Table 1 Characteristics of clinical studies comparing levodropropizine to controls in children
From: Levodropropizine for treating cough in adult and children: a meta-analysis of published studies
Study | Design | Participants | Intervention vs. comparator | Condition | Outcomes |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
De Blasio 2012 | Observational study | Children N = 433 (161 valid for analysis) Mean age: 6,1 yrs | Levodropropizine vs. cloperastine/codeine | Acute cough associated with a URTI | Cough severity reduced by all antitussives |
Kim 2002 | RCT double-blind, two parallel groups Oral administration t.i.d. for 3 days | Children N = 77 (75 valid for analysis) Mean age: 3 yrs | Levodropropizine vs. dextromethorphan | Acute or chronic bronchitis with non-recurrent or slightly recurrent cough | Improvement in cough frequency and severity significantly higher with levodropropizine |
Banderali 1995 | RCT double-blind, double-dummy, prospective, two parallel groups, Oral administration t.i.d. for 3 days | Children N = 267 (258 valid for analysis) Age: 2–14 yrs | Levodropropizine vs. dropropizine | Non-productive cough | Significant decrease in cough frequency and night awakenings with both treatment |
Fiocchi 1991 | RCT double-blind, Oral administration in single dose for 4 weeks | Children N = 12 Age: 2–8 yrs | Levodropropizine vs. placebo | Asthmatic cough | Significant reduction in nocturnal awakening with levodropropizine |