View clinical trials related to Barotitis.
Filter by:This study is being conducted to learn more about a procedure, balloon dilation of the eustachian tube, in treating patients with eustachian tube dysfunction. Traditionally, eustachian tube dysfunction is treated with nasal steroid sprays and decongestants, or by placement of ear tubes. However, current evidence suggest that medical options are ineffective, and placement of ear tubes is not risk-free. The investigators are carrying out this research study with the following goals: 1. Determine if balloon dilation of the eustachian tube is superior to a placebo procedure in treating patients with eustachian tube dilatory dysfunction 2. Identify patient variables associated with positive response to balloon dilation of the eustachian tube 3. Re-demonstrate the safety of balloon dilation of the eustachian tube What does participation in this study involve? Participants in this study will: - Agree to be randomly assigned to undergo either: balloon dilation of the eustachian tube, or a placebo procedure, with the option to undergo dilation of the eustachian tube 6 weeks later - Agree to allowing the investigators access to their personal health information - Complete the following assessments and questionnaires in clinic before undergoing balloon dilation or placebo procedure: - A questionnaire to assess your eustachian tube dysfunction - An assessment of the movement of your ear drum (tympanogram) - A hearing test (audiogram) - A questionnaire to assess the impact of eustachian tube dysfunction on work/activity - A questionnaire to assess overall health-related quality of life - An assessment of the ability to equalize middle ear pressure(s) - Visual examination of the ear drums - Repeat the above assessments and questionnaires over the course of four follow-up appointments at 6-, 12-, 24-, and 52-weeks after the procedure.
This validation study investigates the diagnostic precision and accuracy when grading otic barotrauma using two alternative gradings systems including the TEED and the OGS grading systems. Background There are two grading systems used to grade otic barotrauma. They include the Teed Score (TEED) and the O'Neill Grading System (OGS). Teed has been utilized more extensively but among physicians has been found to have limitations. The OGS is an alternative grading system with less classification categories than what the Teed classification system utilizes. The OGS system is tied directly to treatment decision making, specific to the respective grading level. Methods This study will utilize a sample of clinical examiners who will independently grade 120 digital color photos of actual patient tympanic membranes with and without evidence of eustachian tube dysfunction and middle ear barotrauma including variable stages or grades of otic barotrauma. They will use the TEED chart as a reference in selecting the appropriate TEED score for each of the photos. Simultaneously they will also utilize the OGS chart as a reference in selecting the appropriate OGS grade for each of the photos. The grading will be conducted by physicians, nurses, and technicians. This will allow for comparisons at varying provider levels. The comparisons will be made using the kappa statistics across the disciplines. This will allow comparison between observed agreement, and expected agreement due to chance for all reviewers. Research Hypothesis Ho: There is no difference in diagnostic precision and accuracy when grading otic barotrauma between clinical examiners using either the TEED or OGS grading systems. Ha: There is a difference in diagnostic precision and accuracy when grading otic barotrauma between clinical examiners using either the TEED or OGS grading systems.