PMC article.
-
Microsuction aural toilet in ENT outpatients: a questionnaire to evaluate the patient experience.Eur Arch Otorhinolaryngol. 2010 Dec;267(12):1863-6. doi: 10.1007/s00405-010-1326-8. Epub 2010 Jul 4. Eur Arch Otorhinolaryngol. 2010. PMID: 20607265
-
Audiovisual distraction reduces pain perception during aural microsuction.Ann R Coll Surg Engl. 2013 Jan;95(1):34-6. doi: 10.1308/003588413X13511609955535. Ann R Coll Surg Engl. 2013. PMID: 23317724 Free PMC article.
-
Aural microsuction.BMJ. 2017 Jun 29;357:j2908. doi: 10.1136/bmj.j2908. BMJ. 2017. PMID: 28663220 Review. No abstract available.
-
Patient safety incidents associated with obesity: a review of reports to the National Patient Safety Agency and recommendations for hospital practice.Postgrad Med J. 2011 Oct;87(1032):694-9. doi: 10.1136/pgmj.2010.106989. Epub 2011 Jul 25. Postgrad Med J. 2011. PMID: 21788232 Review.
Cited by
-
Nystagmus and Vertigo During Aural Toilet Using Microsuction.Audiol Res. 2025 Mar 19;15(2):33. doi: 10.3390/audiolres15020033. Audiol Res. 2025. PMID: 40126281 Free PMC article.
References
-
- Clegg A, Loveman E, Gospodarevskaya E (2010) The safety and effectiveness of different methods of earwax removal: a systematic review and Economic Evaluation. Health Technol Assess 14(28). https://doi.org/10.3310/hta14280
-
- Pothier DD, Hall C, Gillett S (2006) A comparison of endoscopic and microscopic removal of wax: a randomised clinical trial. Clin Otolaryngol 31(5):375–380. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1749-4486.2006.01288.x - DOI - PubMed
-
- Gray RF, Nicolaides AR (1988) Vertigo following aural suction: can it be prevented? Clin Otolaryngol 13(4):285–288. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2273.1988.tb01133.x - DOI - PubMed
-
- Addams-Williams J, Howarth A, Phillipps JJ (2010) Microsuction aural toilet in ENT outpatients: a questionnaire to evaluate the patient experience. Eur Arch Otorhinolaryngol 267(12):1863–1866. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00405010-1326-8 - DOI - PubMed
-
- Prowse SJ, Mulla O (2014) Aural microsuction for wax impaction: survey of efficacy and patient perception. J Laryngol Otol 128(7):621–625. https://doi.org/10.1017/s0022215114000796 - DOI - PubMed
MeSH terms
LinkOut - more resources
Full Text Sources
Medical