Luo 2010.

Methods	Design: randomised, double‐blind, parallel‐group, controlled trial
Participants	Setting: inpatient wards of a teaching hospital for children in China Eligible: not stated Randomised: 50 hypertonic saline group; 43 normal saline group Completed: 50 hypertonic saline group; 43 normal saline group Gender (male): 60.2% Age (mean ± SD): 6.0 ± 4.3 months in hypertonic saline group; 5.6 ± 4.5 months in normal saline group Inclusion criteria: infants with a diagnosis of mild to moderately severe bronchiolitis Exclusion criteria: age > 24 months, previous episode of wheezing, chronic cardiac and pulmonary disease, immunodeficiency, accompanying respiratory failure, requiring mechanical ventilation, inhaling the nebulised 3% hypertonic saline solution and salbutamol 12 h before treatment, and premature infants born at less than 34 weeks gestation
Interventions	Intervention group: nebulised 3% hypertonic saline (4 mL) plus 2.5 mg salbutamol Control group: nebulised 0.9% normal saline (4 mL) plus 2.5 mg salbutamol Infants in each group received 3 treatments every day, delivered at intervals of 8 h until discharge using air‐compressed nebulisers.
Outcomes	Length of hospital stay Duration of symptoms and signs Wang clinical severity score Adverse events
Notes	RSV positive: 70% in hypertonic saline group; 69.7% in normal saline group
Risk of bias
Bias	Authors' judgement	Support for judgement
Random sequence generation (selection bias)	Unclear risk	No details were reported.
Allocation concealment (selection bias)	Low risk	No detectable difference in colour, smell, or other physical properties between the therapeutic packages containing 0.9% saline solution or 3% saline solution. The codes of the therapeutic packages were not available to the investigators, nurses, or parents.
Blinding (performance bias and detection bias) All outcomes	Low risk	Double‐blind
Incomplete outcome data (attrition bias) All outcomes	Low risk	No withdrawals reported.
Selective reporting (reporting bias)	Low risk	All predefined outcomes reported.
Other bias	Low risk	No other bias found.