The Hearing Centre レビュー 

Excellent service from Leanne, understanding and kindness shown to my elderly Mum, and no sales pressure whatsoever. Highly recommended.

A word of warning.
I visited the Hearing Centre for routine earwax removal over 7 months ago, and since then I've had permanently worse hearing and substantially worse tinnitus.
During the miocrosuction procedure the device made extremely loud noises which caused my ear to react by 'closing up' and when this effect lessened it left behind the aggravated tinnitus and hearing loss that I live with everyday.
If you research microsuction you will find many forums and academic articles about this potential danger.
I booked online but only on arrival was I presented with a long disclaimer to sign immediately before going in. In this disclaimer it states that hearing loss, damage and aggravated tinnitus can all be caused by the procedure.
Every day I wish I had paid more attention to this. If you read up on this you will learn that most microsuction devices aren't tested and lisenced for medical use, though there is now a device centres can use that is kitemarked for this work. There are also alternative procedures that some audiologists offer.
What do I wish the centre had done differently?
1. Sent the disclaimer to read when I made the booking rather than present after travelling to the centre.
2. Asked me about any existing conditions (I had very mild tinnitus) at the beginning of the consultation and highlighted risks and alternatives
3. Offered to stop when I first mentioned the extreme loud noises rather than continue for many minutes
4. Questioned whether the procedure should have been carried out as my ear was only partially blocked and may have been fixable in many other less dangerous ways. I also wonder whether this procedure should be done on a partially blocked ear at all as it seems the NHS will often decline unless the ear is fully blocked.
5. In the longer term I'd suggest reviewing the appropriateness of the equipment used.

The centre did offer a follow up hearing test, but what good after the damage is done. I was reluctant to return to the place that damaged my hearing in the first place, and instead have hearing care elsewhere (and yes, the damage is permanent.)

Whilst many people obviously undergo this procedure without damage I am writing this to highlight to everyone the 'luck of the draw' element involved, and to encourage careful consideration before choosing to roll the dice with your precious hearing.

In response to the reply below I would clarify that my hearing has been permanently worsened, so reference to a temporary threshold shift shouldn't be confused with the permanent damage.
In respect of offering to stop. I was not asked during the process if I would like to stop. Instead when I mentioned the noise I was told that it was normal and my ear was protecting itself.
With regard to equipment I would encourage people to read up on how equipment used for microsection isn't tested for medical use, it is used on the basis that no medically tested equipment is available (similar in a way to the way some medicines are prescribed 'off-licence'.
I simply write this in the hope of encouraging others to do more exploration of alternatives, and to raise awareness of the dangers, as I wish I myself had approached this with far more caution. You did also mention in your reply to me that when people feel their hearing has been affected you always offer a follow up appointment. This suggests others have also had a negative experience.