Nouira 2014.
Study characteristics | ||
Methods | Study design: randomised, double‐blind, controlled trial Number of study centres and location: 2; Fattouma Bourguiba University Hospital (Monastir, Tunisia) and Tahar Sfar University Hospital (Mahdia, Tunisia) Study setting: emergency department (ED) Withdrawals: stated Date of study: January 2005 and June 2007 |
|
Participants | Number screened: 208
Number randomised: 124
Numbers in treatment group: 62
Number in placebo group: 62
Numbers of withdrawals: 2 (magnesium); 2 (ipratropium)
Numbers completing trial: 60 (magnesium); 60 (ipratropium) Number included in analysis: 62 (magnesium); 62 (ipratropium) Mean age (years): 69.2 (SD 8.6) (magnesium), 68.9 (SD 7.8) (ipratropium) Gender (male/female): 48/14 (magnesium), 47/15 (ipratropium) Diagnostic criteria: clinical Smoking history: current smokers: 58 (magnesium); 52 (ipratropium) Hospitalisation for COPD within the last year, n (%): 3.6 (2.4) (magnesium); 3.1 (1.7) (ipratropium) Inclusion criteria:
Exclusion criteria:
|
|
Interventions | Intervention: magnesium sulfate 150 mg in 4 mL of normal saline delivered via aerosol mask at 10 L/min driven by pressurised air plus IV magnesium sulfate 1.5 g in 10 mL, followed by 4 doses of magnesium sulfate with terbutaline at 30 min apart Comparator: ipratropium bromide 0.5 mg in 3 mL of normal saline delivered via aerosol mask at 10 L/min driven by pressurised air plus IV 10 mL of normal saline as placebo, followed by 4 doses of nebulized ipratropium bromide with terbutaline at 30 min apart Concomitant medications: standard treatment consisting of intravenous methylprednisolone, parenteral fluid therapy, antibiotics, and nebulised terbutaline 5 mg in 4 mL of normal saline |
|
Outcomes | Primary outcomes
Secondary outcomes
|
|
Notes | Funding for studies: University of Monastir Conflicts of interest of trial authors: not described; proposal was approved by the Ethic committee Clinical Trials Registry: NCT01136421 |
|
Risk of bias | ||
Bias | Authors' judgement | Support for judgement |
Random sequence generation (selection bias) | Low risk | Quote: "treatment preparation and allocation were performed by the hospital pharmacy in random sequence using a random table" |
Allocation concealment (selection bias) | Unclear risk | Comment: not reported in detail. |
Blinding of participants and personnel (performance bias) All outcomes | Low risk | Quote: "patients were assigned in a randomised double‐blind fashion; treatment preparation performed by the hospital pharmacy were kept identical in their appearance" |
Blinding of outcome assessment (detection bias) All outcomes | Low risk | Comment: masking includes participant, care provider, investigator and outcomes assessor. |
Incomplete outcome data (attrition bias) All outcomes | Low risk | Comment: there were no dropouts from the study arms. |
Selective reporting (reporting bias) | Unclear risk | Comment: trial was registered on website; however, outcomes were not provided on the website so unclear if all outcomes were reported as planned. |
Other bias | Low risk | Comment: no other apparent biases identified. |