Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-gbm5v Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-29T08:19:42.905Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Topical antibiotic ototoxicity: does it influence our practice?

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  30 November 2006

E C Ho ,
A Alaani  and
R Irving
E C Ho
Affiliation:
Department of ENT Surgery, Warwick Hospital, WarwickUK
A Alaani
Affiliation:
Department of ENT Surgery, Derbyshire Royal Infirmary, Derby
R Irving
Affiliation:
Department of ENT Surgery, Queen Elizabeth Hospital, Birmingham, UK
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Introduction: We hypothesised that general practitioners and ENT specialists manage discharging ears differently. This study was designed to investigate this further.

Methods and materials: Postal questionnaires were sent to all general practitioners in the Birmingham area and all UK consultants on the British Association of Otolaryngology–Head and Neck Surgery address list.

Results and discussion: In the presence of an intact tympanic membrane, 99 per cent of consultants and 90 per cent of general practitioners would use topical antibiotics. In the presence of a perforated tympanic membrane, 97 per cent of consultants would continue to use topical antibiotics, compared with only 43 per cent of general practitioners. This was attributed to a fear of ototoxicity. If a topical non-ototoxic antibiotic of proven efficacy could be made available, 93 per cent of consultants and 88 per cent of general practitioners in this study would seriously consider using it as first line treatment.

Conclusion: The majority of general practitioners would not use topical antibiotics in the presence of a perforated tympanic membrane. Most doctors would consider using a non-ototoxic topical antibiotic as first line treatment should one be made available.

Keywords

AntibioticsTopical Anti-infective AgentsAminoglycosidesQuinolonesOtitis MediaOtitis ExternaOtotoxicityQuestionnaire
Type
Main Articles
Information
The Journal of Laryngology & Otology , Volume 121 , Issue 4 , April 2007 , pp. 333 - 337
Copyright
2006 JLO (1984) Limited

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Footnotes

Presented at the Royal Society of Medicine Section of Otology Short Papers Meeting, 2nd April 2004, London, UK.