ArticleOTO open
Redundancy of Pharmacologic Ingredients in Over-the-Counter Nasal Sprays.
Article in OTO open. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Part 1 - imidazolines and the changing face of nasal decongestants.Frontiers in pharmacology · 2025Review
- Part II - imidazolines and rhinitis medicamentosa: how can we tackle the rebound dilemma?Frontiers in pharmacology · 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
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Objective: To evaluate and determine the prevalence of ingredients in over-the-counter (OTC) nasal sprays. Study Design: Cross-sectional. Setting: Retail pharmacies. Methods: An inventory of brand-name and generic OTC nasal sprays was recorded at five national pharmacy outlets in August 2023. Data regarding the active ingredients were collected on commercial websites, MedlinePlus and drugs.com, and frequency statistics were calculated. Results: Five pharmacies were visited, at which 12 different brand names of nasal sprays were identified at multiple pharmacies. Nine brand names were associated with multiple formulations, accounting for 49 different products. The active ingredients included in our analysis were oxymetazoline, phenylephrine, fluticasone, triamcinolone, budesonide, azelastine, cromolyn sodium, and mometasone. Nasal decongestants had the greatest number of brand name formulations compared to intranasal steroids and antihistamine sprays which had limited choices. Products that included oxymetazoline were the most widely marketed drug (51 unique products) followed sodium chloride (40 unique products). Conclusion: These findings suggest that there are widespread redundancies in the OTC nasal spray market. Clinician should be aware of the redundancy in OTC formulations and encourage patients to read the labels in order to make informed decisions regarding their use of OTC medications.
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.