BACKGROUND: Ear, nose and throat complaints are very common and can cause significant disruption to patients' lives. Many conditions are of a chronic nature and are not currently managed in a timely manner by general practitioners in the community. This may be due to a lack of specialized knowledge, necessary diagnostic equipment or time for lengthy patient education on management of their condition. A nurse-led model of care may be an effective alternative. OBJECTIVE: To examine the effectiveness of nurse-led clinics on adults with chronic ear, nose and throat complaints. INCLUSION CRITERIA PARTICIPANTS: Adult patients, aged 18 years and older, attending ear, nose and throat clinics, regardless of the complaint. INTERVENTIONS: Nurse-led care in general practice and acute care in which the nurse was identified as taking a lead role in the care of the patients with chronic ear, nose and throat complaints. COMPARATOR: General practitioner-led care, or ear, nose and throat consultant-led care, sometimes described as "standard care". OUTCOMES: Service delivery outcomes, clinical and health outcomes and financial outcomes. STUDIES: Any relevant quantitative studies published in English between 1980 and 2013 were considered. SEARCH STRATEGY: A standardized three-step search strategy aimed to find both published and unpublished studies. Databases searched include PubMed, CINAHL, Cochrane Library (CENTRAL), Scopus, Embase, MedNar and ProQuest Theses and Dissertations. METHODOLOGICAL QUALITY: Methodological validity was assessed independently by two reviewers using standardized critical appraisal instruments from the Joanna Briggs Institute. DATA SYNTHESIS: Due to methodological heterogeneity of the included studies, no statistical pooling was possible and all results are presented narratively. RESULTS: The search identified 13,536 titles, of which 20 potentially relevant articles were retrieved. Of these 20, 17 were excluded following full-text review leaving three studies that were assessed for methodological quality and included in the review. Service delivery outcome findings were that patient satisfaction was equal or higher and waiting times were shorter in nurse led clinics. The other service delivery outcomes were not addressed. Clinical and health outcomes findings were that lower pain/discomfort levels were demonstrated in nurse led clinics but other clinical/health outcomes were not addressed. Financial outcomes findings were that nurse-led clinics were cost effective when compared with medical-led clinics. CONCLUSIONS: While all studies reported evidence of the effectiveness of nurse-led clinics in service delivery and clinical outcomes in adults with chronic ear, nose and throat complaints, most of the data was self-reported and many of the outcomes of interest were not considered. The lack of experimental trials means that the level of evidence is low and further research is needed. There was also not enough detail in the financial outcomes from which clear conclusions of the cost benefit of nurse-led clinics could be drawn. IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE: Evidence from included studies indicated higher levels of patient satisfaction, cost benefits and lower levels of pain/discomfort in nurse-led clinics, which suggests that nurse-led ear, nose and throat clinics may be considered in the management of adult patients with ear, nose and throat complaints. IMPLICATIONS FOR RESEARCH: Currently there is little evidence examining the effectiveness of nurse-led ear, nose and throat clinics. Areas to be addressed by future research should include: levels of patient education, booking queues, levels of self-treatment change in presentation to clinic episodes, reinfection rates, prevention and cure and representation of patients at clinics for same complaint.