ArticleJRSM open2025
Ecological footprint of salbutamol administration by metered-dose inhaler versus nebulisation in acute asthma: a life-cycle assessment.
Article in JRSM open, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
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
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Objective: The scientific evidence indicates little or no difference in the effectiveness or cost of using of metered-dose inhalers (MDIs) versus nebulisation to treat acute asthma in the emergency department (ED). However, the use of MDIs raises questions of environmental impact. Our objective was to compare the ecological footprint of salbutamol administered by MDI versus nebulisation. Design: Life cycle assessment in which we inventoried and quantified the resources extracted and pollutants emitted by each therapeutic option, from the manufacturing of medication and equipment to their disposal by incineration. Setting: EDs of the CHU de Québec-Université Laval (Canada). Participants: Not applicable. Main outcome measures: Each item of life cycle inventory data was translated into CO Results: One and three ED-administered treatments with salbutamol emit respectively 1.9 and 4.0 kg of CO Conclusions: Considering the absence or minimal difference in clinical effectiveness, this study suggests that nebulisation may be a more eco-efficient administration route than MDIs in the emergency treatment of asthma.
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.