Exacerbations

Exacerbations
  • 文章类型: Journal Article
    目的:进行了改良的Delphi程序,以提供美国专家主导的共识,以指导短效β2激动剂(SABA)使用的临床行动。这包括一项在线调查(第一阶段),论坛讨论和陈述发展(第二阶段),和陈述裁决(第三阶段)。
    结果:在第一阶段(n=100名临床医生),12%的患者常规提供≥4SABA处方/年,73%的患者在每次就诊时都要求SABA使用频率,21%的患者未咨询哮喘指南/专家报告.第三阶段专家(n=8)达成共识(李克特得分中位数,四分位数范围)每年使用≥3个SABA罐与加重和哮喘相关死亡的风险增加相关(5,4.75-5);每次患者就诊时都应征求SABA使用史(5,4.75-5);随着时间的推移,使用模式,不是绝对阈值,应指导对SABA过度使用的反应(5,4.5-5)。未来的哮喘指南应包括关于SABA使用的明确建议,使用专家主导的行动门槛。
    A modified Delphi process was undertaken to provide a US expert-led consensus to guide clinical action on short-acting beta2-agonist (SABA) use. This comprised an online survey (Phase 1), forum discussion and statement development (Phase 2), and statement adjudication (Phase 3).
    In Phase 1 (n = 100 clinicians), 12% routinely provided patients with ≥4 SABA prescriptions/year, 73% solicited SABA use frequency at every patient visit, and 21% did not consult asthma guidelines/expert reports. Phase 3 experts (n = 8) reached consensus (median Likert score, interquartile range) that use of ≥3 SABA canisters/year is associated with increased risk of exacerbation and asthma-related death (5, 4.75-5); SABA use history should be solicited at every patient visit (5, 4.75-5); usage patterns over time, not absolute thresholds, should guide response to SABA overuse (5, 4.5-5). Future asthma guidelines should include clear recommendations regarding SABA usage, using expert-led thresholds for action.
    导出

    更多引用

    收藏

    翻译标题摘要

    我要上传

       PDF(Pubmed)

  • 文章类型: Journal Article
    这篇综述的目的是为我们理解通过脉冲振荡法(IOS)建立外周气道损伤(PAI)的临床重要性提供新进展,和靶向治疗,这可能会导致更好的哮喘结局。数据源包括PubMed和Google搜索,仅限于英语和人类疾病,关键词IOS和哮喘。主要发现:使用IOS参考方程,PAI与不受控制的哮喘在不同种族之间始终相关,使用西班牙裔和白人参考算法。即使在哮喘指南认为控制良好的患者中,PAI也很常见。在一项大型纵向分析(ATLANTIS研究)中,在多变量分析中,R5-R20、AX和X5序数评分是哮喘控制和急性加重的独立预测因素,但FEV1对发病率无显著预测作用.然而,将FEV1<80%与PAI相结合,可以发现不受控制的哮喘和急性发作的可能性更大。而不是一个人。在哮喘儿童中应用外部验证方法为临床医生提供了最适合其特定人群的IOS参考方程。几种临床表型也可以以高概率识别PAI,当IOS不可用时有用。肥胖哮喘患者的不良哮喘结局与呼吸困难和PAI相关,不仅仅是肥胖。超细吸入糖皮质激素(EF-ICS)实现更好的哮喘控制,与非EF-ICS气雾剂相比,在较低剂量下恶化较少,以及改善外周气道功能。总之,这些数据支持在未来的哮喘指南中将IOS添加到肺活量测定中的益处,并提示靶向治疗的潜在益处。
    The objective of this review is to provide new advances in our understanding of the clinical importance of establishing peripheral airway impairment (PAI) by impulse oscillometry (IOS) and targeted therapy, which could result in better asthma outcomes. Data sources include PubMed and Google search, limited to English language and human disease, with key words IOS and asthma. Key findings include PAI being consistently associated with uncontrolled asthma across ethnicities, using IOS reference equations factoring Hispanic and White reference algorithms. It is noted that PAI is common even in patients considered well-controlled by asthma guidelines. In a large longitudinal analysis (Assessment of Small Airways Involved in Asthma or ATLANTIS study), a composite of R5-R20, AX, and X5 ordinal scores were independently predictive of asthma control and exacerbation in a multivariate analysis, but forced expiratory volume in 1 second was not significantly predictive of morbidities. However, combining forced expiratory volume in 1 second less than 80% with PAI resulted in greater odds of identifying uncontrolled asthma and exacerbations, than either alone. Applying an external validation method in children with asthma offers the clinician the IOS reference equations best fit for their own specific population. Several clinical phenotypes can also identify PAI with high probability, useful when IOS is not available. Poor asthma outcomes for obese patients with asthma are associated with dysanapsis and PAI, not obesity alone. Extrafine inhaled corticosteroids achieve better asthma control and improve peripheral airway function with fewer exacerbations at lower dosages than nonextrafine inhaled corticosteroid aerosols. In conclusion, these data support the benefit of adding IOS to spirometry in future asthma guidelines and suggest the potential benefit from targeted therapy.
    导出

    更多引用

    收藏

    翻译标题摘要

    我要上传

    求助全文

  • 文章类型: Journal Article
    虽然二十世纪给哮喘的诊断和管理带来了快速的变化,直到1980年代中期,共识准则才存在。在随后的四十年里,指导方针从基于专家的建议演变为全面的,基于证据的参考文献。本章要讨论的主要两个准则是美国国家心脏组织公布的专家小组报告(EPR),肺,和血液研究所(NHLBI)以及NHLBI和世界卫生组织(WHO)发布的全球哮喘管理和预防报告(GINA)。虽然这些指南都侧重于基于证据的哮喘诊断和管理方法,在组织和建议方面都存在显著差异。在过去的20年里,循证指南的引入对哮喘管理是革命性的,我们预计基于正在进行的尖端临床研究,将进一步制定针对精准医学的建议.
    While the twentieth century brought rapid changes to the diagnosis and management of asthma, consensus guidelines did not exist until the mid-1980s. Over the subsequent four decades, guidelines evolved from expert-based recommendations to comprehensive, evidenced-based references. The main two guidelines to be discussed in this chapter are the expert panel reports (EPR) published by the United States National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute (NHLBI) and the Global Strategy for Asthma Management and Prevention Report (GINA) published by the NHLBI and World Health Organization (WHO). While these guidelines both focus on evidence-based approaches to the diagnosis and management of asthma, there are significant differences in both organization and recommendations. Just as the introduction of evidence-based guidelines was revolutionary to asthma management over the last 20 years, we anticipate further development of recommendations specific to precision medicine based on ongoing cutting-edge clinical research.
    导出

    更多引用

    收藏

    翻译标题摘要

    我要上传

    求助全文

  • 文章类型: Consensus Development Conference
    目的:在临床试验和临床实践中使用的哮喘控制的定义和措施差异很大。在理解和管理哮喘控制方面,患者和医疗保健专业人员(HCP)之间也存在错位。本研究旨在达成哮喘控制的共识定义,并评估HCP和患者观点之间的差异。
    方法:一项由哮喘专家参与的两阶段德尔菲问卷旨在确定临床实践中哮喘控制方面的共识领域。将结果与结构化文献综述的结果进行比较,以评估研究中使用的现有哮喘控制指南和措施是否与实践相关。82名小组成员参加了德尔福问卷。结构化文献综述包括185份手稿和31份摘要。
    结果:小组成员一致认为哮喘控制没有标准定义,在Delphi研究和文献综述中确定了总共19种不同的复合共识/指南定义和/或经过验证的控制措施。小组成员同意良好控制的哮喘与患者预后的正相关,但不在控制工作定义的组件或阈值上。
    结论:哮喘控制的普遍接受的定义和措施,被患者使用和理解,HCP,需要研究人员。
    OBJECTIVE: Definitions and measures of asthma control used in clinical trials and in clinical practice vary considerably. There is also misalignment between patients and healthcare professionals (HCPs) in terms of understanding and managing asthma control. This study aimed to progress towards a consensus definition of asthma control, and evaluate disparities between HCP and patient perspectives.
    METHODS: A two-stage Delphi questionnaire involving asthma specialists sought to identify areas of consensus on aspects of asthma control in clinical practice. Results were compared with those of a structured literature review to assess if existing guidance and measures of asthma control used in studies correlated with practice. Eighty-two panelists took part in the Delphi questionnaire. The structured literature review included 185 manuscripts and 31 abstracts.
    RESULTS: Panelists agreed that there was no standard definition of asthma control, confirmed by a total of 19 different composite consensus/guideline definitions and/or validated measures of control being identified across the Delphi study and literature review. Panelists agreed on the positive associations of well-controlled asthma with patient outcomes, but not on the components or thresholds of a working definition of control.
    CONCLUSIONS: A universally accepted definition and measure of asthma control that is utilized and understood by patients, HCPs, and researchers is required.
    导出

    更多引用

    收藏

    翻译标题摘要

    我要上传

    求助全文

  • 文章类型: Journal Article
    慢性阻塞性肺疾病(COPD)的药物治疗主要基于吸入支气管扩张剂。吸气流量和肺沉积是吸入治疗中需要考虑的关键参数;然而,这两个参数之间的关系,病人的具体情况,吸入器类型在COPD管理中的适用性尚未得到充分解决。本研究遵循DelphiPanel方法,以就吸气流量和肺沉积作为COPD吸入治疗中关键决定因素的作用达成专家共识。
    两轮Delphi面板,由38个陈述(项目)组成,由57名西班牙肺科医师完成,是为了衡量专家对每一项的共识程度。
    在咨询的大多数项目上达成了高度共识,在选择吸入装置时,应定期考虑其中的吸气流量或吸气容量,以确保所使用的吸入器的适用性;应考虑不同装置的流出速度和颗粒大小,以确保足够的肺沉积;对于低吸气流量的患者,应使用主动装置(加压计量吸入器(pMDI)或软雾吸入器(SMI)),以获得足够的肺沉积;对于重度梗阻和重度加重患者,应重新评估干粉吸入器(DPI)的使用情况.
    这项研究表明,在选择用于COPD管理的吸入装置时,吸气流量和肺中颗粒沉积程度的相关性,以及SMI型设备在低吸气流量的情况下的便利性。此外,它突出了COPD指南中关于吸入装置具体特征的信息的缺乏.
    The pharmacological treatment of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) is largely based on inhaled bronchodilators. Inspiratory flow and lung deposition are key parameters to be considered in inhaled therapy; however, the relationship between these two parameters, the patient specificities, and the suitability of the inhaler type for COPD management has not been fully addressed. The present study follows a Delphi Panel methodology to find expert consensus on the role of inspiratory flow and lung deposition as key decision factors in COPD inhaled therapy.
    A two-round Delphi Panel, consisting of 38 statements (items) and completed by 57 Spanish pulmonologists, was carried out to measure the experts\' consensus degree with each item.
    A high degree of consensus was reached on most of the items consulted, among these inspiratory flow or inspiratory capacity should be periodically considered when choosing an inhalation device and to ensure the suitability of the inhaler used; the outflow velocity and particle size of the different devices should be considered to ensure adequate lung deposition; an active device (pressurized metered-dose inhalers (pMDI) or soft mist inhalers (SMI)) should be used in patients with low inspiratory flow to achieve adequate lung deposition; and, the use of dry powder inhalers (DPI) should be re-evaluated in patients with severe obstruction and severe exacerbations.
    This study shows the relevance of inspiratory flow and the degree of particle deposition in the lung in the choice of an inhalation device for COPD management, as well as the convenience of an SMI type device in cases of low inspiratory flow. Moreover, it highlights the scarcity of information on the specific features of inhalation devices in COPD guidelines.
    导出

    更多引用

    收藏

    翻译标题摘要

    我要上传

       PDF(Pubmed)

  • 文章类型: Journal Article
    哮喘是西班牙最普遍的疾病之一,然而,尽管在这一领域取得了巨大的诊断和治疗进展,健康结果提示,高达80%的患者哮喘未得到良好控制.尽管造成这种情况的原因是多种多样的,治疗哮喘的专业人员中有一些做法不利于改善这种疾病的健康结果.我们的工作组编写了这份文件,以提醒临床医生一系列基本准则,与当前的指导方针和最近的文献一致,并由多学科专家小组使用Delphi方法达成一致。这些关于成人患者哮喘管理中不应该做什么的建议分为四个方面:诊断,监测,治疗和预防恶化。
    Asthma is one of the most prevalent diseases in Spain, yet despite the great diagnostic and therapeutic advances made in this field, health outcomes suggest that up to 80% of patients do not have their asthma well controlled. Although the causes of this situation are diverse, there are some practices among the professionals who treat asthma that are not conducive to improving health outcomes in this disease. Our working group has prepared this document in order to remind clinicians of a series of basic guidelines, aligned with current guidelines and recent literature, and agreed by a multidisciplinary expert panel using Delphi methodology. These recommendations about what not to do in the management of asthma in the adult patient are structured into four areas: diagnosis, monitoring, treatment and prevention of exacerbations.
    导出

    更多引用

    收藏

    翻译标题摘要

    我要上传

       PDF(Sci-hub)

       PDF(Pubmed)

  • 文章类型: Journal Article
    Dupilumab, a fully human monoclonal antibody against interleukin-4 receptor α, is approved as add-on maintenance treatment for inadequately controlled type 2 severe asthma. This systematic review evaluated the efficacy, safety and economic impact of dupilumab compared to standard of care for uncontrolled severe asthma. PubMed, EMBASE and Cochrane Library were searched for RCTs and health economic evaluations. Critical and important asthma-related outcomes were evaluated. The risk of bias and the certainty of the evidence were assessed using GRADE. Three RCTs including 2735 subjects >12 years old and 24-52 weeks of follow-up were included. Dupilumab reduced with high certainty severe asthma exacerbations (Incidence rate ratio 0.51; 95% CI 0.45-0.59) and the percentage use of oral corticosteroid use (mean difference (MD) -28.2 mg/d; 95% CI -40.7 to -15.7). Asthma control (ACQ-5), quality of life (AQLQ) and rescue medication use [puffs/d] improved, without reaching the minimal important clinical difference: ACQ-5 MD -0.28 (95% CI -0.39 to -0.17); AQLQ MD +0.28 (95% CI 0.20-0.37); and rescue medication MD -0.35 (95% CI -0.73 to +0.02). FEV1 increased (MD +0.15; 95% CI +0.11 to +0.18) (moderate certainty). There was an increased rate of dupilumab-related adverse events (AEs) (moderate certainty) and of drug-related serious AEs (low certainty). The incremental cost-effectiveness ratio of dupilumab versus standard therapy was 464 000$/QALY (moderate certainty). More data on long-term safety are needed both for children and for adults, together with more efficacy data in the paediatric population.
    导出

    更多引用

    收藏

    翻译标题摘要

    我要上传

       PDF(Sci-hub)

  • 文章类型: Journal Article
    Allergic asthma is a frequent asthma phenotype. Both IgE and type 2 cytokines are increased, with some degree of overlap with other phenotypes. Systematic reviews assessed the efficacy and safety of benralizumab, dupilumab and omalizumab (alphabetical order) vs standard of care for patients with uncontrolled severe allergic asthma. PubMed, Embase and Cochrane Library were searched to identify RCTs and health economic evaluations, published in English. Critical and important asthma-related outcomes were evaluated. The risk of bias and the certainty of the evidence were assessed using GRADE. All three biologicals reduced with high certainty the annualized asthma exacerbation rate: benralizumab incidence rate ratios (IRR) 0.63 (95% CI 0.50 - 0.81); dupilumab IRR 0.58 (95%CI 0.47 - 0.73); and omalizumab IRR 0.56 (95%CI 0.42 - 0.73). Benralizumab and dupilumab improved asthma control with high certainty and omalizumab with moderate certainty; however, none reached the minimal important difference (MID). Both benralizumab and omalizumab improved QoL with high certainty, but only omalizumab reached the MID. Omalizumab enabled ICS dose reduction with high certainty. Benralizumab and omalizumab showed an increase in drug-related adverse events (AEs) with low to moderate certainty. All three biologicals had moderate certainty for an ICER/QALY value above the willingness to pay threshold. There was high certainty that in children 6-12 years old omalizumab decreased the annualized exacerbation rate [IRR 0.57 (95%CI 0.45-0.72)], improved QoL [relative risk 1.43 (95%CI 1.12 -1.83)], reduced ICS [mean difference (MD) -0.45 (95% CI -0.58 to -0.32)] and rescue medication use [ MD -0.41 (95%CI -0.66 to -0.15)].
    导出

    更多引用

    收藏

    翻译标题摘要

    我要上传

       PDF(Sci-hub)

  • 文章类型: Journal Article
    暂无摘要。
    导出

    更多引用

    收藏

    翻译标题摘要

    我要上传

       PDF(Sci-hub)

  • 文章类型: Journal Article
    In 2008, the Spanish Society of Pulmonology (SEPAR) published the first guidelines in the world on the diagnosis and treatment of bronchiectasis. Almost 10 years later, considerable scientific advances have been made in both the treatment and the evaluation and diagnosis of this disease, and the original guidelines have been updated to include the latest therapies available for bronchiectasis. These new recommendations have been drafted following a strict methodological process designed to ensure quality of content, and are linked to a large amount of online information that includes a wealth of references. The guidelines are focused on the treatment of bronchiectasis from both a multidisciplinary perspective, including specialty areas and the different healthcare levels involved, and a multidimensional perspective, including a comprehensive overview of the specific aspects of the disease. A series of recommendations have been drawn up, based on an in-depth review of the evidence for treatment of the underlying etiology, the bronchial infection in its different forms of presentation using existing therapies, bronchial inflammation, and airflow obstruction. Nutritional aspects, management of secretions, muscle training, management of complications and comorbidities, infection prophylaxis, patient education, home care, surgery, exacerbations, and patient follow-up are addressed.
    导出

    更多引用

    收藏

    翻译标题摘要

    我要上传

       PDF(Sci-hub)

公众号