ObjectiveTo present our experience with ear splint therapy for babies with ear deformities, and thereby demonstrate that this therapy is an effective and safe intervention without significant complications.MethodsThis was a retrospective study of 54 babies (35 boys and 19 girls; 80 ears; age ≤3 months) with ear deformities who had received ear splint therapy at the Center for Torticollis, Department of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation, Ajou University Hospital between December 2014 and February 2016. Before the initiation of ear splint therapy, ear deformities were classified with reference to the standard terminology. We compared the severity of ear deformity before and after ear splint therapy by using the physician's ratings. We also compared the physician's ratings and the caregiver's ratings on completion of ear splint therapy.ResultsAmong these 54 babies, 41 children (58 ears, 72.5%) completed the ear splint therapy. The mean age at initiation of therapy was 52.91±18.26 days and the treatment duration was 44.27±32.06 days. Satyr ear, forward-facing ear lobe, Darwinian notch, overfolded ear, and cupped ear were the five most common ear deformities. At the completion of therapy, the final physician's ratings of ear deformities were significantly improved compared to the initial ratings (8.28±1.44 vs. 2.51±0.92; p<0.001). There was no significant difference between the physician's ratings and the caregiver's ratings at the completion of ear splint therapy (8.28±1.44 vs. 8.0±1.61; p=0.297).ConclusionWe demonstrated that ear splint therapy significantly improved ear deformities in babies, as measured by quantitative rating scales. Ear splint therapy is an effective and safe intervention for babies with ear deformities.
Background
This study aimed to analyze the literature systematically to determine the clinical characteristics and prognosis of patients with connective tissue disease (CTD) with combined pulmonary fibrosis and emphysema (CPFE) compared to those of patients with CTD-interstitial lung disease (CTD-ILD) without emphysema.
Methods
We searched MEDLINE, EMBASE, Cochrane Library, and KoreaMed for relevant articles published before July 2019. Studies meeting all the following criteria were included: (1) original research studies evaluating the effect of CPFE on CTD, (2) studies that compared patients with CTD-CPFE to those with CTD-ILD without emphysema, and (3) studies providing data on physical capacity, pulmonary function, or death in patients with CTD. Clinical characteristics of patients with CTD-CPFE were compared with those of patients with CTD-ILD without emphysema, and the influence of CPFE on physical capacity, pulmonary function, and death was analyzed.
Results
Six studies between 2013 and 2019 were included. Two hundred ninety-nine (29.5%) and 715 (70.5%) patients had CTD-CPFE and CTD-ILD without emphysema, respectively. Regarding the type of CTD, 711 (68.3%) patients had systemic sclerosis, 263 (25.3%) rheumatoid arthritis, and 67 (6.4%) other CTDs. Patients with CTD-CPFE had a higher frequency of pulmonary hypertension and pulmonary fibrosis > 20% of the total lung volume, higher ratio of the forced vital capacity to the diffusion capacity of the lung for carbon monoxide (DLCO), lower arterial oxygen pressure at rest, and lower DLCO compared to those in patients with CTD-ILD without emphysema. In addition, more deaths occurred among those with CTD-CPFE (odds ratio, 2.95; 95% confidence interval, 1.75–4.96).
Conclusion
CTD-CPFE is associated with worse physical and pulmonary function and more deaths compared to those in CTD-ILD without emphysema. These findings indicate the need for increased awareness and close monitoring of patients with CTD-CPFE.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.