Trial reportEuropean archives of oto-rhino-laryngology : official journal of the European Federation of Oto-Rhino-Laryngological Societies (EUFOS) : affiliated with the German Society for Oto-Rhino-Laryngology - Head and Neck Surgery2024
A nasal airflow oscillation device targeting nasal congestion: a preliminary report.
Trial report in European archives of oto-rhino-laryngology : official journal of the European Federation of Oto-Rhino-Laryngological Societies (EUFOS) : affiliated with the German Society for Oto-Rhino-Laryngology - Head and Neck Surgery, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the 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.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
3 citing papers in PubMed, 1 citations in OpenAlex.
- Longitudinal Changes in Nasal Airflow and Patient-Reported Outcomes Following Acoustic Nasal Therapy: A Pilot Study.Health science reports · 2026Article
- Effects of Mechanical Nasal Stimulation on Olfaction.Medical devices (Auckland, N.Z.) · 2026Article
- Acoustic therapy for allergic rhinitis and chronic rhinosinusitis: modulating microbiome, immunity and well-being.Frontiers in allergy · 2025Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
Abstract
purposeUpper respiratory tract complaints are common in the general population. A safe, non-pharmacologic treatment would be an attractive option for many patients either as an alternative to existing therapies, or as a complementary therapy. This study assessed the acceptability, safety and possible efficacy of a nasal airflow oscillation device in a group of people suffering chronic nasal congestion.
methodsSubjects with a known history of nasal congestion, but without fixed anatomical obstruction, participated in a prospective clinical study. Efficacy was assessed using peak nasal inspiratory flow (NPIF) and a 10-point visual analogue scale (VAS) administered before and after the oscillation device had been worn for twenty minutes.
resultsTwenty-one subjects (mean age 37 years; 43% female) were enrolled in the study. After treatment with the small nasal airflow oscillation device for twenty minutes, average NPIF increased significantly from 84.8 L/minute to 99.0 L/minute (p < 0.05). There was a corresponding significant reduction in the VAS score for nasal congestion (p < 0.05). Similar significant improvements were also seen for the immediate sensation of nasal drainage, sinonasal pressure and overall sinonasal symptoms (p < 0.05). There was no change in the sense of smell (p = 0.37). Subjects rated ease of use highly; average = 9.1 (Range 7-10).
conclusionTreatment of nasal congestion with the nasal airflow oscillation device was found to result in significant improvement in NPIF after twenty minutes of use. Initial patient-reported outcomes improved significantly, and the treatment was safe and highly acceptable.
trial registrationPublic clinical trial registration: Universal Trial Number (U1111-1259-0704). Australian New Zealand clinical trials registration: ACTRN12623001307695.
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.