{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.012755102040816327, 'fraction_numerical': 0.002551020408163265, 'mean_word_length': 4.769607843137255, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
Swimming and grommets: a prospective survey.

AIM
To assess the incidence of otorrhoea after swimming in patients with grommets in situ, and discover whether protecting the ears from water affects this occurrence.


METHODS
A group of children with bilateral patent grommets were allowed to swim with head under the water with one ear protected, and the other unprotected from water entry. Using a calendar system, each swim was recorded and each episode of otalgia or otorrhoea occasioning medical consultation was recorded with the outcome of the consultation.


RESULTS
Nineteen children completed the survey taking a total of 551 swims with head immersion. One child suffered bilateral otorrhoea one day after a swim. There were three episodes of otalgia sufficiently severe to warrant medical consultation. Two occurred in a protected ear and one in an unprotected ear. On each occasion there was no evidence of infection.


CONCLUSIONS
There appears to be a low incidence of otorrhoea during summer in children who swim with grommets in situ. There is no evidence that protecting the ears from water entry confers any benefit as far as preventing infection in concerned.