ArticleMultidisciplinary respiratory medicine2024
Inter-societal Survey on the topical nasal treatments in Italy.
Article in Multidisciplinary respiratory medicine, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- The Evaluation initiative: management of rhinitis by Italian otorhinolaryngologists.Multidisciplinary respiratory medicine · 2026Article
- A multidisciplinary Delphi consensus on budesonide aqueous nasal spray in managing upper respiratory diseases.Multidisciplinary respiratory medicine · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Topical nasal therapy represents a widespread opportunity to treat upper airway diseases. As a result, specialists in different areas (mainly ENT, pediatrics, and allergology) and general practitioners prescribe intranasal compounds. However, a myriad of products and devices are available, as well as respiratory disorders. Consequently, this matter is debatable, and no guideline organically addresses this issue. Considering these premises, a restricted panel of qualified experts promoted an initial multidisciplinary survey involving only Fellows of some Scientific Societies belonging to ENT, pediatrics, and allergology areas. The survey included a series of queries concerning practical aspects of topical nasal therapy (treated disease, devices, and agents). A web platform served to participate in this survey. Each participant anonymously completed the questionnaire. Four hundred and forty-five doctors participated in the survey. There was a homogeneous distribution in Italy. Most participants were pediatricians (37%), followed by allergologists (31%) and ENT specialists (24%). Almost all doctors (95%) used topical nasal therapy. The most common diseases topically treated were allergic rhinitis (79%), chronic rhinosinusitis (73%), and non-allergic rhinitis. The most popular devices were pre-dosed spray both for nasal irrigation (67%) and nebulization (66%). Corticosteroids (67%), isotonic saline (63%), hyaluronic acid, hypertonic saline, and antihistamines (39%) were the most common agents used for intranasal therapy. Combined antihistamine/corticosteroids were also commonly used (38%). The most frequent schedule was the cyclic treatment. Most doctors (89%) claim they adequately spend time educating patients on this matter. In conclusion, topical nasal therapy is commonly used to manage upper respiratory diseases. However, the disagreement about some issues requires greater knowledge of the topics and the need to develop new studies, including pragmatic ones.
Identifiers
What Socratic 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 Socratic graph.