Abstract
Background:
Limited evidence suggests that nasal sprays, or physical activity and stress-management, could limit respiratory infections. This study aimed to assess the impact on respiratory illnesses from nasal sprays or promoting physical activity and stress-management.
Methods.:
13799 participants aged >=18, from 332 GP practices, with co-morbidities and/or >=3 self-reported recurrent illnesses , were randomised by online software to: i) usual care (n=3451) ii) gel-based spray (n=3448) (2 sprays per nostril, up to 6 times/day) iii) saline spray (n=3450) (same dosing), or iv) a brief behavioural website promoting physical activity and stress-management (n=3450). The sprays were relabelled. Primary outcome: respiratory illness days over 6 months. Harms: side effects, antibiotic use.
Findings:
The usual care group (n=2983 analysed) had a mean of 8 self-reported illness days which was reduced in both spray groups (gel-based (n=2935) 6.5 days adjusted incidence rate ratio (IRR) 0.82, 99% CIs 0.76, 0.90, p<0.0001), Saline (n=2967) 6.4 days (IRR 0.81; 0.74,0.88, p<0.0001), behavioural website (n=2727) 7.4 days (0.97; 0.91, 1.04), p=0.46); for those reporting an illness it was 15,12,11.8 and 14 days respectively. Headache was more common with the gel-based spray (7.8%(199/2556) vs 4.8% (123/2547) usual care; risk ratio 1.61, 95% CIs 1.30 to 1.99, p<0.0001), but antibiotic use was lower for all interventions (IRRs (95% CIs) respectively 0.65 (0.50 to 0.84;p=0.001), 0.69 (0.45,0.88;p=0.003), 0.74 (0.57 to 0.94;p=0.02)).
Interpretation:
Advice to use either nasal spray at the first sign of an RTI reduced illness duration and both sprays and the behavioural website reduced antibiotic use.
Limited evidence suggests that nasal sprays, or physical activity and stress-management, could limit respiratory infections. This study aimed to assess the impact on respiratory illnesses from nasal sprays or promoting physical activity and stress-management.
Methods.:
13799 participants aged >=18, from 332 GP practices, with co-morbidities and/or >=3 self-reported recurrent illnesses , were randomised by online software to: i) usual care (n=3451) ii) gel-based spray (n=3448) (2 sprays per nostril, up to 6 times/day) iii) saline spray (n=3450) (same dosing), or iv) a brief behavioural website promoting physical activity and stress-management (n=3450). The sprays were relabelled. Primary outcome: respiratory illness days over 6 months. Harms: side effects, antibiotic use.
Findings:
The usual care group (n=2983 analysed) had a mean of 8 self-reported illness days which was reduced in both spray groups (gel-based (n=2935) 6.5 days adjusted incidence rate ratio (IRR) 0.82, 99% CIs 0.76, 0.90, p<0.0001), Saline (n=2967) 6.4 days (IRR 0.81; 0.74,0.88, p<0.0001), behavioural website (n=2727) 7.4 days (0.97; 0.91, 1.04), p=0.46); for those reporting an illness it was 15,12,11.8 and 14 days respectively. Headache was more common with the gel-based spray (7.8%(199/2556) vs 4.8% (123/2547) usual care; risk ratio 1.61, 95% CIs 1.30 to 1.99, p<0.0001), but antibiotic use was lower for all interventions (IRRs (95% CIs) respectively 0.65 (0.50 to 0.84;p=0.001), 0.69 (0.45,0.88;p=0.003), 0.74 (0.57 to 0.94;p=0.02)).
Interpretation:
Advice to use either nasal spray at the first sign of an RTI reduced illness duration and both sprays and the behavioural website reduced antibiotic use.
Original language | English |
---|---|
Pages (from-to) | 619-632 |
Number of pages | 14 |
Journal | The Lancet Respiratory Medicine |
Volume | 12 |
Issue number | 8 |
Early online date | 11 Jul 2024 |
DOIs | |
Publication status | E-pub ahead of print - 11 Jul 2024 |
Bibliographical note
Publisher Copyright:© 2024 The Author(s). Published by Elsevier Ltd.
Research Groups and Themes
- Health and Wellbeing (Psychological Science)