Normal saline plus standard treatment vs usual care: Antibiotic usage Patient‐reported usage
It is very uncertain whether normal saline plus standard treatment changes antibiotic usage Patient‐reported usage compared with standard treatment alone (very low certainty).
What each review found
Include earlier review versions| Finding | Effect | Studies | GRADE certainty |
|---|---|---|---|
Normal saline plus standard treatment vs standard treatment alone Antibiotic usage Patient‐reported usage · patients with acute upper respiratory tract infections It is very uncertain whether normal saline plus standard treatment changes antibiotic usage Patient‐reported usage compared with standard treatment alone (very low certainty). Saline nasal irrigation for acute upper respiratory tract infections (2015) · Cochrane Headline outcomes only | OR 0.65 [0.29, 1.46] | 2 studies · 422 participants | Very low |
Findings are shown side by side, never pooled across reviews.
The reviews
| Review | Searched up to | Included studies | AMSTAR 2 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Saline nasal irrigation for acute upper respiratory tract infections 2015 · Cochrane Headline outcomes only | Not reported | list not extracted yet | Not assessed |
Studies behind the findings
None of these reviews ties its included studies to this outcome in the data here. Cochrane reviews and reviews with headline outcomes only do not list their studies yet.
How reviews are matched to this question
Reviews word the same question differently. Four decision models (TypeSafe's Jev, Liquid AI's d1-ultra, SubQ Snap and Baseten's Elephant) judged each wording of the population, intervention, comparator and outcome against the others; two wordings count as the same when at least three of them agree and none clearly disagrees, and findings count as this question only when all four elements match. Timing, setting and subgroup never split a question: they are shown on each finding.