Scolaris Content Display Scolaris Content Display

Study flow diagram: review update
Figuras y tablas -
Figure 1

Study flow diagram: review update

'Risk of bias' summary: review authors' judgements about each risk of bias item for each included study.
Figuras y tablas -
Figure 2

'Risk of bias' summary: review authors' judgements about each risk of bias item for each included study.

In the control group 82 people out of 100 had hospital admission , compared to 78 (95% CI 75 to 82) out of 100 for the active treatment group.
Figuras y tablas -
Figure 3

In the control group 82 people out of 100 had hospital admission , compared to 78 (95% CI 75 to 82) out of 100 for the active treatment group.

Comparison 1 MgSO4 + SABA + ipratropium versus SABA + ipratropium, Outcome 1 Pulmonary function (% FEV1).
Figuras y tablas -
Analysis 1.1

Comparison 1 MgSO4 + SABA + ipratropium versus SABA + ipratropium, Outcome 1 Pulmonary function (% FEV1).

Comparison 1 MgSO4 + SABA + ipratropium versus SABA + ipratropium, Outcome 2 Pulmonary function % predicted PEF.
Figuras y tablas -
Analysis 1.2

Comparison 1 MgSO4 + SABA + ipratropium versus SABA + ipratropium, Outcome 2 Pulmonary function % predicted PEF.

Comparison 1 MgSO4 + SABA + ipratropium versus SABA + ipratropium, Outcome 3 Clinical severity scores (closest to 60 mins).
Figuras y tablas -
Analysis 1.3

Comparison 1 MgSO4 + SABA + ipratropium versus SABA + ipratropium, Outcome 3 Clinical severity scores (closest to 60 mins).

Comparison 1 MgSO4 + SABA + ipratropium versus SABA + ipratropium, Outcome 4 Admission at first presentation.
Figuras y tablas -
Analysis 1.4

Comparison 1 MgSO4 + SABA + ipratropium versus SABA + ipratropium, Outcome 4 Admission at first presentation.

Comparison 1 MgSO4 + SABA + ipratropium versus SABA + ipratropium, Outcome 5 HDU/ITU admission.
Figuras y tablas -
Analysis 1.5

Comparison 1 MgSO4 + SABA + ipratropium versus SABA + ipratropium, Outcome 5 HDU/ITU admission.

Comparison 1 MgSO4 + SABA + ipratropium versus SABA + ipratropium, Outcome 6 Readmission.
Figuras y tablas -
Analysis 1.6

Comparison 1 MgSO4 + SABA + ipratropium versus SABA + ipratropium, Outcome 6 Readmission.

Comparison 1 MgSO4 + SABA + ipratropium versus SABA + ipratropium, Outcome 7 Respiratory rate at 60 mins.
Figuras y tablas -
Analysis 1.7

Comparison 1 MgSO4 + SABA + ipratropium versus SABA + ipratropium, Outcome 7 Respiratory rate at 60 mins.

Comparison 1 MgSO4 + SABA + ipratropium versus SABA + ipratropium, Outcome 8 Heart rate at 60 mins.
Figuras y tablas -
Analysis 1.8

Comparison 1 MgSO4 + SABA + ipratropium versus SABA + ipratropium, Outcome 8 Heart rate at 60 mins.

Comparison 1 MgSO4 + SABA + ipratropium versus SABA + ipratropium, Outcome 9 Systolic blood pressure at 60 mins.
Figuras y tablas -
Analysis 1.9

Comparison 1 MgSO4 + SABA + ipratropium versus SABA + ipratropium, Outcome 9 Systolic blood pressure at 60 mins.

Comparison 1 MgSO4 + SABA + ipratropium versus SABA + ipratropium, Outcome 10 Diastolic blood pressure at 60 mins.
Figuras y tablas -
Analysis 1.10

Comparison 1 MgSO4 + SABA + ipratropium versus SABA + ipratropium, Outcome 10 Diastolic blood pressure at 60 mins.

Comparison 1 MgSO4 + SABA + ipratropium versus SABA + ipratropium, Outcome 11 Serious adverse events (during admission).
Figuras y tablas -
Analysis 1.11

Comparison 1 MgSO4 + SABA + ipratropium versus SABA + ipratropium, Outcome 11 Serious adverse events (during admission).

Comparison 1 MgSO4 + SABA + ipratropium versus SABA + ipratropium, Outcome 12 Any adverse event (during admission).
Figuras y tablas -
Analysis 1.12

Comparison 1 MgSO4 + SABA + ipratropium versus SABA + ipratropium, Outcome 12 Any adverse event (during admission).

Comparison 1 MgSO4 + SABA + ipratropium versus SABA + ipratropium, Outcome 13 Serious adverse events (within 30 days).
Figuras y tablas -
Analysis 1.13

Comparison 1 MgSO4 + SABA + ipratropium versus SABA + ipratropium, Outcome 13 Serious adverse events (within 30 days).

Comparison 1 MgSO4 + SABA + ipratropium versus SABA + ipratropium, Outcome 14 Any adverse event (within 30 days).
Figuras y tablas -
Analysis 1.14

Comparison 1 MgSO4 + SABA + ipratropium versus SABA + ipratropium, Outcome 14 Any adverse event (within 30 days).

Comparison 1 MgSO4 + SABA + ipratropium versus SABA + ipratropium, Outcome 15 Adverse event: hypotension.
Figuras y tablas -
Analysis 1.15

Comparison 1 MgSO4 + SABA + ipratropium versus SABA + ipratropium, Outcome 15 Adverse event: hypotension.

Comparison 1 MgSO4 + SABA + ipratropium versus SABA + ipratropium, Outcome 16 Adverse event: flushing.
Figuras y tablas -
Analysis 1.16

Comparison 1 MgSO4 + SABA + ipratropium versus SABA + ipratropium, Outcome 16 Adverse event: flushing.

Comparison 2 MgSO4 + SABA versus SABA, Outcome 1 Pulmonary function % predicted FEV1.
Figuras y tablas -
Analysis 2.1

Comparison 2 MgSO4 + SABA versus SABA, Outcome 1 Pulmonary function % predicted FEV1.

Comparison 2 MgSO4 + SABA versus SABA, Outcome 2 % predicted FEV1: subgroup: severity.
Figuras y tablas -
Analysis 2.2

Comparison 2 MgSO4 + SABA versus SABA, Outcome 2 % predicted FEV1: subgroup: severity.

Comparison 2 MgSO4 + SABA versus SABA, Outcome 3 Pulmonary function PEF L/min.
Figuras y tablas -
Analysis 2.3

Comparison 2 MgSO4 + SABA versus SABA, Outcome 3 Pulmonary function PEF L/min.

Comparison 2 MgSO4 + SABA versus SABA, Outcome 4 Admission to hospital.
Figuras y tablas -
Analysis 2.4

Comparison 2 MgSO4 + SABA versus SABA, Outcome 4 Admission to hospital.

Comparison 2 MgSO4 + SABA versus SABA, Outcome 5 Heart rate at 120 mins.
Figuras y tablas -
Analysis 2.5

Comparison 2 MgSO4 + SABA versus SABA, Outcome 5 Heart rate at 120 mins.

Comparison 2 MgSO4 + SABA versus SABA, Outcome 6 Respiratory rate at 120 mins.
Figuras y tablas -
Analysis 2.6

Comparison 2 MgSO4 + SABA versus SABA, Outcome 6 Respiratory rate at 120 mins.

Comparison 2 MgSO4 + SABA versus SABA, Outcome 7 Diastolic blood pressure at 120 mins.
Figuras y tablas -
Analysis 2.7

Comparison 2 MgSO4 + SABA versus SABA, Outcome 7 Diastolic blood pressure at 120 mins.

Comparison 2 MgSO4 + SABA versus SABA, Outcome 8 Systolic blood pressure at 120 mins.
Figuras y tablas -
Analysis 2.8

Comparison 2 MgSO4 + SABA versus SABA, Outcome 8 Systolic blood pressure at 120 mins.

Comparison 2 MgSO4 + SABA versus SABA, Outcome 9 Serious adverse events.
Figuras y tablas -
Analysis 2.9

Comparison 2 MgSO4 + SABA versus SABA, Outcome 9 Serious adverse events.

Comparison 2 MgSO4 + SABA versus SABA, Outcome 10 Any adverse events.
Figuras y tablas -
Analysis 2.10

Comparison 2 MgSO4 + SABA versus SABA, Outcome 10 Any adverse events.

Comparison 3 MgSO4 versus SABA, Outcome 1 Clinical severity score.
Figuras y tablas -
Analysis 3.1

Comparison 3 MgSO4 versus SABA, Outcome 1 Clinical severity score.

Comparison 3 MgSO4 versus SABA, Outcome 2 Admission to hospital.
Figuras y tablas -
Analysis 3.2

Comparison 3 MgSO4 versus SABA, Outcome 2 Admission to hospital.

Comparison 3 MgSO4 versus SABA, Outcome 3 Heart rate (120 mins).
Figuras y tablas -
Analysis 3.3

Comparison 3 MgSO4 versus SABA, Outcome 3 Heart rate (120 mins).

Comparison 3 MgSO4 versus SABA, Outcome 4 Respiratory rate.
Figuras y tablas -
Analysis 3.4

Comparison 3 MgSO4 versus SABA, Outcome 4 Respiratory rate.

Comparison 3 MgSO4 versus SABA, Outcome 5 Systolic pressure (120 mins).
Figuras y tablas -
Analysis 3.5

Comparison 3 MgSO4 versus SABA, Outcome 5 Systolic pressure (120 mins).

Comparison 3 MgSO4 versus SABA, Outcome 6 Diastolic pressure (120 mins).
Figuras y tablas -
Analysis 3.6

Comparison 3 MgSO4 versus SABA, Outcome 6 Diastolic pressure (120 mins).

Comparison 3 MgSO4 versus SABA, Outcome 7 Serious adverse events.
Figuras y tablas -
Analysis 3.7

Comparison 3 MgSO4 versus SABA, Outcome 7 Serious adverse events.

Comparison 3 MgSO4 versus SABA, Outcome 8 Mild‐Moderate Side Effects.
Figuras y tablas -
Analysis 3.8

Comparison 3 MgSO4 versus SABA, Outcome 8 Mild‐Moderate Side Effects.

Summary of findings for the main comparison. MgSO4 + SABA + ipratropium compared to SABA + ipratropium in the treatment of acute asthma

MgSO+ SABA + ipratropium compared to SABA + ipratropium in the treatment of acute asthma

Patient or population: adults and children with acute exacerbation of asthma
Setting: emergency department/inpatient
Intervention: MgSO₄ + SABA + ipratropium
Comparison: SABA + ipratropium

Outcomes

Anticipated absolute effects* (95% CI)

Relative effect
(95% CI)

№ of participants
(studies)

Quality of the evidence
(GRADE)

Comments

Risk with SABA + ipratropium

Risk with MgSO4 + SABA + ipratropium

Pulmonary function (% predicted FEV1)

(90 to 120 minutes)

The mean pulmonary function (% predicted FEV1) was 65%

% predicted FEV1 was 3.28% higher
(1.06 higher to 5.49 higher)

120
(2 RCTs)

⊕⊝⊝⊝
VERY LOW 1 2 3

Outcome measured at 90 mins in 1 study and 120 mins in the other.

1 study (Gaur 2008) has reported much smaller standard deviations and contributes almost 90% of analysis weight

Pulmonary function % predicted PEF

(60 minutes)

The mean pulmonary function % predicted PEF was 50.45%

% predicted PEF was 0.05 higher
(2.33 lower to 2.42 higher)

636
(2 RCTs)

⊕⊕⊕⊝
MODERATE 2 4 5

Both studies in adults

Mean control group % predicted PEF was 36% in 1 study and 64.9% in the other

Clinical severity scores

(60 minutes)

The mean dyspnoea VAS was 31.8; the mean Yung ASS was 4.95

SMD 0.01 higher
(0.11 lower to 0.12 higher)

1130
(2 RCTs)

⊕⊕⊝⊝
LOW 2 6

1 study reported Yung ASS and the other change in dyspnoea VAS

Admission at first presentation

819 per 1000

778 per 1000
(745 to 819)

RR 0.95
(0.91 to 1.00)

1308
(4 RCTs)

⊕⊕⊕⊝
MODERATE 7 8 9

Adults vs children test for subgroup difference: P = 0.72, I² = 0%

Readmission

(7 to 30 days)

26 per 1000

46 per 1000
(22 to 100)

RR 1.80
(0.84 to 3.87)

750
(2 RCTs)

⊕⊕⊝⊝
LOW 10

Outcome measured at 7 days in 1 study and 30 days in the other.

Serious adverse events (during admission)

43 per 1000

Not estimable. See comment.

557
(2 RCTs)

⊕⊕⊕⊝
MODERATE 11

Risk difference: −0.03 (95% CI −0.06 to 0.00)

Adults vs children test for subgroup difference: P = 0.39, I² = 0%

Goodacre 2013 also reported participants with 1 or more SAE within 30 days: 35/332 in the MgSO₄ group and 28/358 in the placebo group (RD: 0.03; 95% CI −0.02 to 0.07)

Any adverse event (during admission)

144 per 1000

Not estimable. See comment.

1197
(2 RCTs)

⊕⊕⊕⊕
HIGH

Risk Difference: 0.01 (95% CI −0.03 to 0.05)

Adults vs children test for subgroup difference: P = 0.34, I² = 0%

Goodacre 2013 also reported participants with 1 or more adverse event within 30 days: 52/332 in the MgSO₄ group and 36/358 in the placebo group (OR 1.66, 95% CI 1.05 to 2.62)

*The risk in the intervention group (and its 95% confidence interval) is based on the assumed risk in the comparison group and the relative effect of the intervention (and its 95% CI).

ASS: asthma severity score; CI: Confidence interval; RD: risk difference; RR: Risk ratio; OR: Odds ratio; VAS: visual analogue scale

GRADE Working Group grades of evidence
High quality: We are very confident that the true effect lies close to that of the estimate of the effect
Moderate quality: We are moderately confident in the effect estimate: the true effect is likely to be close to the estimate of the effect, but there is a possibility that it is substantially different
Low quality: Our confidence in the effect estimate is limited: the true effect may be substantially different from the estimate of the effect
Very low quality: We have very little confidence in the effect estimate: the true effect is likely to be substantially different from the estimate of effect

1 One study contributing most of weight at unclear risk of bias in multiple domains (−1 study limitations)

2 I² > 50% (−1 inconsistency)

3 Studies equal size but one study contributes almost 90% of weight to analysis due to much smaller standard deviations. Result no longer significant if random‐effects model applied (−1 imprecision)

4 Although one study at unclear risk of bias in several domains, the larger study, which contributes vast majority of weight to analysis, if of high methodological quality (no downgrade)

5 Although confidence interval includes no difference, they are sufficiently tight to effectively rule out an important between‐group difference (no downgrade)

6 Confidence intervals include both harm and benefit of intervention (−1 imprecision)

7 Although two of the studies at unclear risk of bias in several domains the two large studies contributing nearly 95% of weight in analysis are both of high methodological quality (no downgrade)

8 Although the I² = 52%, the two large studies contributing to this analysis show consistent results (no downgrade)

9 Confidence intervals include no difference (−1 imprecision)

10 Confidence intervals include no difference and appreciable harm or benefit of the intervention (−2 imprecision)

11 Events rare and confidence intervals include no difference (−1 imprecision)

Figuras y tablas -
Summary of findings for the main comparison. MgSO4 + SABA + ipratropium compared to SABA + ipratropium in the treatment of acute asthma
Summary of findings 2. MgSO4 + SABA compared to SABA in the treatment of acute asthma

MgSO+ SABA compared to SABA in the treatment of acute asthma

Patient or population: adults and children with acute exacerbation of asthma
Setting: emergency department/inpatient
Intervention: MgSO₄ + SABA
Comparison: SABA

Outcomes

Anticipated absolute effects* (95% CI)

Relative effect
(95% CI)

№ of participants
(studies)

Quality of the evidence
(GRADE)

Comments

Risk with SABA

Risk with MgSO4 + SABA

Pulmonary function % predicted FEV1

(20 minutes to 2 to 3 h)

The mean pulmonary function % predicted FEV1 was 56.55%

% predicted FEV1 was 3.34% higher
(1.58 lower to 8.26 higher)

208
(4 RCTs)

⊕⊕⊝⊝
LOW 1 2

Adults vs children test for subgroup difference: P = 0.35, I² = 0%

Severe vs moderate asthma exacerbation test for subgroup difference: P = 0.15, I² = 51.8% (favouring a greater effect in the more severe subgroup)

Pulmonary function PEF L/min ‐ Adults

(20 minutes to 2 to 3 h)

The mean pulmonary function PEF was 233 L/min

PEF was 11.91 L/min higher
(4.12 lower to 27.95 higher)

155
(3 RCTs)

⊕⊕⊝⊝
LOW 1 2

Pulmonary function PEF L/min ‐ Children

(60 minutes)

The mean pulmonary function PEF was 143.5

PEF was 11.9 L/min higher
(6.86 lower to 30.66 higher)

80
(1 RCT)

⊕⊕⊝⊝
LOW 2 3

Admission to hospital at initial presentation

202 per 1000

158 per 1000 (105 to 233)

RR 0.78, (0.52 to 1.15)

375
(6 RCTs)

⊕⊕⊝⊝
LOW 1 2

Adults vs children test for subgroup difference: P = 0.35, I² = 0%

Serious adverse events

(During ED/hospital admission)

Not estimable

Not estimable. See comment

243
(5 RCTs)

⊕⊕⊝⊝
LOW 1 4

Risk difference: 0.00 (95% CI −0.04 to 0.04)

No events reported

Any adverse events

(During ED/hospital admission)

107 per 1000

Not estimable. See comment

694
(5 RCTs)

⊕⊕⊝⊝
LOW 1 2

Risk difference: −0.01 (95% CI −0.05 to 0.03)

Adults vs children test for subgroup difference: P = 0.77, I² = 0%

*The risk in the intervention group (and its 95% confidence interval) is based on the assumed risk in the comparison group and the relative effect of the intervention (and its 95% CI).

CI: Confidence interval; ED: emergency department; FEV1: forced expiratory volume in 1 second; OR: Odds ratio; PEF: peak expiratory flow; RD: risk difference; RR: Risk ratio

GRADE Working Group grades of evidence
High quality: We are very confident that the true effect lies close to that of the estimate of the effect
Moderate quality: We are moderately confident in the effect estimate: The true effect is likely to be close to the estimate of the effect, but there is a possibility that it is substantially different
Low quality: Our confidence in the effect estimate is limited: The true effect may be substantially different from the estimate of the effect
Very low quality: We have very little confidence in the effect estimate: The true effect is likely to be substantially different from the estimate of effect

1 Several studies were at unclear or high risk of bias in one or more domain (−1 study limitations)

2 Confidence intervals include both possible harm and benefit of the intervention (−1 imprecision)

3 Study at unclear risk of bias in several domains (−1 study limitations)

4 No events reported but less than 250 participants in total. Risk difference confidence intervals include a possible important harm or benefit of the intervention (−1 imprecision)

Figuras y tablas -
Summary of findings 2. MgSO4 + SABA compared to SABA in the treatment of acute asthma
Summary of findings 3. MgSO4 compared to SABA in the treatment of acute asthma

MgSOcompared to SABA in the treatment of acute asthma

Patient or population: adults and children with acute exacerbation of asthma
Setting: emergency department/inpatient
Intervention: MgSO₄
Comparison: SABA

Outcomes

Anticipated absolute effects* (95% CI)

Relative effect
(95% CI)

№ of participants
(studies)

Quality of the evidence
(GRADE)

Comments

Risk with SABA

Risk with MgSO4

Lung function

Reported narratively in text

Clinical severity score ‐ Fischl index

(120 minutes)

The Fischl index score was 2.1

Fischl index score 0.13 lower
(0.62 lower to 0.36 higher)

93
(3 RCTs)

⊕⊝⊝⊝
VERY LOW 1 2 3

Time point 120 minutes in 2 studies and unclear in the third study

Wide range of control group scores (0.3, 0.76 and 4.81). Scale out of 7 with higher score indicating more severe symptoms. 4.81 reported in study with unclear time point.

Admission to hospital at initial presentation

118 per 1000

62 per 1000
(6 to 625)

RR 0.53
(0.05 to 5.31)

33
(1 RCT)

⊕⊝⊝⊝
VERY LOW 4 5

Serious adverse events

(During ED/hospital admission)

Not estimable

Not estimable. See comment

53
(2 RCTs)

⊕⊕⊝⊝
LOW 1 6

Risk difference: 0.00 (95% CI −0.10 to 0.10)

No events reported

*The risk in the intervention group (and its 95% confidence interval) is based on the assumed risk in the comparison group and the relative effect of the intervention (and its 95% CI).

CI: Confidence interval; RR: Risk ratio; OR: Odds ratio;

GRADE Working Group grades of evidence
High quality: We are very confident that the true effect lies close to that of the estimate of the effect
Moderate quality: We are moderately confident in the effect estimate: The true effect is likely to be close to the estimate of the effect, but there is a possibility that it is substantially different
Low quality: Our confidence in the effect estimate is limited: The true effect may be substantially different from the estimate of the effect
Very low quality: We have very little confidence in the effect estimate: The true effect is likely to be substantially different from the estimate of effect

1 Several studies at unclear or high risk of bias in one or more domains (−1 study limitations)

2 Confidence intervals include both possible harm and benefit of the intervention (−1 imprecision)

3 Time‐point for measurement unclear in one study (−1 indirectness)

4 Study at unclear risk of bias in several domains (−1 study limitations)

5 One small study. Confidence intervals include appreciable harm or benefit of the intervention (−2 imprecision)

6 Two small studies. No events reported. Risk difference confidence intervals include appreciable harm or benefit of the intervention (−1 for imprecision)

Figuras y tablas -
Summary of findings 3. MgSO4 compared to SABA in the treatment of acute asthma
Table 1. Summary of Severity

Study

Severity of asthma exacerbation

Diagnosis based on

Population (adult/mixed/paediatric)

MgSO₄ and SABA and Ipratropium bromide versus SABA and Ipratropium

Ashtekar 2008

Severe

BTS definition clinical features

Paediatric (2 to 16)

Drobina 2006

Unclear

PEF and clinical signs

Adults

Gallegos‐Solórzano 2010

Moderate to severe

FEV1 < 60%

Adults >18

Gaur 2008

Severe

FEV1 < 30%

Adults (18 to 60)

Goodacre 2013

Severe

BTS definition

Adult (≥ 16)

Hossein 2016

Moderate to severe

PEF < 70% and clinical signs

Adult (> 16)

Powell 2013

Severe after conventional treatment

BTS definition

Paediatric (2 to 16)

MgSO4 and SABA versus SABA

Abreu‐Gonzalez 2002

Moderate

FEV1 and PEF at baseline

Adults

Aggarwal 2006

Severe and life threatening

BTS definition clinical features and PEF

Mixed (13 to 60)

Ahmed 2013

Severe

PEF

Not documented

Alansari 2015

Moderate to severe

Clinical score

Paediatric (2 to 14)

Badawy 2014

Unclear

N/A

Adult

Bessmertny 2002

Moderate to severe

PEF between  40% to 80%

Adults (18 to 65)

Dadhich 2005

Severe

PEF < 50%

Adults

Hughes 2003

Severe

FEV1 < 50%

Adults (16 to 65)

Khashabi 2008

Unclear

Clinically defined as respiratory distress

Paediatric (mean age 3.55 years)

Kokturk 2005

Moderate to severe

Clinical scores and PEF

Adults (18 to 60)

Mahajan 2004

Moderate to severe

FEV1 between 45% and 75%

Paediatric (5 to 17)

Mohammedzadeh 2014

Moderate to severe

GINA definition

Paediatric (5 to 14)

Nannini 2000

Severe

PEF < 50%

Adult (> 18)

Sarhan 2016

Unclear

PEF < 300L/min

Mixed (11 to 70)

Turker 2017

Moderate

Not described

Children (3 to 15)

MgSO₄ versus SABA

Dadhich 2005

Severe

PEF < 50%

Adults

Mangat 1998

Moderate to severe

PEF < 300 L/Min

Mixed (12 to 60)

Meral 1996

Moderate to severe

PEF < 75%

Paediatric

Neki 2006

Severe

FEV1 < 40% or PEF < 300 L/Min

Adult (15 to 60)

Sarhan 2016

Unclear

PEF < 300L/min

Mixed (11 to 70)

BTS: British Thoracic Society

GINA: Global Initiative for Asthma
FEV1: Forced expiratory volume in one second
PEF: Peak Expiratory Flow Rate

Figuras y tablas -
Table 1. Summary of Severity
Table 2. Summary of  Characteristics of the studies – where patients were recruited from, additional treatment, exclusion criteria and side effects.

Study

Presentation to which department?

Origin

Primary outcome(s)

Total n randomised

Side effects (patients in study)

Pharmaceutical exclusions

Other Interventions

MgSO₄ and SABA and Ipratropium bromide versus SABA and Ipratropium

Ashtekar 2008

Children’s Assessment Unit after GP referral

Cardiff, Wales

ASS (Yung)

17

1 tingling in fingers and 1 transient hypotension

None stated

All management followed the BTS/SIGN guidelines; all children received 2 mg/kg prednisolone

Drobina 2006

ED

USA

PEF, admissions

110

No comment on side effects in paper

Not stated

All subjects received 50 mg of oral prednisone at the onset of the treatment

Gallegos‐Solórzano 2010

ED

Mexico City, Mexico

% change FEV1,

O₂ post treatment, admission rates

112

Dry and bitter mouth (MgSO₄ group 1), dizziness (MgSO₄ 1; placebo 1)

Use of steroids prior to presentation

All participants received one IV dose of 125 mg methylprednisolone at admission and 1 mg/kg/day for 10 days prednisolone,on discharge. Other treatments were administered according to the treating physician

Gaur 2008

ED

Delhi, India

FEV1

60

None reported

None stated

All participants received IV hydrocortisone on arrival

Goodacre 2013

ED

UK

Admission within 7d, visual analogue scale for breathlessness at 2 h

703

AEs (41 MgSO₄/salbutamol; 36 placebo/salbutamol)

MgSO₄ in the past 24 h

All participants were managed according to BTS/SIGN guidelines (consisting of
oxygen, nebulised salbutamol (5 mg), nebulised ipratropium (500 μg), and oral prednisolone administered during recruitment, followed by up to 5 mg salbutamol added to each trial nebuliser. Other treatments were provided at the discretion of the clinician

Hossein 2016

ED

Tehran, Iran

PEFR improvement, admission rate

50

No serious side effects reported

None stated

All participants received 50 mg oral prednisolone

Powell 2013

ED and children's assessment units

UK

Yung asthma severity score

508

47 in MgSO₄ group and 59 in control group

None

Hospital‐defined conventional treatment

MgSO4 and SABA versus SABA

Abreu‐Gonzalez 2002

Tenerife Spain

FEV1, PEF

24

None reported

None stated

Not stated

Aggarwal 2006

ED

New Delhi India

PEF

100

Palpitations (MgSO₄/salbutamol 13; salbutamol/placebo 11) and tremors (7; 7).

None stated

Clinicians free to administer steroids, salbutamol, IV hydrocortisone if judged to be required

Ahmed 2013

Mymensingh, Bangladesh

PEF

120

None reported

None stated

Not stated

Alansari 2015

Paediatric emergency centre

Doha, Qatar

Time to readiness for discharge

400

Chest tightness and facial rash (MgSO₄/salbutamol 191), excessive cough (placebo/salbutamol 174)

None stated

All participants received methylprednisolone 1 mg/kg IV every 12h and additional nebulised albuterol at clinicians' discretion

Badawy 2014

Outpatient department and ED

Sohag, Egypt

Exacerbations post intervention, delivery outcome, post‐partum health status

60

None reported

None stated

All participants received 100 mg hydrocortisone IV, 500 mg aminophylline IV

Bessmertny 2002

ED

Brooklyn, USA

FEV1 (% pred)

74

No SAEs reported

No theophylline or anticholinergics 2 h prior to presentation

Intravenous hydrocortisone, 2 mg/kg
every 6 h, was administered to patients who failed to show an adequate improvement of pulmonary function after 3 initial doses of albuterol

Dadhich 2005

ED

Ajmer India

PEF

71

"Side effects were self limiting"

Not stated

Not stated

Hughes 2003

ED

Wellington New Zealand

FEV1

52

None reported

None

All participants received 100 mg hydrocortisone IV

Khashabi 2008

Urmia, Iran

Reduced mean duration of O₂ therapy in MgSO₄ group,

no change in Respiratory Distress Score)

40

No side effects

Not stated

Not stated

Kokturk 2005

ED

Gazi, Turkey

PEF difference

26

Transient hypotension (1 MgSO₄), palpitation (1 salbutamol)

None

All participants received 1 mg/kg prednisolone. Theophylline, anticholinergics and salbutamol given at clinicians discretion

Mahajan 2004

ED

Detroit, USA

% change in FEV1

62

No side effects

Steroids, ipratropium or theophylline in the last 3 days.

All participants received 2 mg/kg of prednisone

Mohammedzadeh 2014

Babol, Iran

Pulmonary index, PEFR, adjusted PEFR

80

Corticosteroids; steroids, theophylline or ipratropium use within last 72 h

Not stated

Nannini 2000

ED

4 hospitals in Argentina

PEF, admissions

35

None reported

Oral or parenteral steroids in the last 7 days

No other medications were permitted during the study except
supplemental oxygen; if the patient’s condition worsened, a 2.5 mg dose of nebulized salbutamol was administered at the discretion of the treating physician

Sarhan 2016

Chest and ED

Minia, Egypt

Clinical improvement, PEFR

30

None severe enough to warrant withdrawal

Bronchodilators in last 6 h, steroids in last 12 h

Nebulised salbutamol, IV hydrocortisone, IV aminophylline at clinicians' discretion

Turker 2017

ED

Turkey

Modified pulmonary index score

100

"No side effect caused by magnesium was observed in any of the patients in the study"

Not stated

Nebulised salbutamol (0.15 mg/kg), methylprednisolone 1 mg/kg IV; Oxygen was given to patients with SaO2≤ 95%

MgSO₄ versus SABA

Dadhich 2005

ED

Ajmer India

PEF

71

"Side effects were self limiting"

Not stated

Not stated

Mangat 1998

ED

St John’s College, India

PEF, Fischl index score, admissions

33

Transient self limiting hypotension (1) palpitation (1) tremors (2) all in control group and only 1 transient hypotension in MgSO₄ group (33)

Oral parenteral bronchodilators (6 h) steroids (last 12 h)

All participants received 100 mg hydrocortisone IV

Meral 1996

Izmir, Turkey

% change in PEF

ASS (Davies Leffert, Dabbous score)

40

No side effects

Beta2‐agonists or theophylline in the last 12 h

No other medication given

Neki 2006

Amritsar Punjab

PEF, RR, Fischl index

40

Oral, inhaled or parenteral steroids in last 12 h

All participants received 100 mg hydrocortisone IV

Sarhan 2016

Chest and ED

Minia, Egypt

Clinical improvement, PEFR

30

None severe enough to warrant withdrawal

Bronchodilators in last 6 h, steroids in last 12 h

Nebulised salbutamol, IV hydrocortisone, IV aminophylline at clinicians' discretion

ASS: Asthma Severity Score; BP: blood pressure; ED: emergency department; FEV1: Forced expiratory volume in 1 second; h: hour(s)
HR: heart rate; IV: intravenous; MgSO₄: magnesium sulfate; PEF: Peak Expiratory Flow Rate; SAEs: serious adverse events

Figuras y tablas -
Table 2. Summary of  Characteristics of the studies – where patients were recruited from, additional treatment, exclusion criteria and side effects.
Table 3. Summary of Interventions

Study (N)

Magnesium sulfate

Control

Dose

N

Co‐interventions

Dose

N

Co‐interventions

MgSO₄ and SABA and Ipratropium bromide versus SABA and Ipratropium

Ashtekar 2008

2.5 mL isotonic MgSO₄ (151 mg /dose)

7

500 mcg Ipratropium bromide

2.5 mg salbutamol or 5 mg salbutamol (depending on age) 3 times per h

2.5 mL of isotonic saline)

10

Same as for MgSO₄ group

Drobina 2006

150 mg MgSO₄ (0.3 mL of 50% MgSO₄ heptahydrate)

60

Albuterol sulfate (0.5%) 5 mg/mL) and 0.5 mg ipratropium bromide (0.02% inhalation solution) (frequency*)

No placebo so volume will be less: i.e. blinding may be an issue)

50

Same as for MgSO₄ group

Gallegos‐Solórzano 2010

3 mL (333 mg) of 10% isotonic MgSO₄ (1 g/10 mL)

60 (30 withdrawals)

2.5 mg albuterol and 500 mcg ipratropium 3 doses per hour

3 mL isotonic saline

52 (22 withdrawals)

Same as for MgSO₄ group

Gaur 2008

3 mL (3.2 g%)

isotonic MgSO₄

30

Salbutamol and ipratropium (dose*, frequency*)

Saline

30

Same as for MgSO₄ group

Goodacre 2013

2 mmol MgSO₄

339 (7 withdrawal)

7.5 mL 0.9% NaCl nebulised, 3 doses; 100 mL 0.9% NaCl IV once, BTS/SIGN standard treatments plus others at clinicians' discretion

7.5 mL 0.9% saline nebulised, 3 doses, 100 mL 0.9% NaCl IV once

364 (7 withdrawal)

BTS/SIGN standard treatments plus others at clinicians' discretion

Hossein 2016

3 mL (260 mmol/L) MgSO4

25

2.5 mg salbutamol, 0.5 mg ipratropium nebulised every 20 to 60 minutes, 50 mg oral prednisolone (once*)

3 mL 0.9% NaCl

25

Same as for MgSO₄ group

Powell 2013

2.5 mL 250 mmol/L MgSO₄

252 (13 withdrawals)

3 doses every 20 min. Hospital‐defined conventional treatment

2.5 mL isotonic saline

256 (10 withdrawals)

Same as for MgSO₄ group

MgSO4 and SABA versus SABA

Abreu‐Gonzalez 2002

2 mL MgSO₄ (isotonic)

13

400 mcg salbutamol

(once*)

2 mL of a physiological serum of an inhaled form

11 patients

11

400 mcg salbutamol

Aggarwal 2006

1 mL of 500 mg/mL MgSO₄

50

1 mL salbutamol (dose*, 8 mL distilled water, (295 mOsml/kg) 3 times per h

ultrasonic nebuliser

7.5 mL normal saline

50

1 mL salbutamol (dose*),

1.5 mL distilled water

(287 mOsml/kg) 3 times per h

Ahmed 2013

MgSO₄ (dose* frequency*)

60

Not recorded

Normal saline (dose* frequency*)

60

Not recorded

Alansari 2015

800 mg (15 mL) MgSO₄

208 (17 withdrawals)

5 mg albuterol, divided into 3 doses over 1 h. Methylprednisolone 1 mg/kg IV every 12 h. 3 doses nebulized 1 mL albuterol (5 mg/mL), 250 mcg ipratropium, 2 mL normal saline before trial doses started

15 mL 0.9% NaCl

192 (18 withdrawals)

Same as for MgSO₄ group

Badawy 2014

500 mg (1mL) MgSO₄

30

1 mL salbutamol solution (dose*), 8 mL 0.9% NaCl, max 3 doses with 20 mins apart. 100 mg hydrocortisone IV, 500 mg aminophylline IV (once*)

1 mL 0.9% NaCl

30

Same as for MgSO₄ group

Bessmertny 2002

MgSO₄ (384 mg)

37 (3 withdrawals)

Followed by ( i.e. not mixed) albuterol 2.5 mg/mL 3 times per h

Normal saline (no volume documented)

37 (3 withdrawals)

Same as for MgSO₄ group

Dadhich 2005

MgSO₄

26

No doses in any group or co‐interventions described

Not stated

24

No doses in any group or co‐interventions described

Hughes 2003

2.5 mL isotonic MgSO₄ (250 mmol/L 151 mg)

28 patients

28

2.5 mg salbutamol 3 times per

30 minutes

2.5 mL normal saline

24

Same as for MgSO₄ group

Khashabi 2008

Isotonic MgSO₄

(dose*, frequency*)

*

Salbutamol (dose*)

2.5 mL normal saline (frequency*)

*

Same as for MgSO₄ group

Kokturk 2005

Isotonic MgSO₄ (2.5 mL)

14

Salbutamol (dose*) 3

times per h then 1 per h for 3 h

2.5 mL normal saline

12

Same as for MgSO₄ group

Mohammedzadeh 2014

3 mL 7.5% MgSO₄

40

0.15 mg/kg salbutamol 3 doses, every 20 min

3 mL normal saline

40

Same as for MgSO₄ group

Mahajan 2004

2.5 mL Isotonic (6.3%) MgSO₄ solution

31

Albuterol 2.5 mg 1 dose

2.5 mL normal saline

31

Same as for MgSO₄ group

Nannini 2000

3 mL isotonic MgSO₄

(286 mOsml, 7.5%, 225 mg)

19

0.5 mL 2.5 mg salbutamol

1 dose*

3 mL normal saline

16

Same as for MgSO₄ group

Sarhan 2016

2.5 mL MgSO4 (100 mg), 0.5 mL salbutamol (2.5 mg)

10

4 doses at 20 min intervals. If needed: additional nebulised salbutamol, IV hydrocortisone, IV aminophylline

2.5 mL isotonic saline

10

Same as for MgSO4 group

Turker 2017

1 mL magnesium sulfate (15%) + 1.5 mL isotonic saline

50

3 doses at 20 min intervals. Also nebulised salbutamol (0.15 mg/kg), methylprednisolone 1 mg/kg IV; Oxygen was given to patients with SaO2 ≤ 95%

1.5 mL isotonic saline

50

Same as for MgSO₄ group

MgSO₄ versus SABA

Dadhich 2005

MgSO₄

21

No doses in any group or co‐interventions described

Not stated

24

No doses in any group or co‐interventions described

Mangat 1998

3.2% solution MgSO₄ = 95 mg)

16

4 doses every 20 minutes

3 mL (2.5 mg) salbutamol

17

Four doses every 20 minutes

Meral 1996

2 mL MgSO₄ (280 mmol/L)

20

1* dose given over 10 to 15 minutes

Salbutamol 2.5 mg in 2.5 mL

20

1 dose* given over 10 to 15 minutes

Neki 2006

20 patients

3.2 G % MgSO₄

20

4 doses every 20 min

3 mL of 25 mg* salbutamol (likely decimal point missing)

20

Same as for MgSO4 group

Sarhan 2016

3 mL (100 mg) MgSO4

10

4 doses at 20 min intervals. If needed: additional nebulised salbutamol, IV hydrocortisone, IV aminophylline

0.5 mL salbutamol (2.5 mg)

10

Same as for MgSO₄ group

TOTAL: 2907 randomised to comparisons of interest. 130 withdrawn, 2777 completed

TOTAL: 1476 randomised, 70 withdrawn = 1406 completed intervention

TOTAL: 1431 randomised, 60 withdrawn = 1371 completed control

* denotes uncertainty

Figuras y tablas -
Table 3. Summary of Interventions
Table 4. Outcomes

Study ID (author, date of publication)

Review primary outcomes

Review secondary outcomes

FEV1

PEF

Clinical severity scores

Hospital admissions

Duration of symptoms

Vital signs

Adverse effects

MgSO₄ and SABA and Ipratropium bromide versus SABA and Ipratropium

Ashtekar 2008

N

N

Y

N

N

N

Y

Drobina 2006

N

P

N

N

N

N

P

Gallegos‐Solórzano 2010

Y

N

N

N

N

N

Y

Gaur 2008

Y

N

N

N

N

N

N

Goodacre 2013

N

Y

N

Y

N

Y

Y

Hossein 2016

N

Y

Y

Y

N

Y

N

Powell 2013

N

N

Y

P

N

N

Y

MgSO4 and SABA versus SABA

Abreu‐Gonzalez 2002

Y

Y

N

N

N

N

N

Aggarwal 2006

N

Y

N

Y

N

Y

Y

Ahmed 2013

N

P

N

N

N

N

N

Alansari 2015

N

N

Y

P

N

N

Y

Badawy 2014

Y

Y

N

N

N

Y

N

Bessmertny 2002

P

N

N

N

N

N

Y

Dadhich 2005

P

P

N

N

N

N

Y

Hughes 2003

Y

N

N

Y

N

N

Y

Khashabi 2008

N

N

N

N

N

N

N

Kokturk 2005

N

Y

P

Y

N

N

Y

Mahajan 2004

Y

N

N

Y

N

N

Y

Mohammedzadeh 2014

N

Y

Y

N

N

N

N

Nannini 2000

N

Y

N

Y

N

N

Y

Sarhan 2016

N

Y

Y

N

N

Y

N

Turker 2017

N

N

Y

Y

N

N

Y

MgSO₄ versus SABA

Dadhich 2005

P

P

N

N

N

N

Y

Mangat 1998

N

Y

N

Y

N

N

Y

Meral 1996

N

Y

N

N

N

N

Y

Neki 2006

N

Y

N

N

N

Y

N

Sarhan 2016

N

Y

Y

N

N

Y

N

N ‒ the study did not report the outcome but it is not clear whether the outcome was measured or not

Y ‒ full reporting

P ‒ partial reporting

Figuras y tablas -
Table 4. Outcomes
Comparison 1. MgSO4 + SABA + ipratropium versus SABA + ipratropium

Outcome or subgroup title

No. of studies

No. of participants

Statistical method

Effect size

1 Pulmonary function (% FEV1) Show forest plot

2

120

Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)

3.28 [1.06, 5.49]

1.1 90 minutes

1

60

Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)

8.57 [1.99, 15.15]

1.2 120 minutes

1

60

Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)

2.60 [0.25, 4.95]

2 Pulmonary function % predicted PEF Show forest plot

2

636

Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.05 [‐2.33, 2.42]

3 Clinical severity scores (closest to 60 mins) Show forest plot

2

1130

Std. Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.01 [‐0.11, 0.12]

3.1 Yung ASS at 60 minutes

1

472

Std. Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)

‐0.17 [‐0.35, 0.02]

3.2 Change in dyspnoea VAS at 60 minutes

1

658

Std. Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.13 [‐0.02, 0.28]

4 Admission at first presentation Show forest plot

4

1308

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.95 [0.91, 1.00]

4.1 Adults

3

800

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.95 [0.87, 1.03]

4.2 Children

1

508

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.96 [0.92, 1.01]

5 HDU/ITU admission Show forest plot

2

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

Totals not selected

5.1 Admission to HDU (adults)

1

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.0 [0.0, 0.0]

5.2 Admission to ICU (adults)

1

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.0 [0.0, 0.0]

5.3 Admission to PICU/HDU or intubation (children)

1

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.0 [0.0, 0.0]

6 Readmission Show forest plot

2

750

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

1.80 [0.84, 3.87]

7 Respiratory rate at 60 mins Show forest plot

2

723

Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.70 [‐0.14, 1.53]

8 Heart rate at 60 mins Show forest plot

1

Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)

Subtotals only

9 Systolic blood pressure at 60 mins Show forest plot

1

Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)

Subtotals only

10 Diastolic blood pressure at 60 mins Show forest plot

1

674

Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)

2.40 [0.29, 4.51]

11 Serious adverse events (during admission) Show forest plot

2

557

Risk Difference (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

‐0.03 [‐0.06, ‐0.00]

11.1 Adults

1

50

Risk Difference (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.0 [‐0.07, 0.07]

11.2 Children

1

507

Risk Difference (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

‐0.04 [‐0.06, ‐0.01]

12 Any adverse event (during admission) Show forest plot

2

1197

Risk Difference (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.01 [‐0.03, 0.05]

12.1 Adults

1

690

Risk Difference (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.02 [‐0.02, 0.07]

12.2 Children

1

507

Risk Difference (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

‐0.02 [‐0.09, 0.05]

13 Serious adverse events (within 30 days) Show forest plot

1

Risk Difference (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

Totals not selected

14 Any adverse event (within 30 days) Show forest plot

1

Risk Difference (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

Totals not selected

15 Adverse event: hypotension Show forest plot

2

1197

Risk Difference (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.02 [‐0.01, 0.04]

15.1 Adults

1

690

Risk Difference (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.03 [‐0.01, 0.07]

15.2 Children

1

507

Risk Difference (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

‐0.00 [‐0.02, 0.01]

16 Adverse event: flushing Show forest plot

2

1197

Risk Difference (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.00 [‐0.01, 0.01]

16.1 Adults

1

690

Risk Difference (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.00 [‐0.01, 0.02]

16.2 Children

1

507

Risk Difference (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

‐0.00 [‐0.02, 0.01]

Figuras y tablas -
Comparison 1. MgSO4 + SABA + ipratropium versus SABA + ipratropium
Comparison 2. MgSO4 + SABA versus SABA

Outcome or subgroup title

No. of studies

No. of participants

Statistical method

Effect size

1 Pulmonary function % predicted FEV1 Show forest plot

4

208

Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)

3.34 [‐1.58, 8.26]

1.1 Adults

3

146

Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)

2.18 [‐3.30, 7.67]

1.2 Children

1

62

Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)

8.10 [‐3.03, 19.23]

2 % predicted FEV1: subgroup: severity Show forest plot

3

188

Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)

4.12 [‐1.81, 10.06]

2.1 Severe (FEV1 <50% predicted)

1

52

Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)

9.90 [0.05, 19.75]

2.2 Moderate

2

136

Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.84 [‐6.59, 8.27]

3 Pulmonary function PEF L/min Show forest plot

4

Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)

Subtotals only

3.1 Adults

3

155

Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)

11.91 [‐4.12, 27.95]

3.2 Children

1

80

Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)

11.90 [‐6.86, 30.66]

4 Admission to hospital Show forest plot

6

375

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.78 [0.52, 1.15]

4.1 Adults

4

213

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.69 [0.45, 1.07]

4.2 Children

2

162

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

1.14 [0.44, 2.98]

5 Heart rate at 120 mins Show forest plot

2

Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)

Totals not selected

6 Respiratory rate at 120 mins Show forest plot

1

Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)

Subtotals only

7 Diastolic blood pressure at 120 mins Show forest plot

2

120

Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.72 [‐1.35, 2.80]

8 Systolic blood pressure at 120 mins Show forest plot

2

120

Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.89 [‐2.69, 4.48]

9 Serious adverse events Show forest plot

5

243

Risk Difference (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.0 [‐0.04, 0.04]

9.1 Adults

4

181

Risk Difference (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.0 [‐0.04, 0.04]

9.2 Children

1

62

Risk Difference (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.0 [‐0.06, 0.06]

10 Any adverse events Show forest plot

5

694

Risk Difference (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

‐0.01 [‐0.05, 0.03]

10.1 Adults

4

329

Risk Difference (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

‐0.02 [‐0.10, 0.06]

10.2 Children

1

365

Risk Difference (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

‐0.01 [‐0.03, 0.01]

Figuras y tablas -
Comparison 2. MgSO4 + SABA versus SABA
Comparison 3. MgSO4 versus SABA

Outcome or subgroup title

No. of studies

No. of participants

Statistical method

Effect size

1 Clinical severity score Show forest plot

3

93

Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)

‐0.13 [‐0.62, 0.36]

1.1 Fischl index final score (120 mins)

1

33

Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)

‐0.33 [‐1.07, 0.41]

1.2 Fischl index score (time point unclear)

1

40

Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)

‐0.20 [‐1.11, 0.71]

1.3 Change in Fischl index at 120 mins

1

20

Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.30 [‐0.67, 1.27]

2 Admission to hospital Show forest plot

1

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

Totals not selected

3 Heart rate (120 mins) Show forest plot

1

20

Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)

21.20 [0.17, 42.23]

4 Respiratory rate Show forest plot

2

60

Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)

‐2.40 [‐3.91, ‐0.89]

5 Systolic pressure (120 mins) Show forest plot

1

Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)

Subtotals only

6 Diastolic pressure (120 mins) Show forest plot

1

Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)

Subtotals only

7 Serious adverse events Show forest plot

2

53

Risk Difference (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.0 [‐0.10, 0.10]

8 Mild‐Moderate Side Effects Show forest plot

1

Risk Difference (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

Totals not selected

Figuras y tablas -
Comparison 3. MgSO4 versus SABA