ArticleActa bio-medica : Atenei Parmensis2019
Internal and external nasal dilatator in patients who snore: a comparison in clinical practice.
Article in Acta bio-medica : Atenei Parmensis, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed, 9 citations in OpenAlex.
- Internal Nasal Dilators After Septorhinoplasty: A Randomized Controlled Trial of Functional and Aesthetic Outcomes.Aesthetic surgery journal · 2026Trial
- Healthcare Resource Utilization and Cost After Temperature-Controlled Radiofrequency Treatment of Nasal Airway Obstruction: A Real-World Longitudinal Claims Analysis.International forum of allergy & rhinology · 2026Article
- Clinical Effectiveness of Nasal Dilators in Sleep-Disordered Breathing: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.Cureus · 2026Review
- Distinguishing science from pseudoscience in commercial respiratory interventions: an evidence-based guide for health and exercise professionals.European journal of applied physiology · 2023Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Snoring is a common symptom. The nasal valve area has the minimal cross-sectional area of the upper airways. So, nasal dilation may significantly reduce resistance to airflow and consequently could reduce snoring. Mechanical dilators may be used: they are external or internal. Nas-air® is a new internal nasal dilator. It was compared to a nasal strip (Rinazina Breathe Right®) in 41 outpatients who snore in an open study conducted in clinical practice. Snoring duration, assessed by smartphone, and visual analogue scale for the perception of sleep quality were measured before and during Nas-air® or nasal strip use. A significant reduction of snoring time and an improvement of sleep quality were achieved by wearing both devices. However, Nas-air® was effective in a larger number of patients and induced a better sleep quality than nasal strip. In conclusion, the present study demonstrates that Nas-air® is an internal nasal dilator able to reduce snoring time and to improve sleep quality, and may be preferred to the nasal strip by snoring patients.
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.