首页> 美国卫生研究院文献>The British Journal of General Practice >The effectiveness of topical preparations for the treatment of earwax: a systematic review
【2h】

The effectiveness of topical preparations for the treatment of earwax: a systematic review

机译:外用制剂治疗耳垢的功效:系统评价

代理获取
本网站仅为用户提供外文OA文献查询和代理获取服务,本网站没有原文。下单后我们将采用程序或人工为您竭诚获取高质量的原文,但由于OA文献来源多样且变更频繁,仍可能出现获取不到、文献不完整或与标题不符等情况,如果获取不到我们将提供退款服务。请知悉。

摘要

>Background: Earwax is a common problem in both primary and secondary care. There is uncertainty as to the most effective topical treatment.>Aim: To assess the evidence concerning the efficacy of topical preparations used for treating earwax.>Design of study: Systematic review and meta-analysis.>Method: Searching for randomised controlled trials (RCTs) of relevant studies. Classification of preparations into three groups, enabling pooling of data and meta-analysis.>Results: Of the 18 RCTs included in the review, four were judged to be of high quality. Fifteen preparations including saline and plain water were studied. Oil-based and water-based preparations were equally effective at clearing earwax without syringing (odds ratio [OR] = 0.9, 95% confidence interval [CI] = 0.4 to 2.3) and facilitating successful syringing (OR = 1.0, 95% CI = 0.6 to 1.6). A non-water-, non-oil-based preparation appeared more effective than an oil-based preparation at both clearing earwax without syringing, and facilitating successful syringing. Immediate syringing after application of a preparation may be as effective as using eardrops for several days and delaying syringing.>Conclusions: On current evidence, there is little to choose between water-based and oil-based preparations; non-water-, non-oil-based preparations appear promising at both clearing earwax and facilitating successful syringing, but further large trials are needed. Although immediate ear syringing is effective and convenient for patients, it may be less cost-effective than using eardrops and perhaps avoiding syringing. Most of the evidence regarding such a common and time-consuming problem is not of high quality.
机译:>背景:耳垢是初级和二级保健中的常见问题。关于最有效的局部治疗尚无定论。>目的:评估有关用于治疗耳垢的局部制剂功效的证据。>研究设计:系统评价和meta -分析。>方法:搜索相关研究的随机对照试验(RCT)。将制剂分为三类,从而可以汇总数据和进行荟萃分析。>结果:本评价纳入的18项RCT中,有4项被认为是高质量的。研究了包括盐水和清水在内的十五种制剂。油基和水基制剂同样有效地清除耳垢而无须打针(比值[OR] = 0.9,95%置信区间[CI] = 0.4至2.3),并有助于成功打针(OR = 1.0,95%CI = 0.6至1.6)。非水,非油基制剂似乎比油基制剂更有效,既可以清除耳垢而无需注射,也可以促进成功注射。 >结论:根据目前的证据,水基和油基制剂之间几乎没有选择;仅在使用制剂后立即注射即可有效。非水,非油基制剂在清除耳垢和促进成功注射方面似乎很有希望,但是还需要进一步的大型试验。尽管立即进行耳部注射对患者有效且方便,但其成本效益不如使用耳塞,并且可能避免进行耳部注射。关于这种常见且费时的问题的大多数证据都不是高质量的。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
代理获取

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号