Effects of steam inhalation on nasal patency and nasal symptoms in patients with the common cold. Effect of inhaling heated vapor on symptoms of the common cold. Effect of inhaling heated vapor on symptoms of the common cold. Local hyperthermia benefits natural and experimental common colds. Therapeutic approaches to the common cold in children.
The effects of steam inhalation on nasal patency and on nasal symptoms were studied in 62 patients with the common cold by a double-blind, randomized, placebo-controlled clinical trial. Treatment consisted of two 20-minute sessions, during which the patient inhaled saturated, hot (42 degrees to 44 degrees C) air through the nose. The subjective response was recorded by each patient during the week following treatment on a daily symptom score card. Nasal patency was determined before treatment, the following day, and 1 week later by measuring peak nasal expiratory and inspiratory air flow. Highly reproducible results were obtained by using these objective methods. Steam inhalation resulted in alleviation of cold symptoms and increased nasal patency in a significantly higher percentage of patients in the actively treated group than in the placebo-treated group. Possible explanations for the effectiveness of treatment are discussed. To test the efficacy of steam inhalation in treating common cold symptoms.
                An in vitro study determined the temperature that inactivated rhinovirus: a temperature of 43 degrees C lasting at least 1 hour was needed. We then conducted a double-blind, placebo-controlled, randomized in vivo study.
                The virology laboratory and the outpatient department of the Cleveland (Ohio) Clinic Foundation.
                Sixty-eight Cleveland Clinic employee volunteers with symptoms of the common cold at the time of enrollment.
                A single 60-minute treatment was given to the volunteers. The steam treatment group (n = 32) received 40 L/min of heated saturated air that raised the intranasal temperature to 43 degrees C. The placebo group (n = 36) received 2 L/min of ambient air at 20 degrees C to 24 degrees C.
                Subjective symptom scores for nasal congestion, nasal drainage, and sneezing and objective measures of nasal resistance were studied during a 7-day follow-up observation period.
                There were no significant differences in daily symptom scores between the groups (P = .59 to .83). The only statistically significant differences between the groups were lower nasal resistances at baseline in the steam group (P = .04) and percent improvement in nasal resistance favoring the placebo group on day 7 (P = .01). However, these differences were of questionable clinical significance.
                We conclude that steam inhalation treatment had no beneficial effect on the cold symptoms of our volunteers. A double-blind, randomized study tested the efficacy of steam (technically, heated, humidified air) inhalation in the treatment of common cold symptoms. Two 20-minute treatments spaced 60 to 90 minutes apart were given at the time of enrollment. The active device (Rhinotherm, Netzer-Sereni, Beer Yaacov, Israel) delivered 40 L/min of saturated air at 40 degrees C to 42 degrees C, while the identical-appearing placebo delivered 2 L/min of ambient air at 20 degrees C to 24 degrees C. There were 34 patients in the placebo group and 32 in the active group. Significant improvements in the placebo-treated group were obtained on subjective symptom scores for nasal congestion, nasal drainage, and sneezing on isolated days during the treatment period (40%, vs 25% on day 3, 71% vs 60% on day 6, and 100% vs 67% on day 7). Improvement in nasal resistance as measured by rhinomanography was better in the placebo group than in the active group on day 7 (11% vs -6%). Our study demonstrated no beneficial effects of steam inhalation on common cold symptoms. To determine whether inhaling fully humidified air at 43 degrees C gave more benefit to cold sufferers than inhaling air at 30 degrees C.
                Randomised double blind trial. Setting--General practice and the common cold research unit.
                87 Unselected patients with typical acute nasal and upper respiratory symptoms (general practice study), and 84 volunteers aged 18-50 without a history of chronic or allergic diseases.
                Subjects breathed from apparatus delivering 40 litres of room air heated to 43 degrees C or 30 degrees C and fully humidified (relative humidity 100%) per minute. End point--Reduction in severity of disease. MEASUREMENTS and main results--Patients recorded their symptoms (general practice study) and observers recorded symptoms and signs, weight of nasal secretions, isolation of virus, and antibody responses in volunteers. Patients treated for 20 minutes at 43 degrees C had in the succeeding days roughly half the score for symptoms of those treated at 30 degrees C. Volunteers treated for 30 minutes on three occasions when they were starting a cold showed an 18% [corrected] reduction in symptoms. Treatment of volunteers for 20 minutes at the onset of the cold and for 10 minutes on succeeding days showed no difference between 43 degrees C and 30 degrees C.
                Nasal hyperthermia can improve the course of a common cold and also give immediate relief of symptoms. In a five-day, randomized, double-blind study, the efficacy and safety of a syrup containing a combination of azatadine maleate, pseudoephedrine sulfate, and dextromethorphan hydrobromide (SCH 399 syrup) were compared with those of an expectorant containing the antihistamine diphenhydramine hydrochloride in 60 children with symptoms of the common cold and associated cough. One-half teaspoonful of assigned medication was administered three or four times daily. The severity of signs and symptoms was graded on days 0, 3, and 5. At days 3 and 5, patients treated with SCH 399 experienced a significantly greater degree of relief (P less than 0.001) than did patients treated with the expectorant product. Differences between treatment groups in overall therapeutic response, as evaluated by the physician, were statistically significant (P less than 0.001) at each visit, favoring patients treated with SCH 399. More than 75% of the patients treated with SCH 399 demonstrated an excellent therapeutic response. Tolerance to both study medications was excellent.
Steam inhalation has not shown any consistent benefits in the treatment of the common cold, hence is not recommended in the routine treatment of common cold symptoms until more double-blind, randomised trials with a standardised treatment modality are conducted.