Login to your account

Username *
Password *
Remember Me

Blog With Right Sidebar

Comparison between two methods of asthma control evaluation based on individual perception.

Related Articles

Comparison between two methods of asthma control evaluation based on individual perception.

J Bras Pneumol. 2012 Jun;38(3):299-307

Authors: Almeida PC, Souza-Machado A, Leite MD, Castro LA, Coelho AC, Cruz CS, Cruz AA

Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To compare the subjective perception of asthma control reported by the patient with that measured by the score obtained on the Asthma Control Questionnaire 6-item version (ACQ-6) in patients with severe asthma and to determine whether asthma control is associated with the number of emergency room visits in the previous month. METHODS: This was a cross-sectional study involving 528 patients treated at the Bahia State Asthma and Allergic Rhinitis Control Program Central Referral Clinic between August of 2008 and March of 2010, in the city of Salvador, Brazil. The patients completed the ACQ-6 and answered a specific additional question in order to evaluate their own perception of asthma control in the previous week. RESULTS: We evaluated 423 patients who met the inclusion criteria. The sample was predominantly female (81.3%), and 64.3% had an income lower than two times the national minimum wage. The mean age was 49.85 ± 13.71 years, and the duration of asthma symptoms was 32.11 ± 16.35 years. The patients had been regularly treated via the program for 36.65 ± 18.10 months. Based on the subjective perception of asthma control, only 8% of the patients considered their asthma to be uncontrolled, whereas 38.8% had an ACQ-6 score > 1.5, which indicates poor control. The kappa statistic revealed poor concordance between the two methods. There was a direct association between uncontrolled asthma and the number of emergency room visits in the previous month (p < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: In this sample of patients, the subjective perception of asthma control differed from that measured by the ACQ-6 score, and the patients overestimated their own level of asthma control, which puts them at risk of being undertreated.

PMID: 22782599 [PubMed - as supplied by publisher]

Respiratory muscle strength in children and adolescents with asthma: similar to that of healthy subjects?

Related Articles

Respiratory muscle strength in children and adolescents with asthma: similar to that of healthy subjects?

J Bras Pneumol. 2012 Jun;38(3):308-314

Authors: Oliveira CM, Lanza FD, Solé D

Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To compare children/adolescents with mild or moderate asthma and healthy subjects in terms of respiratory muscle strength, correlating it with spirometric variables in the former group. METHODS: This was a cross-sectional study involving individuals 6-16 years of age and clinically diagnosed with mild/moderate asthma, together with a group of healthy, age- and gender-matched subjects. We determined spirometric values, as well as MIP and MEP, and we selected three reproducible measurements (variation < 10%). RESULTS: We evaluated 75 patients with asthma and 90 controls. The mean age was 10.0 ± 2.6 years. There were no statistically significant differences between the controls and the asthma group regarding MIP (-89.7 ± 26.7 cmH2O vs. -92.2 ± 26.3 cmH2O; p = 0.541) or MEP (79.2 ± 22.9 cmH2O vs. 86.4 ± 24.0 cmH2O; p = 0.256). The groups were subdivided by age (children and adolescents: 6-12 and 13-16 years of age, respectively). Within the asthma group, there was a significant difference between the child and adolescent subgroups in terms of MEP (74.1 ± 24.1 cmH2O vs. 92.1 ± 21.9 cmH2O; p < 0.001) but not MIP (p = 0.285). Within the control group, there were significant differences between the child and adolescent subgroups in terms of MIP (-79.1 ± 17.7 cmH2O vs. -100.9 ± 28.1 cmH2O; p < 0.001) and MEP (73.9 ± 18.7 cmH2O vs. 90.9 ± 28.1cmH2O; p < 0.001). In the asthma group, spirometric variables did not correlate with MIP or MEP. CONCLUSIONS: In our sample, asthma was found to have no significant effect on respiratory muscle strength.

PMID: 22782600 [PubMed - as supplied by publisher]

Weight loss interventions for chronic asthma.

Related Articles

Weight loss interventions for chronic asthma.

Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2012;7:CD009339

Authors: Adeniyi FB, Young T

Abstract
BACKGROUND: Asthma and obesity are both public health problems with increasing prevalence globally. Several epidemiological studies have shown an association between asthma and obesity, however there is no good quality evidence on the effect of weight loss on asthma control.
OBJECTIVES: To assess the effect of various interventions for weight loss on measures of asthma control and weight loss amongst overweight or obese patients with chronic asthma.
SEARCH METHODS: We searched the Cochrane Airways Group's Specialized Register of Trials (CAGR) (derived from systematic searches of bibliographic databases, including the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) (The Cochrane Library), MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL, AMED and PsycINFO, and handsearching of respiratory journals and meeting abstracts). We also searched ongoing trials web sites and dissertation databases up to March 2012. We contacted experts in the field and searched reference lists for additional studies.
SELECTION CRITERIA: We included randomized controlled trials (RCTs) of weight loss interventions for overweight or obese participants with asthma compared to either no intervention for weight loss or an alternative weight loss intervention.
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two authors independently assessed study eligibility and risk of bias, and extracted data using a data extraction form. We did not undertake any meta-analysis as there were no suitable data to combine.
MAIN RESULTS: We included four completed studies conducted amongst adults (n = 197). Two were published as abstracts, and two as full articles. Interventions included supervised physical activity, low calorie diet and anti-obesity drugs (singly or in combination), and were compared to usual care (two studies), low calorie diet (one study), while one study had three intervention arms (physical activity versus low calorie diet versus a combination of the two). Two studies were conducted in high-income countries, while two were conducted in upper, middle-income countries.All studies had an unclear risk of selection and a high risk of detection bias. One of the studies found a statistically significant reduction in symptoms scores in treatment compared to control groups: the difference between groups in total St. George's Respiratory Questionnaire (SGRQ) score was -10 units (95% CI -18 to-1; P = 0.02). One study showed reduction in doses of rescue medication in treatment compared with control groups in the short term. Weight loss was associated with some improvement in forced expiratory volume in 1 second (FEV1) and forced vital capacity (FVC) in one study, which was statistically significant, but clinically unimportant; there was no improvement in peak expiratory flow rate (PEFR). No data were reported on health care utilization and adverse effects. One study reported statistically significant weight loss in the treatment group compared to controls with no intervention, which was still significant at one year follow-up.
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: Implications for practice  This review found one randomized trial that showed that weight loss may be beneficial for improving asthma control in overweight and obese patients, in conjunction with weight loss in intervention groups in the short term. Applying the GRADE system to the results of this review however, shows that the quality of evidence is low, because although all four studies are RCTs there were serious methodological limitations in the studies (unclear risk of selection bias and high risk of detection bias) and imprecision (small sample size). There is inadequate evidence to comment on the effect of weight loss interventions on quality of life and health care utilization. In addition, there was inadequate reporting of data on adverse effects to permit proper balancing of harms and benefits of the interventions. On account of this low quality of evidence, the benefit of weight loss as an intervention for asthma control remains uncertain, and as such, clinicians should be prepared to help patients to make a decision that is consistent with their own values.Implications for research  The finding that most of the included studies were of low methodological quality highlights the need for further well designed RCTs, with emphasis on adequate methods of allocation sequence generation as well as allocation concealment and longer follow-up periods. These studies need to report more fully on relevant outcomes (both statistically significant and otherwise) such as: asthma symptoms/control, use of rescue medication, change in lung function parameters (actual mean/median values), hospital utilization, quality of life, and adverse effects. There is also a need for longer intervention as well as follow-up durations to evaluate the effect of sustained measures to achieve weight loss, and to determine if these effects are still significantly present after a considerable period of time.There is also a need for these well designed studies in children and adolescents, as well as in low-income countries such as Africa, where the prepackaged, low energy diets, as well as structured physical activity-based interventions utilized in these included studies, may not be feasible or applicable.

PMID: 22786526 [PubMed - in process]

Clinical and Economic Outcomes Associated with Low-Dose Fluticasone Propionate Versus Montelukast in Children with Asthma Aged 4 to 11 Years.

Related Articles

Clinical and Economic Outcomes Associated with Low-Dose Fluticasone Propionate Versus Montelukast in Children with Asthma Aged 4 to 11 Years.

Open Respir Med J. 2012;6:37-43

Authors: Stanford RH, Shah M, Chaudhari SL

Abstract
OBJECTIVE: Inhaled corticosteroids (ICS) are preferred first-line controller agents for adults and adolescents with asthma. There is limited effectiveness data comparing ICS to leukotriene receptor antagonists (LTRA) in children with asthma aged 4 to 11 years. METHODS: A retrospective, matched cohort study was conducted using medical and pharmacy claims data. Asthma patients (ICD-9, 493.xx) naïve to any asthma controller therapy, and having ≥1 dispensing of fluticasone propionate 44 mcg (FP44), an ICS, or montelukast any dose (MON), an LTRA, were identified. Drug cohorts were matched (1:2) using propensity scores. Outcomes during follow-up included asthma-related ED visits, composite measure of asthma-related ED/hospital visit, asthma-related costs per month, and monthly rescue medication use. Statistical differences between cohorts were evaluated using multivariate regression models. RESULTS: The final matched sample included 6,636 patients (FP44=2,212; MON=4,424). During follow-up, the FP44 cohort had a 29% significantly lower risk of an asthma-related ED visit (Hazard ratio (95% CI) =0.71 (0.52, 0.96)) compared to the MON cohort. Monthly asthma-related costs were significantly reduced on average by 36% in the FP44 compared to the MON cohort ($48 vs $75, p<0.05). Use of short-acting beta-agonists per month were similar between cohorts but monthly adjusted number of oral corticosteroid prescriptions were significantly lower in the FP44 compared to the MON cohort (0.03 vs 0.04, p<0.001). CONCLUSION: Initiation of FP44 versus MON in children with asthma aged 4 to 11 years is associated with a significant reduction in asthma-related ED visits, costs, and oral corticosteroid use.

PMID: 22787519 [PubMed - as supplied by publisher]

Subcutaneous allergen immunotherapy for allergic disease: examining efficacy, safety and cost-effectiveness of current and novel formulations.

Related Articles

Subcutaneous allergen immunotherapy for allergic disease: examining efficacy, safety and cost-effectiveness of current and novel formulations.

Immunotherapy. 2012 Jun;4(6):601-16

Authors: Cox L, Calderón M, Pfaar O

Abstract
Subcutaneous immunotherapy (SCIT) is a unique therapy for allergic disease because it provides symptomatic relief while modifying the allergic disease by targeting the underlying immunological mechanism. Its efficacy and safety have been established in the treatment of asthma, allergic rhinitis/rhinoconjunctivitis and stinging insect hypersensitivity in numerous controlled clinical trials. This review evaluates a spectrum of clinical factors, ranging from efficacy to cost-effectiveness, which should be considered in evaluating SCIT. The evidence for SCIT safety and efficacy for these conditions is reviewed in an evaluation of the systematic reviews and meta-analyses. The evidence for the persistent and preventive effects of SCIT is also examined. An overview of the SCIT outcomes measures utilized in clinical trials is presented. The cost-effectiveness of SCIT compared with conventional medication treatment, novel indications and formulations for SCIT are also explored in this review.

PMID: 22788128 [PubMed - in process]

Search