SynthesisThe Cochrane database of systematic reviews2008
Commercial versus home-made spacers in delivering bronchodilator therapy for acute therapy in children.
Synthesis in The Cochrane database of systematic reviews, 2008. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 papers.
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
9 citing papers in PubMed, 32 citations in OpenAlex.
- Valved Holding Chambers in Young Children With Acute Wheezing: A Randomized Clinical Trial.JAMA pediatrics · 2026Trial
- Randomized trial of spacers in asthma.Indian journal of pediatrics · 2007Trial
- Clinical standards for the diagnosis and management of asthma in low- and middle-income countries.The international journal of tuberculosis and lung disease : the official journal of the International Union against Tuberculosis and Lung Disease · 2023Article
- Emerging Roles of Malaysian Pharmacists in Asthma Management Amidst the COVID-19 Pandemic: A Narrative Review.The Malaysian journal of medical sciences : MJMS · 2023Review
- Implementing asthma management guidelines in public primary care clinics in Malaysia.NPJ primary care respiratory medicine · 2021Article
- Acute asthma management during SARS-CoV2-pandemic 2020.The World Allergy Organization journal · 2020Review
- What is New in the Management of Childhood Asthma?Indian journal of pediatrics · 2018Review
- A Rationale for Going Back to the Future: Use of Disposable Spacers for Pressurised Metered Dose Inhalers.Pulmonary medicine · 2015Review
- Challenges in treating pediatric asthma in developing countries.Paediatric drugs · 2012Article
Corrections and comments
- Commented on by
Authors and funding
3 authors at 3 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundStrong evidence supports the use of metered-dose inhalers combined with a spacer for delivering rapid-acting inhaled beta-2 agonists in the treatment of acute exacerbations of asthma in children. The high cost and lack of availability of commercially produced spacers however, have limited their use in developing countries.
objectivesThe aim of this review was to compare the response to inhaled beta-2 agonists delivered through metered-dose inhaler using home-made spacers, to the use of commercially produced spacers, in children with acute exacerbations of wheezing or asthma. SEARCH STRATEGY: We searched the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) The Cochrane Library Issue 3, 2007,(up to August 2007) MEDLINE , EMBASE, CINHAL, LILACS and reference lists of included studies. We contacted authors and known experts in the field, and approached pharmaceutical companies that manufacture inhalation spacers to identify additional published or unpublished data. No language restrictions were applied. SELECTION CRITERIA: Trials comparing treatment with rapid acting beta 2-agonists delivered though MDI attached to home-made spacers, with the same bronchodilator therapy delivered with MDI and commercially produced spacers, in children under 18 years with acute exacerbations of wheezing or asthma. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two review authors independently extracted the data and assessed trial quality. Missing data were obtained from the authors or estimated from information available in published reports. MAIN
resultsSix trials with 658 participants met the inclusion criteria . At the time of this report, five trials were published in full text, and one study was available in abstract form only. No significant differences were demonstrated between the two delivery methods in terms of need for hospital admission (RR 1.00, 95% CI 0.63 to 1.59), change in oxygen saturation (SMD -0.03, 95% CI -0.39 to 0.33), PEFR (SMD 0.04, 95% CI -0.72 to 0.80), clinical score (WMD 0.00, 95% CI -0.37 to 0.37), in terms of need for additional treatment (RR 1.18, 95% CI 0.84 to 1.65), or regarding change in heart rate per minute (SMD 0.09, 95% CI -0.24 to 0.42). AUTHORS'
conclusionsOverall, this review supports did not identify a difference between these two methods for delivering bronchodilator therapy to children with acute asthma or lower airways obstruction attacks. Care should be taken in the interpretation and applicability of our results because of the small number of RCTs along with few events available meeting the criteria for inclusion in the review, absence of the primary outcome of interest and other clinically important outcomes in the majority of included studies. The possible need for a face-mask in younger children using home-made spacers should also be considered in practice.
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.