Observational studyBMJ open2020
Observational study of administering intranasal steroid sprays by healthcare workers.
Observational study in BMJ open, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 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
6 citing papers in PubMed.
- Administration Technique of Intranasal Corticosteroid Sprays Among Nepali Pharmacists: Cross-Sectional Study.JMIRx med · 2026Article
- Part 1 - imidazolines and the changing face of nasal decongestants.Frontiers in pharmacology · 2025Review
- Intranasal corticosteroid users in The Netherlands: A drug utilization study.The journal of allergy and clinical immunology. Global · 2024Article
- Pharmacology, particle deposition and drug administration techniques of intranasal corticosteroids for treating allergic rhinitis.Clinical and experimental allergy : journal of the British Society for Allergy and Clinical Immunology · 2022Review
- Evaluation of the techniques and steps of intranasal corticosteroid sprays administration.Asia Pacific allergy · 2022Article
- The Quality of Instructional YouTube Videos for the Administration of Intranasal Spray: Observational Study.JMIR medical education · 2020Article
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.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectivesPatients with allergic rhinitis receive their information about administering intranasal corticosteroid sprays (INCS) from healthcare workers. Since the majority of patients does not administer these sprays correctly, we investigated whether healthcare workers know how to administer INCS. SETTINGS: We studied participants at their working place: pharmacy, outpatient clinic or general practitioner centre for emergencies.
participantsPharmacist assistants, general practitioners, paediatricians and ear nose throat doctors.
designObservational study. All the participants demonstrated the administration technique with a spray device filled with water. PRIMARY OUTCOME: Number of steps of administration of INCS based on the established INCS protocol. SECONDARY OUTCOME: Number of five steps are labelled essential to obtain optimal distribution of the medication.
resultsAmong the 75 participants, none performed all the steps correctly. The median of correctly performed steps in the protocol was 14 out of 29. A significantly better result was found among the pharmacist assistants. The essential steps were performed by 27 out of the 75 participants (36%).
conclusionThe majority of healthcare workers does not know how to administer INCS correctly. Patients could, therefore, receive incorrect and non-uniform instructions. The education of healthcare workers on how to administer INCS correctly may be an option for improvement.
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.