Trial reportJournal of global health2024
Double-blind randomised trial of saline solution for gargling and nasal rinsing in SARS-CoV-2 infection.
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. Cited by 1 paper, 1 of them a synthesis 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.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
1 citing paper in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Saline nasal irrigation and gargling in COVID-19: Part II. Outcomes in Omicron and risk-benefit for self-care.Frontiers in public health · 2025Pooled it
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Previous studies have shown that hypertonic saline nasal irrigation and gargling reduced the duration of symptoms in upper respiratory infections caused by coronavirus. This study aims to investigate the effects of two saline regimens on symptoms associated with severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus-2 (SARS-CoV-2). Methods: Between 2020 and 2022, individuals aged 18-65 years who tested positive for SARS-CoV-2 infection via polymerase chain reaction (PCR) were randomly assigned to either low- or high-saline regimens for 14 days. The low-saline solutions contained 2.13 g of salt dissolved in eight ounces of warm water, while the high-saline solution contained six grams of salt dissolved in eight ounces of warm water. Participants gargled and rinsed their nasal passages four times a day for 14 days. Primary outcomes assessed included frequency and duration of SARS-CoV-2 symptoms, while secondary outcomes included hospital or intensive care unit (ICU) admission, need for mechanical ventilatory support, or mortality rates. Exclusion criteria included chronic hypertension or participation in other interventional studies. Results: Fifty-eight individuals were allocated to the low (n = 27) or high (n = 28) saline regimens; with three lost to follow-up. There were no significant differences in primary or secondary outcomes between these groups. Comparatively, during the study period, 9398 individuals with confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infection by positive PCR test were observed as a reference group. Hospitalisation rates in the low-saline (18.5%) and high-saline (21.4%) regimens were significantly lower than in the reference group (58.8%; P < 0.001), while no significant differences were observed in other outcomes among these groups. Conclusions: Low and high saline regimens for gargling and nasal rinsing show similar effectiveness in reducing the frequency and duration of symptoms related to SARS-CoV-2 infection. Both saline regimens are associated with lower hospitalisation rates compared to individuals not using gargling or nasal rinsing in those infected by SARS-CoV-2.
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.