Trial reportBMC pulmonary medicine2023
Cough desensitization treatment for patients with refractory chronic cough: results of a second pilot randomized control trial.
Trial report in BMC pulmonary medicine, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to 2 registered trials, which are not on this map. Cited by 3 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.
Cough Desensitization Therapy for Cough Hypersensitivity Syndrome: Pilot 2
Mechanisms of Change in Behavioral Cough Suppression Therapy for Refractory Chronic Cough
Who cites it
3 citing papers in PubMed, 8 citations in OpenAlex.
- The value of continuous cough monitoring: a narrative review.Journal of thoracic disease · 2025Review
- Laryngeal Recalibration Therapy in Clinical Practice for Laryngopharyngeal Symptoms.The American journal of gastroenterology · 2024Article
- Oral Capsaicin as Treatment for Unexplained Chronic Cough and Airway Symptoms.CHEST pulmonary · 2024Article
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
Abstract
objectiveThe purpose of this study was to collect pilot efficacy data on a novel treatment for refractory chronic cough (RCC), which we call cough desensitization treatment (CDT). DESIGN AND
methodsIn this parallel cohort, sham-controlled, randomized controlled trial, 21 adults with RCC were randomly assigned to 12 sessions of either CDT (progressive doses of aerosolized capsaicin while behaviorally suppressing cough; n = 11) or a sham treatment (repeated exposure to aerosolized saline; n = 9). The Leicester Cough Questionnaire (LCQ) was the primary outcome measure. Perceived cough severity with a visual analogue scale and cough challenge testing (for measuring cough-reflex sensitivity) were secondary outcome measures. Data were analyzed with mixed effects linear regression and follow-up contrasts.
resultsResults on all measures favored CDT. Excluding one sham participant, whose baseline LCQ scores were deemed unreliable, mean change in LCQ at 3-weeks post treatment was 6.35 and 2.17 in the CDT and sham groups, respectively. There was moderate to strong evidence of a greater improvement in the CDT group in total LCQ score (p = .058) and LCQ Psychological domain (p = .026) and Physical domain (p = .045) scores. Strong evidence was found for a greater reduction in urge-to-cough during CCT in the CDT group (p = .037) and marginal for a reduction in the capsaicin cough-reflex sensitivity (p = .094). There was weak evidence of a greater reduction in cough severity in the CDT group (p = .103). DISCUSSION: Although the study is limited due to the small sample size, the data provide additional evidence supporting further research on CDT. CDT resulted in a greater change in the primary efficacy measure (LCQ) than both pharmaceutical and behavioral treatments currently found in the literature.
trial registrationThis trial (NCT05226299) was registered on Clinicaltrials.gov on 07/02/2022.
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.