PMCCPMCCPMCC

Search tips
Search criteria 

Advanced

 
Logo of bmjThe BMJ
 
BMJ. 1990 December 1; 301(6763): 1251–1253.
PMCID: PMC1664378

Ear wax removal: a survey of current practice.

Abstract

OBJECTIVE--To determine the methods of removing ear wax used by local general practitioners and the incidence of associated complications. DESIGN--Postal survey of 312 general practitioners serving a population of about 650,000; supplementary study of ear, nose, and throat outpatients to quantify the improvement in aural acuity after wax removal. SETTING--Catchment area of the Edinburgh otolaryngological unit. PARTICIPANTS--289 General practitioners who responded to the survey; 21 outpatients in the ear, nose, and throat department with occlusive wax. RESULTS--274 General practitioners removed wax by syringing, but only 53 (19%) always performed the procedure themselves; the remainder routinely delegated the task to practice nurses, some of whom had received no instruction. Ears were rarely examined again after the procedure. Complications had been experienced by 105 practitioners (38%) and included perforation, canal lacerations, and failure of wax removal. The removal of occlusive wax improved hearing by a mean of 5 dB over the frequencies analysed. CONCLUSIONS--About 44,000 ears are syringed each year in the area and complications requiring specialist referral are estimated to occur in 1/1000 ears syringed. The incidence of complications could be reduced by a greater awareness of the potential hazards, increased instruction of personnel, and more careful selection of patients.

Full text

Full text is available as a scanned copy of the original print version. Get a printable copy (PDF file) of the complete article (665K), or click on a page image below to browse page by page. Links to PubMed are also available for Selected References.

Selected References

These references are in PubMed. This may not be the complete list of references from this article.
  • Morrison AW. 'Silence in court': twenty-one years of otolaryngology litigation. J Laryngol Otol. 1990 Feb;104(2):162–165. [PubMed]
  • Prasad KS. Cardiac depression on syringing the ear. A case report. J Laryngol Otol. 1984 Oct;98(10):1013–1013. [PubMed]
  • Burgess EH. Earwax - and the right way to use an ear syringe. Nurs Times. 1977 Oct 6;73(40):1564–1565. [PubMed]
  • HINCHCLIFFE R. Prevalence of the commoner ear, nose, and throat conditions in the adult rural population of Great Britain. A study by direct examination of two random samples. Br J Prev Soc Med. 1961 Jul;15:128–140. [PMC free article] [PubMed]
  • Warwick-Brown NP. Wax impaction in the ear. Practitioner. 1986 Apr;230(1414):301–301. [PubMed]
  • Meyers AD. Managing cerumen impaction. Postgrad Med. 1977 Jul;62(1):207–209. [PubMed]
  • Sim DW. Wax plugs and cotton buds. J Laryngol Otol. 1988 Jul;102(7):575–576. [PubMed]
  • Horowitz JI. Solvents for ear wax. Br Med J. 1968 Nov 30;4(5630):583–583. [PMC free article] [PubMed]
  • Fraser JG. The efficacy of wax solvents: in vitro studies and a clinical trial. J Laryngol Otol. 1970 Oct;84(10):1055–1064. [PubMed]
  • Chaput de Saintonge DM, Johnstone CI. A clinical comparison of triethanolamine polypeptide oleate-condensate ear drops with olive oil for the removal of impacted wax. Br J Clin Pract. 1973 Dec;27(12):454–455. [PubMed]
  • Fahmy S, Whitefield M. Multicentre clinical trial of Exterol as a cerumenolytic. Br J Clin Pract. 1982 May;36(5):197–204. [PubMed]
  • Seiler ER. Ear syringing. Br Med J. 1980 May 24;280(6226):1273–1273. [PMC free article] [PubMed]

Articles from The BMJ are provided here courtesy of BMJ Publishing Group