Trial reportJournal of global health2024
Hypertonic saline nasal irrigation and gargling for suspected or confirmed COVID-19: Pragmatic randomised controlled trial (ELVIS COVID-19).
Trial report in Journal of global health, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT05104372 (Hypertonic Saline Nasal Irrigation and Gargling), which is not on this map. Cited by 3 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled 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.
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.
Hypertonic Saline Nasal Irrigation and Gargling (HSNIG) for Suspected COVID-19: Pragmatic, Web-based Bayesian Adaptive Randomised Controlled Trial in Pakistan
Who cites it
3 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- Antimicrobial mouthwashes (gargling) and nasal sprays to protect healthcare workers when undertaking aerosol-generating procedures (AGPs) on patients without suspected or confirmed COVID-19 infection.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2020Pooled it
- Antimicrobial mouthwashes (gargling) and nasal sprays administered to patients with suspected or confirmed COVID-19 infection to improve patient outcomes and to protect healthcare workers treating them.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2020Pooled it
- Review of the use of nasal and oral antiseptics during a global pandemic.Future microbiology · 2021Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
11 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: In a previous pilot randomised controlled trial conducted on UK adults, we found that hypertonic saline nasal irrigation and gargling (HSNIG) reduced common cold symptoms, the need for over-the-counter medications, viral shedding, and the duration and transmission of the illness. It is unclear whether HSNIG improves outcomes of the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). Hypertonic saline can be prepared and HSNIG performed at home, making it a safe and scalable intervention, particularly well-suited for low- and middle-income countries. Methods: We conducted a pragmatic randomised controlled trial in Pakistan on adults with suspected or confirmed COVID-19, initially within 48 hours of symptom onset, later extended to within five days due to recruitment challenges. Participants were randomised to one of two groups: the intervention group received instructions on preparing a 2.6% hypertonic saline solution for HSNIG, while the control group was instructed on performing ablution for Muslim prayers (wudu), which involves nasal washing and gargling with tap water. Our primary outcome was the time to symptom resolution, measured by two consecutive days of scoring zero on relevant questions from the validated, self-reported, adapted short form of the Wisconsin Upper Respiratory Symptom Survey (WURSS-24). Secondary outcomes included the severity of all symptoms, the severity and time to resolution of individual symptoms, health care contacts (GP/physician, emergency contacts), hospital attendance (and length of stay if admitted), over-the-counter (OTC) medication (frequency and cost), and transmission to household contacts. The analysis was conducted on an intention-to-treat basis. Logistic regression was used to calculate adjusted odds ratios (aORs) of improvement and Cox regression to calculate adjusted hazard ratios (aHRs) for the time to improvement with accompanying 95% confidence intervals (CIs). Results: We randomised 576 people: 279 to the HSNIG group and 297 to the control group. Among those, 10 out of 279 (3.6%) in the HSNIG had symptom resolution, compared with 11 out of 297 (3.7%) in the control group (aOR = 1.20, 95% CI = 0.46- 3.22). The time-to-event analysis also showed no significant benefit (aHR = 1.23, 95% CI = 0.51-2.97). Excluding the 127 participants with no data on the primary outcome (who did not complete the study), 10 out of 222 (4.5%) in the HSNIG group had symptom resolution, compared to 11 out of 227 (4.8%) in the control group. Conclusions: HSNIG was not effective for individuals with suspected or confirmed COVID-19 who began the intervention within five days of symptoms onset and therefore cannot be recommended for use. Further investigation is needed for interventions started within 48 hours of illness onset. Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT05104372).
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.