Skip to main content
Article
Corticosteroids for the common cold (Review)
Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews
  • Gail Hayward, University of Oxford
  • Matthew J. Thompson, University of Washington,
  • Chris Del Mar, Bond University
  • Paul Glasziou, Bond University
  • Carl J. Heneghan, University of Oxford
Date of this Version
10-13-2015
Document Type
Journal Article
Publication Details

Published version

Hayward, G., Thompson, M. J., Perera, R., Del Mar, C. B., Glasziou, P. P., & Heneghan, C. J. (2015). Corticosteroids for the common cold (Review). Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, 10, Art. No.: CD008116, 1-26.

Access the journal

2015 HERDC submission

© Copyright, The Cochrane Collaboration, 2015

Abstract

BACKGROUND

The common cold is a frequent illness, which, although benign and self limiting, results in many consultations to primary care and considerable loss of school or work days. Current symptomatic treatments have limited benefit. Corticosteroids are an effective treatment in other upper respiratory tract infections and their anti-inflammatory effects may also be beneficial in the common cold. This updated review has included one additional study.

OBJECTIVES

To compare corticosteroids versus usual care for the common cold on measures of symptom resolution and improvement in children and adults.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL 2015, Issue 4), which includes the Acute Respiratory Infections (ARI) Group's Specialised Register, the Database of Reviews of Effects (DARE) (2015, Issue 2), NHS Health Economics Database (2015, Issue 2), MEDLINE (1948 to May week 3, 2015) and EMBASE (January 2010 to May 2015).

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomised, double-blind, controlled trials comparing corticosteroids to placebo or to standard clinical management.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently extracted data and assessed trial quality. We were unable to perform meta-analysis and instead present a narrative description of the available evidence.

MAIN RESUTLS

We included three trials (353 participants). Two trials compared intranasal corticosteroids to placebo and one trial compared intranasal corticosteroids to usual care; no trials studied oral corticosteroids. In the two placebo-controlled trials, no benefit of intranasal corticosteroids was demonstrated for duration or severity of symptoms. The risk of bias overall was low or unclear in these two trials. In a trial of 54 participants, the mean number of symptomatic days was 10.3 in the placebo group, compared to 10.7 in those using intranasal corticosteroids (P value = 0.72). A second trial of 199 participants reported no significant differences in the duration of symptoms. The single-blind trial in children aged two to 14 years, who were also receiving oral antibiotics, had inadequate reporting of outcome measures regarding symptom resolution. The overall risk of bias was high for this trial. Mean symptom severity scores were significantly lower in the group receiving intranasal steroids in addition to oral amoxicillin. One placebo-controlled trial reported the presence of rhinovirus in nasal aspirates and found no differences. Only one of the three trials reported on adverse events; no differences were found. Two trials reported secondary bacterial infections (one case of sinusitis, one case of acute otitis media; both in the corticosteroid groups). A lack of comparable outcome measures meant that we were unable to combine the data.

AUTHOR’S CONCLUSIONS

Current evidence does not support the use of intranasal corticosteroids for symptomatic relief from the common cold. However, there were only three trials, one of which was very poor quality, and there was limited statistical power overall. Further large, randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled trials in adults and children are required to answer this question.

Citation Information
Gail Hayward, Matthew J. Thompson, Chris Del Mar, Paul Glasziou, et al.. "Corticosteroids for the common cold (Review)" Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews Iss. 10 (2015) p. 1 - 26 ISSN: 1469-493X
Available at: http://works.bepress.com/paul_glasziou/184/