Trial reportArchives of disease in childhood1999
A randomised controlled trial to assess the relative benefits of large volume spacers and nebulisers to treat acute asthma in hospital.
Trial report in Archives of disease in childhood, 1999. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
8 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 59 citations in OpenAlex.
- Holding chambers (spacers) versus nebulisers for beta-agonist treatment of acute asthma.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2013Pooled it
- Wheeze in childhood: is the spacer good enough?Singapore medical journal · 2014Article
- Emergency presentation and management of acute severe asthma in children.Scandinavian journal of trauma, resuscitation and emergency medicine · 2009Review
- Management of asthma in children.BMJ (Clinical research ed.) · 2007Review
- Spacer devices for metered dose inhalers.Clinical pharmacokinetics · 2004Review
- Emergency asthma inhalers in school.Archives of disease in childhood · 2003Review
- Antiasthmatic drug delivery in children.Paediatric drugs · 2002Review
- Successful implementation of spacer treatment guideline for acute asthma.Archives of disease in childhood · 2001Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectivesTo compare the clinical effectiveness, acceptability, and cost benefit of administering beta2 agonists by means of a metered dose inhaler and large volume spacer with conventional nebulisers to children admitted to hospital with acute asthma.
methodsA randomised controlled trial was conducted over five months. Sixty one children older than 3 years admitted to a large teaching hospital and a district general hospital with acute asthma completed the study. Children received either 5 mg of salbutamol up to one hourly by jet nebuliser, or up to 10 puffs of salbutamol 100 microg by means of a metered dose inhaler and spacer up to one hourly.
resultsMedian hospital stay was 40 hours in the nebuliser group and 36.5 hours in the spacer group. Asthma disability scores at two weeks after discharge were significantly improved in the spacer group. Drug costs were pound 14.62 less for each patient in the spacer group.
conclusionsLarge volume spacers are an acceptable, cost effective alternative to nebulisers in treating children admitted with acute asthma, provided that the children can use the mouthpiece, and symptoms are not severe. Their use facilitates effective home treatment by parents, with subsequent reduction in morbidity and re-admission rates.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.