Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34764377›Full record

Trial reportScientific reports2021

Comparison of nasal patency after nose-blowing between pinch versus no pinch method: a randomized controlled trial.

Patorn Piromchai, Jakkrit Netnoi, Supaporn Srirompotong, Panida Thanawirattananit

Open access · goldAbstract readComparative StudyRandomized Controlled Trial
In one paragraph

Trial report in Scientific reports, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing papers in PubMed
0.2field-weighted citation impact, top 43% 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

3 citing papers in PubMed, 2 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Review
  3. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

4 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Patorn PiromchaiDepartment of Otorhinolaryngology, Faculty of Medicine, Khon Kaen University, Khon Kaen, 40002, Thailand. patorn@kku.ac.th.
Jakkrit NetnoiDepartment of Otorhinolaryngology, Faculty of Medicine, Khon Kaen University, Khon Kaen, 40002, Thailand.
Supaporn SrirompotongDepartment of Otorhinolaryngology, Faculty of Medicine, Khon Kaen University, Khon Kaen, 40002, Thailand.
Panida ThanawirattananitDepartment of Otorhinolaryngology, Faculty of Medicine, Khon Kaen University, Khon Kaen, 40002, Thailand.
Khon Kaen University · TH

Funding

Khon Kaen University AS64207
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

We proposed that nose-blowing without pinching was safer and able to get rid of mucus and maintain nasal patency as effective as the pinch and blow method. The objective of this study was to evaluate the nasal patency after nose-blowing by pinching the nose versus no pinching. The patients who have nasal discharge such as allergic rhinitis or common cold were recruited. The patients were randomized to perform pinching or no pinching nose-blowing. Fifty patients were enrolled in this study. The objective evaluation using acoustic rhinometry found no difference in nasal patency between the two groups (p > 0.05). The subjective patency score was significantly higher in the pinch one nostril shut group (mean difference 0.88, 95% CI 0.20-1.55). The patency of the two methods were comparable according to the objective test. However, the patients felt that their nose was clearer when pinching and blowing.

Indexed as

Common ColdNasal CavityNasal MucosaRhinitis, AllergicAdultFemaleHumansMaleMiddle AgedRhinometry, Acoustic

Identifiers

PMID34764377
PMCPMC8585869
OpenAlexW3212445842

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.