Cargando…
Efficacy and tolerability of an ectoine mouth and throat spray compared with those of saline lozenges in the treatment of acute pharyngitis and/or laryngitis: a prospective, controlled, observational clinical trial
The aim of this observational trial was to evaluate the efficacy and tolerability of a mouth and throat spray containing ectoine in the treatment of acute pharyngitis and/or laryngitis. The outcome was compared with control treatment using saline lozenges. This study was designed as a prospective, c...
Autores principales: | , , , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
Springer Berlin Heidelberg
2016
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4974281/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/27126336 http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00405-016-4060-z |
_version_ | 1782446524391751680 |
---|---|
author | Müller, Dörte Lindemann, Torben Shah-Hosseini, Kija Scherner, Olaf Knop, Markus Bilstein, Andreas Mösges, Ralph |
author_facet | Müller, Dörte Lindemann, Torben Shah-Hosseini, Kija Scherner, Olaf Knop, Markus Bilstein, Andreas Mösges, Ralph |
author_sort | Müller, Dörte |
collection | PubMed |
description | The aim of this observational trial was to evaluate the efficacy and tolerability of a mouth and throat spray containing ectoine in the treatment of acute pharyngitis and/or laryngitis. The outcome was compared with control treatment using saline lozenges. This study was designed as a prospective, controlled, non-randomized, observational multicenter clinical trial and was conducted in Germany. The study population consisted of 95 patients. The decision for treatment with either spray or lozenges was based on the patients’ preference for pharyngeal or oral application. Investigators assessed symptoms specific to acute pharyngitis/laryngitis and determined the pharyngitis symptom score. Both patients and investigators evaluated the tolerability and efficacy of the treatment applied. Treatment with the spray showed higher efficacy, 1.95 ± 0.81 versus 1.68 ± 0.67 (investigators) and 1.97 ± 0.88 versus 1.57 ± 0.69 (patients, p < 0.05). Treatment with the spray resulted in significantly greater reduction of cervical lymph node swelling (p < 0.05), ∆ spray = 0.44 ± 0.62, ∆ lozenges = 0.21 ± 0.62. The lozenges showed some advantage in relieving cough, ∆ lozenges = 0.62 ± 0.94 versus ∆ spray = 0.44 ± 0.85. Both patients and investigators rated the tolerability of both medical devices as “good” to “very good”. Adverse events of mild to moderate severity were either possibly related or not related to the medical devices used. No serious adverse events occurred. Taken together, while the tolerability was consistent in both treatment groups, the ectoine-based spray showed superior efficacy in treating acute pharyngitis and/or laryngitis. ELECTRONIC SUPPLEMENTARY MATERIAL: The online version of this article (doi:10.1007/s00405-016-4060-z) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-4974281 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2016 |
publisher | Springer Berlin Heidelberg |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-49742812016-08-17 Efficacy and tolerability of an ectoine mouth and throat spray compared with those of saline lozenges in the treatment of acute pharyngitis and/or laryngitis: a prospective, controlled, observational clinical trial Müller, Dörte Lindemann, Torben Shah-Hosseini, Kija Scherner, Olaf Knop, Markus Bilstein, Andreas Mösges, Ralph Eur Arch Otorhinolaryngol Laryngology The aim of this observational trial was to evaluate the efficacy and tolerability of a mouth and throat spray containing ectoine in the treatment of acute pharyngitis and/or laryngitis. The outcome was compared with control treatment using saline lozenges. This study was designed as a prospective, controlled, non-randomized, observational multicenter clinical trial and was conducted in Germany. The study population consisted of 95 patients. The decision for treatment with either spray or lozenges was based on the patients’ preference for pharyngeal or oral application. Investigators assessed symptoms specific to acute pharyngitis/laryngitis and determined the pharyngitis symptom score. Both patients and investigators evaluated the tolerability and efficacy of the treatment applied. Treatment with the spray showed higher efficacy, 1.95 ± 0.81 versus 1.68 ± 0.67 (investigators) and 1.97 ± 0.88 versus 1.57 ± 0.69 (patients, p < 0.05). Treatment with the spray resulted in significantly greater reduction of cervical lymph node swelling (p < 0.05), ∆ spray = 0.44 ± 0.62, ∆ lozenges = 0.21 ± 0.62. The lozenges showed some advantage in relieving cough, ∆ lozenges = 0.62 ± 0.94 versus ∆ spray = 0.44 ± 0.85. Both patients and investigators rated the tolerability of both medical devices as “good” to “very good”. Adverse events of mild to moderate severity were either possibly related or not related to the medical devices used. No serious adverse events occurred. Taken together, while the tolerability was consistent in both treatment groups, the ectoine-based spray showed superior efficacy in treating acute pharyngitis and/or laryngitis. ELECTRONIC SUPPLEMENTARY MATERIAL: The online version of this article (doi:10.1007/s00405-016-4060-z) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users. Springer Berlin Heidelberg 2016-04-28 2016 /pmc/articles/PMC4974281/ /pubmed/27126336 http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00405-016-4060-z Text en © The Author(s) 2016 Open AccessThis article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license, and indicate if changes were made. |
spellingShingle | Laryngology Müller, Dörte Lindemann, Torben Shah-Hosseini, Kija Scherner, Olaf Knop, Markus Bilstein, Andreas Mösges, Ralph Efficacy and tolerability of an ectoine mouth and throat spray compared with those of saline lozenges in the treatment of acute pharyngitis and/or laryngitis: a prospective, controlled, observational clinical trial |
title | Efficacy and tolerability of an ectoine mouth and throat spray compared with those of saline lozenges in the treatment of acute pharyngitis and/or laryngitis: a prospective, controlled, observational clinical trial |
title_full | Efficacy and tolerability of an ectoine mouth and throat spray compared with those of saline lozenges in the treatment of acute pharyngitis and/or laryngitis: a prospective, controlled, observational clinical trial |
title_fullStr | Efficacy and tolerability of an ectoine mouth and throat spray compared with those of saline lozenges in the treatment of acute pharyngitis and/or laryngitis: a prospective, controlled, observational clinical trial |
title_full_unstemmed | Efficacy and tolerability of an ectoine mouth and throat spray compared with those of saline lozenges in the treatment of acute pharyngitis and/or laryngitis: a prospective, controlled, observational clinical trial |
title_short | Efficacy and tolerability of an ectoine mouth and throat spray compared with those of saline lozenges in the treatment of acute pharyngitis and/or laryngitis: a prospective, controlled, observational clinical trial |
title_sort | efficacy and tolerability of an ectoine mouth and throat spray compared with those of saline lozenges in the treatment of acute pharyngitis and/or laryngitis: a prospective, controlled, observational clinical trial |
topic | Laryngology |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4974281/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/27126336 http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00405-016-4060-z |
work_keys_str_mv | AT mullerdorte efficacyandtolerabilityofanectoinemouthandthroatspraycomparedwiththoseofsalinelozengesinthetreatmentofacutepharyngitisandorlaryngitisaprospectivecontrolledobservationalclinicaltrial AT lindemanntorben efficacyandtolerabilityofanectoinemouthandthroatspraycomparedwiththoseofsalinelozengesinthetreatmentofacutepharyngitisandorlaryngitisaprospectivecontrolledobservationalclinicaltrial AT shahhosseinikija efficacyandtolerabilityofanectoinemouthandthroatspraycomparedwiththoseofsalinelozengesinthetreatmentofacutepharyngitisandorlaryngitisaprospectivecontrolledobservationalclinicaltrial AT schernerolaf efficacyandtolerabilityofanectoinemouthandthroatspraycomparedwiththoseofsalinelozengesinthetreatmentofacutepharyngitisandorlaryngitisaprospectivecontrolledobservationalclinicaltrial AT knopmarkus efficacyandtolerabilityofanectoinemouthandthroatspraycomparedwiththoseofsalinelozengesinthetreatmentofacutepharyngitisandorlaryngitisaprospectivecontrolledobservationalclinicaltrial AT bilsteinandreas efficacyandtolerabilityofanectoinemouthandthroatspraycomparedwiththoseofsalinelozengesinthetreatmentofacutepharyngitisandorlaryngitisaprospectivecontrolledobservationalclinicaltrial AT mosgesralph efficacyandtolerabilityofanectoinemouthandthroatspraycomparedwiththoseofsalinelozengesinthetreatmentofacutepharyngitisandorlaryngitisaprospectivecontrolledobservationalclinicaltrial |