35 Comparative Performance of Prediction Model, Non-Expert and Tele-Diagnosis of Common External and Middle Ear Disease Using A Patient Cohort from Cambodia That Included One Hundred and Thirty-Eight Ears

Abstract

Abstract Introduction Globally 6% of the population suffers from disabling hearing loss and the majority resides in low- and middle-income countries, but diagnosis and treatment are hampered by poor availability of expert diagnosis. We compared the utility of tele-diagnosis, non-expert diagnosis, and prediction model diagnosis as a screening tool for common external and middle ear disorders. Method We recruited consecutive adult and paediatric patients presenting with ear or hearing symptoms to ENT outpatients at Children’s Surgical Centre, Cambodia. Each participant underwent sequential symptomatic and otoscopic assessment by a non-specialist and an ENT specialist. The non-specialist captured data using a novel automated symptom questionnaire loaded onto a smartphone otoscope. An ENT specialist in the UK subsequently reviewed these data. Results 138 ears were recruited. The prediction model performed poorly, but absence of otorrhoea was found to reliably exclude a diagnosis of chronic suppurative otitis media (negative predictive value=0.99). Both on-site non-expert and expert tele-diagnosis had high diagnostic specificity (90-99% and 86-99%), but low sensitivity (<43% and 32-100%). Conclusions We report the first study to directly compare approaches for non-specialist diagnosis of disorders of the middle/external ear, which shows suboptimal but comparable performance using an automated questionnaire, on site non-expert diagnosis, or remote expert diagnosis