Ear Popper?

[chicoborja]

Hi guys,

I'm an audiology PhD student and about a year ago I heard about Ear Popper. If you are not familar with this product (www.earpopper.com), it seems as though it employs a modified politzer technique to open the Eustachian tubes. Two articles were published in the ENT Journal (I think Dec 05 or around then). If I recall correctly, the results seemed impressive with it being superior to antibiotics alone in the majority of cases. Has anyone had any experience with this device or does anyone have any opinions on it? Thanks.

---

Members don't see this ad.

 

[resxn]

If you look on the Cochran database for RCT's there is no good study demonstrating any single modality works well. Both valsalva maneuvers either self-performed or by the use of nasal balloons do show some promise similar to what this earpopper thing is claiming. INS and abx have been shown to only offer short-term benefits. PET's obviously remain the gold standard.

A few things to consider in the study you cite:
1 - control group was doing nothing at all. A much better study would be a 2nd arm where people performed vasalva maneuvers (with balloon assitance if necessary) and see if there is similar benefit. If so, no point in wasting the time or money on the device.
2 - they took nearly 2 months to complete the treatment process with this modified politzer device. PET's work immediately. For those children with persistance of fluid with CHL for >3 months, as a parent I'm not sure I'd want to wait an additional 2 months for hearing to be restored
3 - Their inclusion criteria selected only 1/6 of the pt's referred for OME. The efficacy was about 85%. That means that 14% of children initially referred to their trial received the device and benefitted from it. Not necessarily a reason not consider using it, but certainly changes the perspective on numbers that they promote.

I love a good debate.