Trial reportNPJ primary care respiratory medicine2026
Pelargonium sidoides extract (EPs® 7630) versus usual care for acute bronchitis in Swiss primary care (PHYTOBRONCH): a pragmatic, open-label, randomised controlled trial.
Trial report in NPJ primary care respiratory medicine, 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
9 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
We aimed to assess whether Pelargonium sidoides extract (EPs®7630) reduces symptom duration or antibiotic use compared with usual care in adults with acute bronchitis. We conducted a pragmatic randomised-controlled trial across 36 primary care practices and five walk-in clinics in Switzerland. Adults ( ≥ 18 years) consulting a general practitioner for the first time for a new episode of acute bronchitis, with a cough of up to eight days' duration, were eligible for inclusion. The co-primary outcomes were (1) number of days required to achieve a 50% reduction in symptoms from the peak value, assessed using the Acute Bronchitis Severity Score (ABSS), and (2) the proportion of participants who used antibiotics. Missing data in intention-to-treat (ITT) analyses were multiply imputed. 332 participants were enrolled and randomly assigned: 155 to EPs®7630 and 177 to usual care. Neither co-primary outcomes showed a statistically significant difference between groups. No significant difference in time to 50% reduction of symptoms between the EPs®7630 and usual care groups was observed (adjusted regression coefficient 0.05 [95% CI - 0.13-0.23]; p = 0.578). Antibiotic use was 7 percentage points lower (31% relative reduction) in the EPs®7630 group (17.4%, 20 of 155) than in the usual care group (25.2%, 33 of 177), although the difference was not statistically significant (adjusted risk ratio 0.78 [95% CI 0.49-1.26]; p = 0.309). Adverse events were reported more frequently in the EPs®7630 group (32.3%, 50 of 155) than in the usual care group (21.5%, 38 of 177; hazard ratio 1.40 [95% CI 1.03-1.89]; p = 0.030); all adverse drug events were mild. EPs®7630 did not reduce symptom duration or antibiotic use significantly and was associated with more frequent events, that were all mild and previously described. Despite the absence of statistical significance, the observed reduction in antibiotic use warrants further investigation in larger trials to clarify its potential role within antimicrobial stewardship strategies.
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.