Evidence map›Paper›PMID 19849767›Full record

Trial reportInternational journal of clinical practice2010

Rapid relief of acute sore throat with AMC/DCBA throat lozenges: randomised controlled trial.

D McNally, M Simpson, C Morris, A Shephard, M Goulder

Open access · bronzeAbstract readMulticenter StudyRandomized Controlled Trial
In one paragraph

Trial report in International journal of clinical practice, 2010. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 16 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
16citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
2.9field-weighted citation impact, top 9% of its field
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

16 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 43 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Clinical practice guideline for the diagnosis and management of group A streptococcal pharyngitis: 2012 update by the Infectious Diseases Society of America.Clinical infectious diseases : an official publication of the Infectious Diseases Society of America · 2012
    Guideline
  2. Trial
  3. Trial
  4. Trial
  5. Article
  6. Substantial non-compliance of online pharmacy catalogues with guidelines.Naunyn-Schmiedeberg's archives of pharmacology · 2025
    Article
  7. Review
  8. Validation and Development of Voice Handicap Index-Throat for Koreans.Folia phoniatrica et logopaedica : official organ of the International Association of Logopedics and Phoniatrics (IALP) · 2024
    Article
  9. Review
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

5 authors at 4 institutions in 1 country.

D McNallyOrmeau Health Centre, Belfast, UK. damienmcnally@doctors.org.uk
M Simpson
C Morris
A Shephard
M Goulder
Reckitt Benckiser (United Kingdom) · GBDepartment of Health and Social Care · GBInsight Healthcare · GBWorldwide Veterinary Service · GB

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

aimAs antibiotics are generally not recommended for the treatment of acute sore throat, the availability of clinically efficacious, over-the-counter (OTC) treatment alternatives is becoming increasingly important. This study was designed to determine the analgesic properties of amylmetacresol and 2,4-dichlorobenzyl alcohol (AMC/DCBA) throat lozenges (Strepsils) in the relief of acute sore throat caused by upper respiratory tract infections.

methodsPatients (n = 310) were randomly assigned to receive AMC/DCBA throat lozenges (n = 155) or non-medicated placebo lozenges (n = 155). After baseline assessments, patients completed three rating assessments at 10 timepoints from 5 to 20 min after first dose. Subsequent lozenges were taken as required, and assessments were made at the end of Day 1, 24 h after first dose, and at the end of Days 2 and 3. Analgesic properties were assessed by comparing severity of throat soreness and sore throat relief ratings. Difficulty in swallowing and functional impairment scores were also assessed.

resultsAmylmetacresol/DCBA throat lozenges reduced throat soreness at 5 min after first dose, which persisted for 2 h and was significantly different vs. non-medicated lozenges at all assessment timepoints for the duration of the 3-day study. Similar significant effects were observed with sore throat relief, easing of difficulty with swallowing and functional impairment scores. There were no differences in adverse events reported between treatment groups.

conclusionAmylmetacresol/DCBA throat lozenges provide rapid analgesic effects that last for 2 h, providing ongoing relief long after the lozenge has dissolved. The superior analgesic effects and improvements in functional impairment scores observed with AMC/DCBA throat lozenges translate into pain relief benefits that are clinically meaningful and are thus a suitable OTC treatment option for patients in the self-management of acute sore throat.

Indexed as

Acute DiseaseAdolescentAdultAgedAnalgesicsAnalysis of VarianceAnti-Infective AgentsDouble-Blind MethodFemaleHumansLidocaineMaleMiddle AgedPharyngitisTreatment OutcomeYoung AdultAnalgesicsAnti-Infective AgentsLidocaineStrepsils

Identifiers

PMID19849767
PMCPMC7202229
OpenAlexW2129344164

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.