TY - JOUR
T1 - Objective evaluation of nonsurgical treatment of prominent ears
T2 - A systematic review
AU - Lin, Yangyang
AU - Ronde, Elsa M.
AU - Butt, Hashir A.
AU - van Etten-Jamaludin, F. S.
AU - Breugem, Corstiaan C.
N1 - Publisher Copyright: © 2023 The Author(s)
PY - 2023/12/1
Y1 - 2023/12/1
N2 - 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.
AB - 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.
KW - Ear-well
KW - Nonsurgical treatment
KW - Objective evaluation
KW - Prominent ears
KW - Splinting
UR - https://www.scopus.com/inward/record.uri?partnerID=HzOxMe3b&scp=85169505632&origin=inward
U2 - https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jpra.2023.07.002
DO - https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jpra.2023.07.002
M3 - Review article
C2 - 37694192
SN - 2352-5878
VL - 38
SP - 14
EP - 24
JO - JPRAS Open
JF - JPRAS Open
ER -