Latte 2007.
Methods | Randomised, double‐blind, placebo‐controlled, parallel‐group study | |
Participants |
N recruited: 216 N analysed: ‐ Placebo: N = 105 ‐ Pseudoephedrine: N = 107 212 had complete data on visit 1 210 had complete data on visit 2 211 completed treatment on day 3 It is not indicated how many participants of the treatment group or placebo group had complete data on day 2 and 3 Age: 18 to 65 years Country: Australia Inclusion criteria:
Exclusion criteria:
Diagnostic criteria: episode of common cold no more than 48 hours duration before visit 1 |
|
Interventions |
Nasal decongestant dose: Pseudoephedrine 60 mg Placebo Administration: multiple doses Oral tablets; 1 tablet 4 times a day for 4 days Follow‐up: 4 days Measurements: Total nasal airways resistance was measured using the posterior rhinomanometry technique Total nasal volume and total minimum cross‐sectional area were measured using acoustic rhinometry A 100 mm visual analogue scale from 0 mm to 100 mm was used to assess symptoms of nasal congestion Subjective measurements on a 7‐point categorical scale for the previous 24 hours (0 none to 6 incapacitating) ‐ worst levels of congestion ‐ worst levels of nasal discharge ‐ worst levels of sneezing Measurements were performed hourly (for 4 hours) after the first dose on day 1 and after the last dose on day 4 |
|
Outcomes |
Primary outcome: the area under the logarithm‐transformed total nasal airways resistance curve from 0.5 to 3 hours after the first dose of study medication on day 1 Secondary outcomes: The area under the curve for the total minimum cross‐sectional area of the combined left and right nasal cavities from 0 to 3 hours on day 1 and 3 The area under the curve for the total nasal volume of the combined left and right nasal cavities from 0 to 3 hours on day 1 and 3 The area under the curve for the nasal congestion visual analogue scale from 0 to 3 hours on day 1 and 3 |
|
Notes |
Funding: Pfizer Consumer Health Care Declarations of interest: not provided |
|
Risk of bias | ||
Bias | Authors' judgement | Support for judgement |
Random sequence generation (selection bias) | Low risk | A randomisation schedule was used: "Medication was allocated blindly according to a centrally generated randomisation code" |
Allocation concealment (selection bias) | Unclear risk | Study reports that "medication was allocated blindly", but method of allocation concealment not clearly stated. Only that "subjects were given treatments consisting of either active medication […] or matching placebo". However, it is not clear if participants could not foresee assignment |
Blinding of participants and personnel (performance bias) All outcomes | Unclear risk | Study reports that it was double‐blind, but methods of blinding not reported |
Blinding of outcome assessment (detection bias) All outcomes | Unclear risk | Study reports that it was double‐blind, but there is no mention of method of blinding outcome assessment |
Incomplete outcome data (attrition bias) All outcomes | Unclear risk | There are 6 dropouts throughout the study, but only 1 discontinuation is explained in the text. The number of remaining participants in each treatment group is not clear |
Selective reporting (reporting bias) | Low risk | All intended outcomes reported |
Other bias | Unclear risk | Study supported by Pfizer Consumer Health Care |