Hostname: page-component-848d4c4894-pjpqr Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-06-20T22:20:24.251Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

The ineffectiveness of applying moisture to the ear on the incidence and severity of otic barotrauma for air passengers

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  20 September 2018

R P Morse*
Affiliation:
School of Life and Health Sciences, Aston University, Birmingham, UK
A Mitchell-Innes
Affiliation:
ENT Department, University Hospital Birmingham, UK
*
Author for correspondence: Dr Robert Morse, School of Engineering, University of Warwick, Coventry CV4 7AL, UK Email: r.morse@warwick.ac.uk Fax: +44 (0)24 7641 8922

Abstract

Objective

The application of moisture to the ear is anecdotally claimed to relieve the pain from otic barotrauma that can arise during aircraft descent. This claim was tested in a randomised double-blind study on an aircraft with eight participants heavily predisposed to barotrauma.

Methods

On the outward flight, half the participants wore ‘active’ devices that applied moisture to the external ear; the remainder wore placebo devices that contained no moisture, but were otherwise identical. On the return flight, the groups were reversed. Participants wore the devices from just before descent until landing, unless they experienced symptoms of barotrauma, in which case they switched to what they knew was an active device.

Results

There were no significant differences between conditions regarding the appearance of the tympanic membrane on landing or the discomfort levels immediately before and after any switch.

Conclusion

Applying moisture is ineffective for passengers heavily predisposed to otic barotrauma.

Type
Main Articles
Copyright
Copyright © JLO (1984) Limited, 2018 

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

Dr R P Morse takes responsibility for the integrity of the content of the paper

References

1Armstrong, HG, Heim, HW. The effect of flight on the middle ear. JAMA 1937;109:417–21Google Scholar
2King, PF. Otitic barotrauma. Proc R Soc Med 1966;59:543–54Google Scholar
3Mirza, S, Richardson, H. Otic barotrauma from air travel. J Laryngol Otol 2005;119:366–70Google Scholar
4Stangerup, SE, Tjernstrom, O, Harcourt, J, Klokker, M, Stokholm, J. Barotitis in children after aviation: prevalence and treatment with Otovent. J Laryngol Otol 1996;110:625–8Google Scholar
5Buchanan, BJ, Hoagland, J, Fischer, PR. Pseudoephedrine and air travel-associated ear pain in children. Arch Pediatr Adolesc Med 1999;153:466–8Google Scholar
6Goto, F, Ogawa, K, Kunihiro, T, Kurashima, K, Kobayashi, H, Kanzaki, J. Perilymph fistula - 45 case analysis. Auris Nasus Larynx 2001;28:2933Google Scholar
7Harding, R. Aeromedical aspects of commercial air travel. J Trav Med 1994;1:211–15Google Scholar
8Mitchell-Innes, A, Young, E, Vasiljevic, A, Rashid, M. Air travellers' awareness of the preventability of otic barotrauma. J Laryngol Otol 2014;128:494–8Google Scholar
9Stangerup, SE, Klokker, M, Vesterhauge, S, Jayaraj, T, Rea, T, Harcourt, T. Point prevalence of barotitis and its prevention and treatment with nasal balloon inflation: a prospective, controlled study. Otol Neurotol 2004;25:8994Google Scholar
10Klokker, M, Vesterhauge, S, Jansen, EC. Pressure-equalizing earplugs do not prevent barotrauma on descent from 8000 ft cabin altitude. Aviat Space Environ Med 2005;76:1079–82Google Scholar
11Airplane descent causes excruciating ear pain. In: http://www.peoplespharmacy.com/2011/08/18/airplane-descent-causes-excruciating-ear-pain/ [4 August 2016]Google Scholar
12Fairechild, D. Jet Smart. Berkeley: Celestial Arts, 1994Google Scholar
13Ear popping, jet lag and dry skin - how cabin crew beat the travel blues. In: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/health/article-1292346/How-cabin-crew-beat-travel-blues.html [4 August 2016]Google Scholar
16Fishman by Fishman v. Delta Air Lines, Inc., 938 F. Supp. 228. U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York, 1996Google Scholar
17Space, DR, Johnson, RA, Rankin, WL, Nagda, NL. The airplane cabin environment: past, present and future research. In: Nagda, NL, ed. Air Quality and Comfort in Airliner Cabins, ASTM STP1393. West Conshohocken, PA: American Society for Testing and Materials, 2000;189210Google Scholar
18Spengler, JD, Wilson, DG. Air quality in aircraft. Proc Inst Mech Eng E 2003;217:323–35Google Scholar
19Malmfors, T, Thornburn, D, Westlin, A. Air quality in passenger cabins of DC-9 and MD-80 aircraft. Environ Technol Lett 1989;10:613–28Google Scholar
20O'Donnell, A, Donnini, G, Nguyen, VH. Air quality, ventilation, temperature and humidity in aircraft. ASHRAE J 1991;4:42–6Google Scholar
21Backman, H, Haghighat, F. Air quality and ocular discomfort aboard commercial aircraft. Optometry 2000;71:653–6Google Scholar
22Wieslander, G, Lindgren, T, Norbäck, D, Venge, P. Changes in the ocular and nasal signs and symptoms of airline crews in relation to the ban on smoking on intercontinental flights. Scand J Work Environ Health 2000;26:514–22Google Scholar
23Rayman, RB. Passenger safety, health and comfort: a review. Aviat Space Environ Med 1997;68:432–40Google Scholar
24American Society of Heating, Refrigerating, and Air-Conditioning Engineers. ANSI/ASHRAE 62–1999: Ventilation for acceptable air quality. Atlanta: ASHRAE, 1999Google Scholar
25Morse, RP. The effect of flying and low humidity on the admittance of the tympanic membrane and middle ear system. J Assoc Res Otolaryngol 2013;14:623–33Google Scholar
26Eden, AR, Laitman, JT, Gannon, PJ. Mechanisms of middle-ear aeration – anatomic and physiologic evidence in primates. Laryngoscope 1990;100:6775Google Scholar
27Rockley, TJ, Hawke, WM. The middle ear as a baroreceptor. Acta Otolaryngol 1992;112:816–23Google Scholar
28Sakata, T, Esaki, Y, Yamano, T, Sueta, N, Nakagawa, T, Kato, T. Air pressure-sensing ability of the middle ear – investigation of sensing regions and appropriate measurement conditions. Auris Nasus Larynx 2009;36:393–9Google Scholar
29British Society of Audiology. Recommended procedure for tympanometry. Br J Audiol 1992;26:255–7Google Scholar
30Teed, RW. Factors producing obstruction of the auditory tube in submarine personnel. US Naval Med Bull 1944;42:292306Google Scholar
31Papakosta, GI, Fava, M. Does the probability of receiving placebo influence clinical trial outcome? A meta-regression of double-blind, randomized clinical trials in MDD. Eur Neuropharmacol 2009;19:3440Google Scholar
32Weimer, K, Gulewitsch, MD, Schlarb, AA, Schwille-Kiuntke, J, Klosterhalfen, S, Enck, P. Placebo effects in children: a review. Pediatr Res 2013;74:96102Google Scholar
33Grün, G, Trimmel, M, Holm, A. Low humidity in the aircraft cabin environment and its impact on well-being – results from a laboratory study. Build Environ 2012;47:2331Google Scholar
34Knutsson, J, Bagger-Sjöbäck, D, von Unge, M. Structural tympanic membrane changes in secretory otitis media and cholesteatoma. Otol Neurotol 2011;32:596601Google Scholar
35Tos, M, Poulsen, G. Changes of pars tensa in secretory otitis. ORL J Otorhinolaryngol Relat Spec 1979;41:313–28Google Scholar
36Nagai, T, Tono, T. Encapsulated nerve corpuscles in the human tympanic membrane. Arch Otorhinolaryngol 1989;246:169–72Google Scholar