Qualitative research methods in otorhinolaryngology

Objective: Qualitative research methods explore the character and meaning of human phenomena. The methodology is unfamiliar to most clinicians, not only because of the different techniques and the type of studied issues, but also because of important differences regarding terminology and criteria for evaluating qualitative studies. This paper aims at discussing the potential contribution of qualitative methods to otorhinolaryngological research in general, and to describe a specific method with an otologic application in detail. Method: In order to explore different disturbing sound phenomena and coping strategies in patients with manifest tympanic membrane retractions, individual semi-structured interviews were performed. The transcripts were systematically analyzed by coding, categorizing, and interpreting the content of the text. The extracted themes, categories, and patterns were summarized. Results: The method proved useful when exploring empirically known but non-measurable sound disturbances. Moreover, the findings provided further support for an alternative pathogenic theory suggesting the patient's playing an active role in the development of tympanic membrane retractions. Conclusions: Used as a complement to quantitative methods, qualitative methods offer a means for exploring the patient's experiences and role in the development, therapy, and prevention of disease. Otorhinolaryngology involves disorders of sensory functions such as hearing, equilibrium, smell and taste, as well as the vital functions of breathing and eating. The related symptoms might be experienced and coped with very differently depending on individual interpretations, fear of severe disease, etc. Furthermore, the clinician's and the patient's perspectives of symptoms and expectations regarding treatment may differ, which has implications for information, planning of therapy, and quality assessment in health care. There is no lack of study questions, but rather a lack of experience of alternative and pertinent methods. (C) 1999 Elsevier Science Ireland Ltd. All rights reserved.