I have already explored a method of determining whether the pathology causing wheeze is predominantly wetness (bronchiolitis) or tightness (viral induced wheeze/ bronchospasm) by using age combined with the story.
Slow accumulation of moisture and mucous tends to cause worsening of symptoms over days whereas bronchospasm causes acute change over hours. My opinion is that in the majority of cases, the age and the story will correlate.
Where the patient is in the overlap zone (e.g. 10-15 months old) and the story is clear (e.g. snotty/ coughing on Monday, struggling with feeds on Tuesday, noisy breathing on Wednesday and fast breathing on Thursday) then the story gives the diagnosis. With age/ story correlation or where the age allows ambiguity but the story is clear, the diagnosis is made.
So what about simply trying an inhaler to see if it works? This alternative approach to the age of overlap sounds straightforward and is reasonably common in practice, but is it logical?
A therapeutic trial works best when a clinical effect is guaranteed and unambiguous. Neither of these things is true in this situation. With viral wheeze, which should respond to salbutamol, clinically apparent response may require increased or repeated doses. Bronchiolitis, which will not respond, is famous for mini-fluctuations in work of breathing. This is caused by mucous plugging or the clearing of secretions.
Disclaimer - when I wrote this, I briefly thought that you could bring logic to medicine. I know, right?!?