| Literature DB >> 25888289 |
Harri Hemilä1, Elizabeth Chalker2.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: A previous meta-analysis found that high dose zinc acetate lozenges reduced the duration of common colds by 42%, whereas low zinc doses had no effect. Lozenges are dissolved in the pharyngeal region, thus there might be some difference in the effect of zinc lozenges on the duration of respiratory symptoms in the pharyngeal region compared with the nasal region. The objective of this study was to determine whether zinc acetate lozenges have different effects on the duration of common cold symptoms originating from different anatomical regions.Entities:
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2015 PMID: 25888289 PMCID: PMC4359576 DOI: 10.1186/s12875-015-0237-6
Source DB: PubMed Journal: BMC Fam Pract ISSN: 1471-2296 Impact factor: 2.497
Characteristics of high dose zinc acetate lozenge trials
|
|
|
|---|---|
|
| |
| Methods | Randomized, placebo-controlled, double-blind trial. |
| Participants | Included in the analysis: 52 Zn and 49 placebo participants: 47 M 54 F, mean age 26 yr (range 18 to 54 yr). Participants were recruited from the campus of the University of Texas through posted announcements. Exclusions: serious illnesses, organ transplants, disability. |
| Intervention | Zn acetate: one lozenge contained 9 mg Zn. Placebo lozenges contained sucrose octaacetate. Participants were instructed to use 1 lozenge every 1½ hr while awake during day 0, then 1 lozenge every 2 hr while awake on following days. The mean number of lozenges used per day by all participants was 9.9. Mean daily zinc dose was 89 mg/d. 97 of the 101 subjects started using zinc lozenges on the first day of enrollment in the study (4 on day 2), but data on the length of time between onset of symptoms and enrollment is not available. |
| Common cold definition | Presence of ≥2 of the following symptoms: nasal drainage, nasal congestion, cough, fever, myalgia, headache, sore throat, scratchy throat, hoarseness, sneezing, malaise. |
|
| |
| Methods | Randomized, placebo-controlled, double-blind trial. |
| Participants | Included in the analysis: 25 Zn and 23 placebo participants: 18 M 30 F, mean age 37 yr (SD 11 yr). Participants were students, staff, and employees at Wayne State University, Michigan, who were ≥18 yr. Exclusions: pregnancy, a known immunodeficiency disorder, chronic illnesses, previous use of zinc lozenges. Inclusion required that the cold had lasted for ≤24 hr. |
| Intervention | Zn acetate: one lozenge contained 12.8 mg Zn. Placebo lozenges contained sucrose octaacetate. Participants were instructed to dissolve 1 lozenge in their mouth every 2 to 3 hr while awake. The mean number of lozenges used per day in the Zn group was 6.2. Mean daily zinc dose was 80 mg/d. |
| Common cold definition | Presence of ≥2 of the following symptoms: cough, headache, hoarseness, muscle ache, nasal discharge, nasal congestion, scratchy throat, sore throat, sneezing, fever. |
|
| |
| Methods | Randomized, placebo-controlled, double-blind trial |
| Participants | Included in the analysis: 25 Zn and 25 placebo participants: 16 M 34 F, mean age 35 yr (SD 14 yr). Participants were students, staff, and employees at Wayne State University, Michigan, who were ≥18 yr. Exclusions: pregnancy, any known immune deficiency disorder or chronic illness, previous use of zinc lozenges. Inclusion required that the cold had lasted for ≤24 hr. |
| Intervention | Zn acetate: one lozenge contained 13.3 mg Zn. Placebo lozenges contained sucrose octaacetate. The packages were identical in appearance except for the randomization numbers. Participants were asked to dissolve 1 lozenge in their mouth every 2 to 3 hr while awake. The mean number of lozenges used per day in the Zn group was 6.9. Mean daily zinc dose was 92 mg/d. |
| Common cold definition | Presence of ≥2 of the following symptoms: cough, headache, hoarseness, muscle ache, nasal discharge, nasal congestion, scratchy throat, sore throat, sneezing, fever. |
*Additional information about [21] was received from Kenneth Lawson on Jan 7, 2015.
Methodological characteristics of the included trials
|
|
|
|---|---|
|
| |
| Randomization | Reported as a randomized trial, but the method of randomization was not described. |
| Allocation concealment | Participants and personnel did not know to which group the participants were allocated. |
| Blinding of participants and personnel | Reported as double-blind, which implies that participants and personnel were blinded. |
| Blinding of outcome assessment | Blinded subjects recorded their symptoms every day. |
| Losses to follow-up | 1 was lost to follow-up. |
|
| |
| Randomization | A Research-Assistant was responsible for randomization. This person did not see the patients and was not involved in collection of clinical data. The subjects were randomized into zinc and placebo groups by the research assistant as they were recruited. |
| Allocation concealment | Participants and personnel did not know to which group the participants were allocated. |
| Blinding of participants and personnel | The Clinical Assistant who collected all of the clinical information and remained in touch with the subjects who were recruited for the study remained completely blinded regarding the contents of the zinc and placebo pills. |
| Blinding of outcome assessment | Blinded participants completed daily logs. |
| Losses to follow-up | 2 in the placebo group dropped out on day 2. |
|
| |
| Randomization | A research consultant prepared the randomization code and the packages of medication. The packages were identical in appearance except for the randomization numbers. This person did not see the patients and was not involved in collection of clinical data. The subjects were randomized into zinc and placebo groups by the research assistant as they were recruited. |
| Allocation concealment | Participants and personnel did not know to which group the participants were allocated. |
| Blinding of participants and personnel | The Clinical Assistant who collected all of the clinical information and remained in touch with the subjects who were recruited for the study remained completely blinded regarding the contents of the zinc and placebo pills. |
| Blinding of outcome assessment | Blinded participants completed daily logs. |
| Losses to follow-up | No drop outs. |
*Additional information about the methods of [22,23] was received from Ananda Prasad on Dec 17, 2014 and of [21] from Kenneth Lawson on Jan 7, 2015.
Figure 1The effect of high dose zinc acetate lozenges on the duration of the common cold. In the forest plot on the right side, the vertical line indicates the placebo level. The horizontal lines indicate the 95% CI for the zinc effect and the squares in the middle of the horizontal lines indicate the point estimate of the effect in the particular trial. The sizes of the squares indicate the relative weights of the trials. The diamond shape indicates the pooled effect and the 95% CI. The pooled effect was −42% (95% CI: −35% to −48%; P = 10−33). The duration of colds was transformed to the relative scale so that the duration in the respective placebo group was given the value of 100%. Thus the difference between zinc and placebo groups directly indicates the effect of zinc lozenges in percentages. See Additional file 2 for the extraction of data and for the calculation of the relative mean and SD values for total common cold duration.
Figure 2The effect of high dose zinc acetate lozenges on the duration of respiratory symptoms of the common cold. In the forest plots on the right side, the vertical line indicates the placebo level. The horizontal lines indicate the 95% CI for the zinc effect and the square in the middle of the horizontal line indicates the point estimate of the effect in the particular trial. Arrows at the end of the horizontal lines indicate that the 95% CI extends out of the forest plot. The sizes of the squares indicate the relative weights of the trials. The diamond shape indicates the pooled effect on the symptoms and its 95% CI. The duration of symptoms was transformed to the relative scale, thus the duration in the respective placebo group was given the value of 100%. The difference between zinc and placebo groups thus directly indicates the effect of zinc lozenges in percentages. See Additional file 2 for the extraction of data and for the calculation of the relative mean and SD values for the duration of symptoms, and Additional file 3 for the raw data and the estimates for individual studies.
Figure 3The effect of high dose zinc acetate lozenges on the duration of systemic symptoms of the common cold. In the forest plots on the right side, the vertical line indicates the placebo level. The horizontal lines indicate the 95% CI for the zinc effect and the square in the middle of the horizontal line indicates the point estimate of the effect in the particular trial. Arrows at the end of the horizontal lines indicate that the 95% CI extends out of the forest plot. The sizes of the squares indicate the relative weights of the trials. The diamond shape indicates the pooled effect on the symptoms and its 95% CI. The duration of symptoms was transformed to the relative scale, thus the duration in the respective placebo group was given the value of 100%. The difference between zinc and placebo groups thus directly indicates the effect of zinc lozenges in percentages. See Additional file 2 for the extraction of data and for the calculation of the relative mean and SD values for the duration of symptoms, and Additional file 3 for the raw data and the estimates for individual studies.
Figure 4The effect of high dose zinc acetate lozenges on the duration of common cold symptoms. The pooled estimates and their 95% CIs are shown in this figure. The horizontal lines indicate the 95% CI for the effect and the squares in the middle of the horizontal lines indicate the point estimates of the effect on the particular respiratory and systemic symptoms. See Additional files 2 and 3 for the calculations.
The effect of zinc acetate lozenges on common cold symptoms in the Prasad et al. (2008) study [23]
|
| ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
|
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| Total duration | 4.00 | 7.12 | −3.12 (−2.48, −3.76) | −43% (−34%, −53%) |
| Nasal discharge | 3.00 | 4.56 | −1.56 (−0.22, −2.90) | −34% (−4%, −64%) |
| Cough | 2.16 | 5.08 | −2.92 (−1.58, −4.26) | −57% (−30%, −84%) |
| Muscle ache | 0.80 | 2.00 | −1.20 (−0.20, −2.20) | −60% (−9%, −110%) |
Figure 5The duration of the specific symptom as a proportion of the total common cold duration (set as 100%) of the placebo groups. The left side of the figure shows the duration of the symptom as a proportion of the total common cold duration, and the right side shows the same information as a forest plot. On the scale of this figure, 100% corresponds to the total duration of the common cold of the placebo groups. The duration of symptoms was calculated as follows. First, the duration of the specific symptom was calculated as the percentage of the total common cold duration for the placebo group (5.1 days in Petrus et al. [21], 8.1 days in Prasad et al. (2000) [22], and 7.1 days in Prasad et al. (2008) [23]). Then the relative duration of each specific symptom was pooled using the RevMan program. There was no heterogeneity between the three trials in the relative duration of untreated nasal discharge, sneezing, sore throat, hoarseness, muscle pain, headache, and fever with P > 0.05 for the test of heterogeneity. The relative durations of untreated nasal congestion (I2 = 85%), scratchy throat (I2 = 74%), and cough (I2 = 68%) were significantly different in the three trials. See Additional files 2 and 4 for the calculations.