Safety, efficacy, and tolerability of early initiation of noninvasive positive pressure ventilation in pediatric patients admitted with status asthmaticus: A pilot study.

Pediatr Crit Care Med. 2011 Nov 3;

Authors: Basnet S, Mander G, Andoh J, Klaska H, Verhulst S, Koirala J

Abstract
OBJECTIVES:: Although noninvasive positive pressure ventilation is increasingly used for respiratory distress, there is not much data supporting its use in children with status asthmaticus. The objective of this study was to determine safety, tolerability, and efficacy of early initiation of noninvasive positive pressure ventilation in addition to standard of care in the management of children admitted with status asthmaticus. STUDY DESIGN:: A prospective, randomized, controlled, clinical trial. PATIENTS:: Twenty patients (1-18 yrs old) admitted to the pediatric intensive care unit with status asthmaticus. METHODS AND MAIN RESULTS:: Children were randomized to receive either noninvasive positive pressure ventilation plus standard of care (noninvasive positive pressure ventilation group) or standard of care alone (standard group). Improvement in clinical asthma score was significantly greater in noninvasive positive pressure ventilation group compared to standard group at 2 hrs, 4-8 hrs, 12-16 hrs, and 24 hrs after initiation of interventions (p < .01). A significant decrease in respiratory rate at ≤24 hrs oxygen requirement after 2 hrs was noted in noninvasive positive pressure ventilation group as compared to standard group (p = .01 and p = .03, respectively). Although statistically not significant, fewer children in the noninvasive positive pressure ventilation group required adjunct therapy compared to standard group (11% vs. 50%; p = .07). There were no major adverse events related to noninvasive positive pressure ventilation. Nine out of ten patients tolerated noninvasive positive pressure ventilation through the duration of the study; noninvasive positive pressure ventilation had to be discontinued in one patient because of persistent cough. CONCLUSIONS:: Early initiation of noninvasive positive pressure ventilation, along with short acting β-agonists and systemic steroids, can be safe, well-tolerated, and effective in the management of children with status asthmaticus.

PMID: 22067982 [PubMed - as supplied by publisher]

Critical care for pediatric asthma: Wide care variability and challenges for study.

Pediatr Crit Care Med. 2011 Nov 3;

Authors: Bratton SL, Newth CJ, Zuppa AF, Moler FW, Meert KL, Berg RA, Berger J, Wessel D, Pollack M, Harrison R, Carcillo JA, Shanley TP, Liu T, Holubkov R, Michael Dean J, Nicholson CE,

Abstract
OBJECTIVES:: To describe pediatric severe asthma care, complications, and outcomes to plan for future prospective studies by the Collaborative Pediatric Critical Care Research Network. DESIGN:: Retrospective cohort study. SETTING:: Pediatric intensive care units in the United States that submit administrative data to the Pediatric Health Information System. PATIENTS:: Children 1-18 yrs old treated in a Pediatric Health Information System pediatric intensive care unit for asthma during 2004-2008. INTERVENTIONS:: None. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS:: Thirteen-thousand five-hundred fifty-two children were studied; 2,812 (21%) were treated in a Collaborative Pediatric Critical Care Research Network and 10,740 (79%) were treated in a non-Collaborative Pediatric Critical Care Research Network pediatric intensive care unit. Medication use in individual Collaborative Pediatric Critical Care Research Network centers differed widely: ipratropium bromide (41%-84%), terbutaline (11%-74%), magnesium sulfate (23%-64%), and methylxanthines (0%-46%). Complications including pneumothorax (0%-0.6%), cardiac arrest (0.2%-2%), and aspiration (0.2%-2%) were rare. Overall use of medical therapies and complications at Collaborative Pediatric Critical Care Research Network centers were representative of pediatric asthma care at non-Collaborative Pediatric Critical Care Research Network pediatric intensive care units. Median length of pediatric intensive care unit stay at Collaborative Pediatric Critical Care Research Network centers was 1 to 2 days and death was rare (0.1%-3%). Ten percent of children treated at Collaborative Pediatric Critical Care Research Network centers received invasive mechanical ventilation compared to12% at non-Collaborative Pediatric Critical Care Research Network centers. Overall 44% of patients who received invasive mechanical ventilation were intubated in the pediatric intensive care unit. Children intubated outside the pediatric intensive care unit had significantly shorter median ventilation days (1 vs. 3), pediatric intensive care unit days (2 vs. 4), and hospital days (4 vs. 7) compared to those intubated in the pediatric intensive care unit. Among children who received mechanical respiratory support, significantly more (41% vs. 25%) were treated with noninvasive ventilation and significantly fewer (41% vs. 58%) were intubated before pediatric intensive care unit care when treated in a Pediatric Health Information System hospital emergency department. CONCLUSIONS:: Marked variations in medication therapies and mechanical support exist. Death and other complications were rare. More than half of patients treated with mechanical ventilation were intubated before pediatric intensive care unit care. Site of respiratory mechanical support initiation is associated with length of stay.

PMID: 22067984 [PubMed - as supplied by publisher]

Structuring and validating a cost-effectiveness model of primary asthma prevention amongst children.

BMC Med Res Methodol. 2011 Nov 9;11(1):150

Authors: Ramos GF, Kuiper S, Dompeling E, van Asselt AD, de Grauw WJ, Knottnerus JA, van Schayck OC, Schermer TR, Severens JL

Abstract
ABSTRACT: BACKGROUND: Given the rising number of asthma cases and the increasing costs of health care, prevention may be the best cure. Decisions regarding the implementation of prevention programmes in general and choosing between unifaceted and multifaceted strategies in particular are urgently needed. Existing trials on the primary prevention of asthma are, however, insufficient on their own to inform the decision of stakeholders regarding the cost-effectiveness of such prevention strategies. Decision analytic modelling synthesises available data for the cost-effectiveness evaluation of strategies in an explicit manner. Published reports on model development should provide the detail and transparency required to increase the acceptability of cost-effectiveness modelling. But, detail on the explicit steps and the involvement of experts in structuring a model is often unevenly reported. In this paper, we describe a procedure to structure and validate a model for the primary prevention of asthma in children. METHODS: An expert panel was convened for round-table discussions to frame the cost-effectiveness research question and to select and structure a model. The model's structural validity, which indicates how well a model reflects the reality, was determined through descriptive and parallel validation. Descriptive validation was performed with the experts. Parallel validation qualitatively compared similarity between other published models with different decision problems. RESULTS: The multidisciplinary input of experts helped to develop a decision-tree structure which compares the current situation with screening and prevention. The prevention was further divided between multifaceted and unifaceted approaches to analyse the differences. The clinical outcome was diagnosis of asthma. No similar model was found in the literature discussing the same decision problem. Structural validity in terms of descriptive validity was achieved with the experts and was supported by parallel validation. CONCLUSIONS: A decision-tree model developed with experts in round-table discussions benefits from a systematic and transparent approach and the multidisciplinary contributions of the experts. Parallel validation provides a feasible alternative to validating novel models. The process of structuring and validating a model presented in this paper could be a useful guide to increase transparency, credibility, and acceptability of (future, novel) models when experts are involved.

PMID: 22070532 [PubMed - as supplied by publisher]

Non-invasive interventions for improving well-being and quality of life in patients with lung cancer.

Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2011;9:CD004282

Authors: Rueda JR, Solà I, Pascual A, Subirana Casacuberta M

Abstract
BACKGROUND: This is an updated version of the original review published in Issue 4, 2004 of The Cochrane Library. Lung cancer is one of the leading causes of death globally. Despite advances in treatment, the outlook for the majority of patients remains grim and most face a pessimistic future accompanied by sometimes devastating effects on emotional and psychological health. Although chemotherapy is accepted as an effective treatment for advanced lung cancer, the high prevalence of treatment-related side effects as well the symptoms of disease progression highlight the need for high-quality palliative and supportive care to minimise symptom distress and to promote quality of life.
OBJECTIVES: To assess the effectiveness of non-invasive interventions delivered by healthcare professionals in improving symptoms, psychological functioning and quality of life in patients with lung cancer.
SEARCH STRATEGY: We ran a search in February 2011 to update the original completed review. We searched the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (The Cochrane Library 2011, Issue 2), MEDLINE (accessed through PubMed), EMBASE, PsycINFO, AMED, British Nursing Index and Archive (accessed through Ovid) and reference lists of relevant articles; we also contacted authors.
SELECTION CRITERIA: Randomised or quasi-randomised clinical trials assessing the effects of non-invasive interventions in improving well-being and quality of life in patients diagnosed with lung cancer.
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two authors independently assessed relevant studies for inclusion. Data extraction and risk of bias assessment of relevant studies was performed by one author and checked by a second author.
MAIN RESULTS: Fifteen trials were included, six of which were added in this update. Three trials of a nursing intervention to manage breathlessness showed benefit in terms of symptom experience, performance status and emotional functioning. Four trials assessed structured nursing programmes and found positive effects on delay in clinical deterioration, dependency and symptom distress, and improvements in emotional functioning and satisfaction with care.Three trials assessed the effect of different psychotherapeutic, psychosocial and educational interventions in patients with lung cancer. One trial assessing counselling showed benefit for some emotional components of the illness but findings were not conclusive. One trial examined the effects of coaching sensory self monitoring and reporting on pain-related variables and found that although coaching increases the amount of pain data communicated to providers by patients with lung cancer, the magnitude of the effect is small and does not lead to improved efficacy of analgesics prescribed for each patient's pain level. One trial compared telephone-based sessions of either caregiver-assisted coping skills training (CST) or education/support involving the caregiver and found that patients in both treatment conditions showed improvements in pain, depression, quality of life and self efficacy.Two trials assessed exercise programmes; one found a beneficial effect on self empowerment and the other study showed an increase in quadriceps strength but no significant changes for any measure of quality of life. One trial of nutritional interventions found positive effects for increasing energy intake, but no improvement in quality of life. Two small trials of reflexology showed some positive but short-lasting effects on anxiety and pain intensity.The main limitations of the studies included were the variability of the interventions assessed and the approaches to measuring the considered outcomes, and the lack of data reported in the trials regarding allocation of patients to treatment groups and blinding.
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: Nurse follow-up programmes and interventions to manage breathlessness may produce beneficial effects. Counselling may help patients cope more effectively with emotional symptoms, but the evidence is not conclusive. Other psychotherapeutic, psychosocial and educational interventions can play some role in improving patients' quality of life. Exercise programmes and nutritional interventions have not shown relevant and lasting improvements of quality of life. Reflexology may have some beneficial effects in the short term.

PMID: 21901689 [PubMed - indexed for MEDLINE]