Objective and subjective responses to a mechanical external nasal dilator in healthy children and children with nasal congestion.

Abstract

Nasal congestion is a frequent symptom of allergic rhinitis. Mechanical external nasal dilators (MEND) can be applied to the outside of the nose to provide temporary relief from nasal stuffiness. To assess the objective and subjective benefits and tolerability of MEND in healthy children and in children with nasal congestion due to allergic rhinitis. Two studies were performed, one in healthy children and one in children with nasal congestion. The study of healthy children was a single-center, randomized, crossover study of two pediatric MEND variants, "tan" and "stars." The study of children with nasal congestion was a single-center assessment of the stars MEND. In both studies, nasal patency was measured via peak nasal inspiratory flow in the seated position and in the supine position at baseline and after the pediatric MEND was affixed to the nose. Assessment questions were administered at baseline and after MEND application, while seated and while supine, to evaluate subjective reduction in nasal blockage and tolerability. Thirty healthy and 26 children with nasal congestion were assessed. Pediatric MENDs showed a statistically significant improvement in peak nasal inspiratory flow for both healthy children and children with nasal congestion while seated and for healthy children while recumbent. Pediatric MENDs were perceived as decreasing nasal obstruction in both healthy children and children with nasal congestion in both positions, and there were statistically significant improvements in most subjective measures. Pediatric MENDs were well tolerated. Pediatric MENDs provided significant objective increases in nasal patency in healthy children and children with nasal congestion in the seated position and also subjective reduction in nasal airway stuffiness in both seated and supine positions; they were also well tolerated.