Trial reportRespirology (Carlton, Vic.)2025
MetaNeb Versus Usual Care During Exacerbations of Cystic Fibrosis: An RCT.
Trial report in Respirology (Carlton, Vic.), 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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.
- MetaNeb Versus Usual Care During Exacerbations of Cystic Fibrosis: An RCT.Respirology (Carlton, Vic.) · 2025Trial
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors.
Funding
Abstract
BACKGROUND AND
objectiveDuring exacerbations, when symptom and treatment burden are increased, individuals with cystic fibrosis (CF) are likely to prefer airway clearance techniques (ACTs) that require minimal effort. Therefore, in adults with CF who were hospitalised with an exacerbation, we sought to compare the effect of the MetaNeb with usual ACTs on respiratory function and expectorated sputum.
methodsThis was a non-blinded randomised controlled trial where adults hospitalised with a CF exacerbation were allocated to an experimental intervention (EIx; MetaNeb) or a control intervention (CIx; their usual ACT). Both groups underwent twice-daily supervised airway clearance sessions, over an intervention period that ranged from 5 to 7 days during their hospitalisation. The primary outcome was ventilation inhomogeneity measured via lung clearance index (LCI) using the multiple breath washout technique. Secondary outcomes included adverse events, respiratory mechanics, forced expiratory volumes, sputum inflammatory markers, wellness, expectorated sputum, symptoms, participant satisfaction, and huff and cough counts.
resultsThirty participants were randomised (EIx group n = 14; CIx group n = 16). On completion of the intervention period, there was a greater improvement in LCI following the EIx than CIx (mean difference -0.84 units [-1.66 to -0.02], as well as some measures of respiratory mechanics. There were no between-group differences for the other secondary outcomes.
conclusionIn adults with CF who were hospitalised with an exacerbation, twice daily MetaNeb produced greater improvements in ventilation inhomogeneity compared to twice daily usual ACTs. There were no between-group differences shown for the other outcomes, including respiratory symptoms.
trial registrationAustralian New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry (ACTRN12619001681145).
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.