ArticlePakistan journal of medical sciences2026
Continuous versus intermittent nebulization of salbutamol in acute Severe asthma in children under 12 years of age.
Article in Pakistan journal of medical sciences, 2026. 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
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Objective: To compare the efficacy of continuous versus intermittent nebulization of salbutamol (SB) in the treatment of acute severe asthma (ASA) in children visiting the emergency department. Methodology: This randomized controlled trial was performed at the emergency department of pediatric medicine, The Children's Hospital and The Institute of Child Health, Multan, Pakistan, during April 2024 to September 2024. Children aged 2-12 years, diagnosed with severe exacerbation of acute asthma, with clinical asthma score (CAS) > 8. Group-A was administered continuous SB nebulization at 0.3 mg/kg/hour for four hours, with 5-15 mg/hour. In Group-B, SB was administered intermittently at a dose of 0.15 mg/kg per dose. CAS, length of hospital stay, and treatment duration, were compared. Results: In a total of 120 children, 68 (56.7%) were male. The mean age was 8.06±1.6 years. Between Group-A (Continuous), and Group-B (Intermittent), there were no significant differences at 20 minutes (p=0.673), 40 minutes (p=0.419), one-hour (p=0.365), two-hours (p=0.536), and four-hours (p=0.536) in terms of CAS. The time to treatment initiation (p=0.837), time to treatment stop (p=0.77), duration of treatment (p=0.084), and hospital stay duration (p=0.959) were statistically similar in both treatment groups. Both groups reported relatively higher safety profile (95.0% [n=57] patients without any side effects in Group-A vs. 96.7% [n=58] in Group-B, p=0.648). Conclusion: Continuous, or intermittent nebulization of SB were both effective methods for treating severe exacerbation of acute asthma in children. CAS, treatment duration, or length of hospital stay between the two methods did not exhibit any significant differences.
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.