RESUMO
Introduction and aims Mildly hypertonic saline is more effective in relieving symptoms of nasal congestion compared to placebo or isotonic saline. Recently, a unique device, delivering a soft mist of 2.3% hypertonic sea-salt saline (Nasoclear PureHaleTM; Zydus Healthcare Ltd., India) has been introduced in India. The device uses a power-less manual technique to release the saline as a soft mist at 1 ml/min. Methods This is a retrospective, multi-centric, single-arm study to evaluate the safety and effectiveness of 2.3% hypertonic sea-salt saline nasal irrigation delivered through a soft mist device in patients with sino-nasal symptoms. This is an analysis of data of 130 patients collected from the medical records of 11 practicing pediatricians across India. Results The mean age of the patients was 5.23 ± 4.24 years; 63 % were boys and 37% were girls (n = 130). The mean reduction in total nasal symptom score (TNSS) at follow-up from baseline was 6.28 ± 0.18 (median days = 7) (95% CI = 5.92 to 6.64; p<0.0001; mean TNSS at baseline = 7.75 ± 2.01, mean TNSS at follow-up = 1.47± 1.30). Out of 130 patients, 33 patients (25.3%) showed complete improvement in TNSS, 93 patients (71.5%) had ≥ 50% improvement in TNSS while 4 patients (3.07%) showed <50% improvement in TNSS. The effectiveness of the device was rated as excellent (75%-100% improvement) and very good (50%-75% improvement) in 41 and 74 patients, respectively. It was rated as very easy to use and easy to use by 62 patients and 57 patients, respectively. One hundred nineteen patients (91.5%) were compliant with the prescribed frequency of the device and 110 patients (84.6%) were compliant with the prescribed duration of use of the device. No serious adverse events were reported; two patients reported mild side effects - stinging and irritation of the throat. Conclusions The 2.3% hypertonic sea-salt saline nasal irrigation delivered through the soft mist device was found to be well-tolerated and effective in patients with sino-nasal symptoms in real-world clinical settings. Clinical trial number The clinical trial number of this study is CTRI/2022/07/043751.
RESUMO
Introduction: Since June 15, 2009, clinical trial registration in the Clinical Trial Registry-India (CTRI) has been made mandatory by the Drugs Controller General of India to improve transparency, accountability, conform to accepted ethical standards and reporting of all relevant results of registered trials. In this study, we planned to evaluate the compliance of Indian and global sponsors with clinical trials conducted in India in terms of reporting of clinical trial results at the CTRI. Methods: We included trials registered in the CTRI between January 2018 and January 2020. The CTRI and ClinicalTrials.gov registry was thoroughly searched for all completed interventional studies. A year-wise comparative analysis was performed to evaluate the number of clinical trials reporting results in both the registry. Results: The reporting of completed interventional clinical trial results was 25/112 (22.32%) in year 2018, y, 8/105 (7.6%) in year 2019 and 17/140 (12.14%) in year 2020. There was significantly less reporting of results of Pharmaceutical company sponsored Interventional Studies-Indian at CTRI when compared with ClinicalTrials.gov registry for the year 2019 (odds ratio [OR]-0.17 (95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.08-0.36) and P < 0.0001) and year 2020 (OR-0.45 [95% CI: 0.24-0.82] and P < 0.01). The difference in results reported at CTRI was significantly low for Pharmaceutical company sponsored Interventional Studies-Global only for year 2019 (OR-0.09 [95% CI: 0.005-1.45] and P = 0.04) compared with ClinicalTrials.gov. Conclusion: There is a need to develop the culture of reporting clinical trial results in CTRI to strengthen the transparency in the research for overall benefit of public, health care professionals, and research community.
