TY - JOUR T1 - Closing evidence to practice gaps: an end to an attack of the vapours? JF - British Journal of General Practice JO - Br J Gen Pract SP - 118 LP - 119 DO - 10.3399/bjgp16X683893 VL - 66 IS - 644 AU - Anthony C Dowell AU - Nikki Turner Y1 - 2016/03/01 UR - http://bjgp.org/content/66/644/118.abstract N2 - Steam inhalation therapy for the treatment of respiratory conditions has been a feature of health practice since antiquity and remains in widespread global use today.1 The use of steam inhalation in Western European tradition gained popularity in Victorian times, with images of both young and old inhaling steamy concoctions from a bowl becoming familiar in popular culture in many countries. The evidence base for this practice has never been clear, with Cochrane reviews giving equivocal results for effectiveness for the common cold,2 bronchiolitis,3 and croup.4Despite this, steam inhalation continues to feature prominently in many health conversations, in much of the complementary and alternative medicine literature, and appropriately as part of research into pragmatic interventions for respiratory infection.5The time for the translation of research evidence, for or against a health innovation into clinical practice, is commonly quoted as 17 years,6 making the two and half thousand years for a clear decision on the therapeutic impact of steam inhalation somewhat of an outlier.First do no harm is an important starting point. In the case of steam inhalation, the lack of effectiveness is partnered with frequently recorded dangers, notably the burns caused by spillage of hot water to the body or direct inhalation of steam to the respiratory tract.The dangers of scalds and burns from steam inhalation have been reported over many years and from many countries. The BJGP has published on this topic for over 25 years7,8 and the evidence is corroborated with other published … ER -