Hostname: page-component-6766d58669-kn6lq Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2026-05-17T04:18:56.757Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Use of the nine-step inflation/deflation test and resting middle-ear pressure range as predictors of middle-ear barotrauma in aircrew members

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  14 July 2014

A Hussein  and
A Abousetta
A Hussein*
Affiliation:
Department of Otorhinolaryngology, Cairo University, Egypt
A Abousetta
Affiliation:
Department of Otorhinolaryngology, Suez Canal University, Egypt
*
Address for correspondence: Dr A Hussein, Saudi Airlines Medical Centre, PO Box 167 c.c 507, Jeddah 21231, Saudi Arabia E-mail: asilyahmed@yahoo.com
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Objective:

To explore the role of the nine-step inflation/deflation tympanometric test and resting middle-ear pressure range as predictors of barotrauma in aircrew members.

Methods:

A prospective, non-randomised study was conducted on 100 aircrew members. Resting middle-ear pressure was measured and the nine-step inflation/deflation test performed on all subjects before flights. Subjects were allocated to two groups according to resting middle-ear pressure range (group A, within the range of +26 to +100 and −26 to −100 mmH2O; group B, −25 to +25 mmH2O). All aircrew members were assessed after flights regarding the presence and the grade of barotrauma.

Results:

In both groups, the sensitivity and specificity values of the entire post-inflation/deflation test were close to those of the post-deflation part of the test. The post-deflation test had a higher negative predictive value than the post-inflation test. Ears with resting middle-ear pressure lower than −55 mmH2O experienced barotrauma, regardless of good or poor post-inflation or post-deflation test results.

Conclusion:

In an aircrew member, a resting middle-ear pressure within the range of −55 and +50 mmH2O, together with good post-deflation test results, are considered reliable predictors for fitness to fly.

Keywords

BarotraumaAltitudeMiddle EarTympanometryEustachian Tube

Information

Type
Main Articles
Information
The Journal of Laryngology & Otology , Volume 128 , Issue 7 , July 2014 , pp. 612 - 617
Copyright
Copyright © JLO (1984) Limited 2014 

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.)

Article purchase

Temporarily unavailable

References

1Mirza, S, Richardson, H. Otic barotrauma from air travel. J Laryngol Otol 2005;119:366–70Google Scholar
2Lewis, ST. Barotrauma in United States Air Force accident/incident. Aerospace Med 1973;44:1059–61Google Scholar
3Ashton, DH, Watson, LA. The use of tympanometry in predicting otitic barotrauma. Aviat Space Environ Med 1990;61:56–61Google ScholarPubMed
4Devine, JA, Forte, VA Jr, Rock, PB, Cymerman, A. The use of tympanometry to detect aerotitis media in hypobaric chamber operations. Aviat Space Environ Med 1990;61:251–5Google Scholar
5King, PF. The eustachian tube and its significance in flight. J Laryngol Otol 1979;93:659–78CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
6Enders, LJ, Lopez, ER. Aeromedical consultation case report: alternobaric vertigo. Aerospace Med 1970;41:200–2Google ScholarPubMed
7Lundgren, CEG, Malm, LU. Alternobaric vertigo among pilots. Aerospace Med 1966;37:178–80Google Scholar
8Brown, TP. Middle ear symptoms while flying: ways to prevent a severe outcome. Postgrad Med 1994;96:135–42Google Scholar
9Blustone, CD., Klein, JO. Diagnosis. In: Blustone, CD., Klein, JO, eds. Otitis media in infant and children, 4th edition, Hamilton, Ontario: B.C. Decker Inc 2007:147–212Google Scholar
10Jerger, J. Clinical experience with impedance audiometry. Arch Otolaryngol 1970;92:311–24CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
11Uzun, C, Adali, MK, Tas, A, Koten, M, Karasalihoglu, AR, Devren, M. Use of the nine-step inflation/deflation test as a predictor of middle ear barotrauma in sports scuba divers. Br J Audiol 2000;34:153–63Google Scholar
12Bluestone, CD. Assessment of eustachian tube function. In: Jerger, J, ed. Handbook of Clinical Impedance Audiometry. New York: American Electromedics, 1975;127–48Google Scholar
13Bluestone, CD, Cantekin, EL. Current clinical methods, indications and interpretation of eustachian tube function tests. Ann Otol Rhinol Laryngol 1981;90:552–62CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
14Fernau, JL, Hirsch, BE, Derkay, C, Ramasastry, S, Schaefer, SE. Hyperbaric oxygen therapy: effect on middle ear and eustachian tube function. Laryngoscope 1992;102:48–52Google Scholar
15Ghosh, MS, Kumar, WCNA. Study of middle ear pressure in relation to eustachian tube patency. Ind J Aerospace Med 2002;46:27–31Google Scholar
16Teed, RW. Factors producing obstruction of the auditory tube in submarine personnel. US Naval Medical Bulletin 1944;42:293–306Google Scholar
17Karahatay, S, Yilmaz, YF, Birkent, H, Ay, H, Satar, B. Middle ear barotraumas with hyperbaric oxygen therapy: incidence and the predictive value of the nine-step inflation/deflation test and otoscopy. Ear Nose Throat J 2008;87:684–8CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
18Brooks, DN. The use of the electro-acoustic impedance bridge in the assessment of middle ear function. Int J Audiol 1969;8:563–9Google Scholar
19Siedentop, KH, Lowey, A, Corrigan, RA, Osenar, SB. Eustachian tube function assessed with tympanometry. Ann Otol Rhinol Laryngol 1978;87:163–9Google Scholar