exacerbation

恶化
  • 文章类型: Journal Article
    背景:2019年全球哮喘倡议(GINA)和2020年国家心肺和血液研究所(NHLBI)哮喘指南对轻度哮喘进行了重大更新。这些小组不再推荐短效β-激动剂(SABA)作为轻度(GINA)或轻度持续性(NHLBI)哮喘的单药治疗。由于指南或证据更新与实践变化之间可能出现的滞后,这项研究试图评估是否采用了指南.
    方法:在这篇回顾性图表综述中,从2021年7月1日至2022年7月1日,我们对来自大型医疗系统的患者电子病历进行了评估,以确定有多少轻度哮喘患者根据需要进行处方,或根据需要在SABA的基础上每天使用吸入性糖皮质激素(ICS).次要结果是评估轻度哮喘患者急性发作的发生率,比较指南指导治疗与否。此外,我们评估了增加轻度哮喘急性发作风险的其他患者因素.
    结果:对于主要结果,在符合纳入标准的1,107名患者中,284例患者(26%)在研究期间没有针对轻度哮喘的指南指导治疗文件,而823(74%)接受指南指导的治疗(Diff:48.7%;95%CI:45.1至52.3%,p<0.001)。对于次要目标,161例患者出现恶化(12%的患者接受指南指导的治疗,15.4%不接受指南指导的治疗)。两个治疗组之间的恶化发生率差异无统计学意义(Diff:-3.4%;95%CI:-8至1.1%;p=0.133)。此外,作为女性,有GERD,在我们的患者人群中,肥胖是与哮喘加重相关的统计学显著因素.
    结论:近1/4的轻度持续性哮喘患者没有接受指南指导的治疗,尽管哮喘指南有更新(GINA2019,NHLBI2020)。诸如女性等因素,有GERD,在轻度持续性哮喘患者中,肥胖是与哮喘加重相关的统计学显著因素.
    BACKGROUND: A significant update was made to both the Global Initiative for Asthma (GINA) in 2019 and the National Heart Lung and Blood Institute (NHLBI) asthma guidelines in 2020 for mild asthma. These groups no longer recommend short-acting beta-agonists (SABA) as monotherapy for mild (GINA) or mild-persistent (NHLBI) asthma. With the lag that can occur between guideline or evidence updates and changes in practice, this study sought to evaluate whether guideline adoption had occurred.
    METHODS: In this retrospective chart review, patient electronic medical records from a large healthcare system were evaluated from July 1 of 2021 to July 1 of 2022 to determine how many patients with mild asthma were prescribed as needed or daily inhaled corticosteroids (ICS) in addition to as needed SABA. The secondary outcome was to evaluate the incidence of exacerbations in patients with mild asthma, comparing those on guideline-directed therapy or not. In addition, we evaluated other patient factors increasing exacerbation risk in mild asthma.
    RESULTS: For the primary outcome, of the 1,107 patients meeting inclusion criteria, 284 patients (26%) did not have documentation of guideline-directed therapy for mild asthma during the study period, while 823 (74%) were on guideline-directed therapy (Diff:48.7%; 95% CI:45.1 to 52.3%, p < 0.001). For the secondary objective, 161 patients had an exacerbation (12% on guideline-directed therapy, 15.4% not on guideline-directed therapy). This difference in incidence of exacerbation between the two treatment groups was not statistically significant (Diff: -3.4%; 95% CI: -8 to 1.1%; p = 0.133). In addition, being female, having GERD, and being obese were all statistically significant factors associated with having asthma exacerbations among our patient population.
    CONCLUSIONS: Nearly one-fourth of patients with mild persistent asthma were not on guideline-directed therapy, despite updates in asthma guidelines (GINA 2019, NHLBI 2020). Factors such as being female, having GERD, and being obese were all statistically significant factors associated with having asthma exacerbations among patients with mild persistent asthma.
    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
    哮喘的特征是慢性气道炎症,可变气道狭窄,和感觉神经刺激,表现为喘息,呼吸困难,胸闷,还有咳嗽.长期哮喘可能导致气道重塑并变得棘手。尽管成人哮喘的患病率增加,日本与哮喘相关的死亡人数有所下降(2020年每10万人中有0.94人)。哮喘治疗的目标包括控制症状和降低未来风险。医生和患者之间的功能伙伴关系对于实现这些目标是必不可少的。长期药物管理和消除触发因素和危险因素是哮喘治疗的基础。哮喘是通过四个步骤的药物治疗(“控制器”),从轻度到强化治疗,取决于疾病的严重程度;每一步都涉及吸入皮质类固醇的每日给药,从低到高剂量不等。长效β2激动剂,白三烯受体拮抗剂,持续释放茶碱,和长效毒蕈碱拮抗剂被推荐作为附加药物。过敏原免疫疗法是一种新的选择,被用作控制治疗。Further,截至2021年,抗IgE抗体,抗IL-5和抗IL-5受体α链抗体,和抗IL-4受体α链抗体可用于治疗严重哮喘。支气管热成形术可用于哮喘治疗,其长期疗效已有报道。其使用的算法已被修订。合并症,如过敏性鼻炎,慢性鼻-鼻窦炎,慢性阻塞性肺疾病,阿司匹林加剧了呼吸系统疾病,在治疗慢性哮喘期间也应考虑。根据发作的严重程度,吸入短效β2激动剂,全身性皮质类固醇,短效毒蕈碱拮抗剂,氧疗,在加重期间,根据需要使用其他方法(“缓解剂”)。
    Asthma is characterized by chronic airway inflammation, variable airway narrowing, and sensory nerve irritation, which manifest as wheezing, dyspnea, chest tightness, and cough. Longstanding asthma may result in airway remodeling and become intractable. Despite the increased prevalence of asthma in adults, asthma-associated deaths have decreased in Japan (0.94 per 100,000 people in 2020). The goals of asthma treatment include the control of symptoms and reduction of future risks. A functional partnership between physicians and patients is indispensable for achieving these goals. Long-term management with medications and the elimination of triggers and risk factors are fundamental to asthma treatment. Asthma is managed via four steps of pharmacotherapy (\"controllers\"), ranging from mild to intensive treatments, depending on disease severity; each step involves daily administration of an inhaled corticosteroid, which varies from low to high dosage. Long-acting β2 agonists, leukotriene receptor antagonists, sustained-release theophylline, and long-acting muscarinic antagonists are recommended as add-on drugs. Allergen immunotherapy is a new option that is employed as a controller treatment. Further, as of 2021, anti-IgE antibody, anti-IL-5 and anti-IL-5 receptor α-chain antibodies, and anti-IL-4 receptor α-chain antibodies are available for the treatment of severe asthma. Bronchial thermoplasty can be performed for asthma treatment, and its long-term efficacy has been reported. Algorithms for their usage have been revised. Comorbidities, such as allergic rhinitis, chronic rhinosinusitis, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, and aspirin-exacerbated respiratory disease, should also be considered during the treatment of chronic asthma. Depending on the severity of episodes, inhaled short-acting β2 agonists, systemic corticosteroids, short-acting muscarinic antagonists, oxygen therapy, and other approaches are used as needed (\"relievers\") during exacerbation.
    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
    未经评估:芬兰的哮喘计划在全国范围内降低了与哮喘相关的死亡率和护理费用,但缺乏有关个人水平的治疗指南依从性和疾病控制的数据.我们旨在评估芬兰成年哮喘患者对指南和疾病控制的依从性。
    联合国调查问卷:在芬兰向2000名随机选择的18-80岁的接受者发送问卷,在过去的12个月中购买了治疗阻塞性气道疾病的药物。问卷包括关于哮喘药物的问题,恶化,自我管理和跟进。通过哮喘控制测试(ACT)评估哮喘症状控制。
    UASSIGNED:541名医生诊断为哮喘的应答者中,高比例(82.4%)报告定期使用哮喘药物,其中97.1%使用吸入糖皮质激素。几乎所有(97.0%)的哮喘患者都被教导如何使用吸入器,78.4%的患者有哮喘自我管理计划,但只有35.7%报告了定期的年度随访。根据症状,60.0%的患者哮喘控制良好(ACT评分≥20)。另一方面,29.2%的人有一个疗程的口服皮质类固醇和21.8%的人有哮喘相关的计划外保健访问在前一年,但只有2.6%的人报告住院。未使用常规哮喘药物的患者哮喘控制更好。
    UASSIGNED:除了定期随访外,该指南在芬兰成人哮喘护理中得到了广泛采用。大多数患者症状控制良好,很少住院。在那些不使用常规哮喘药物的人中,更好的哮喘控制意味着他们没有得到充分治疗,而是患有轻度疾病。
    UNASSIGNED: Asthma program in Finland decreased asthma-related mortality and expenses of care on national level, but there is lack of data on adherence to treatment guidelines and disease control on individual level. We aimed to assess adherence to guidelines and disease control among Finnish adult asthmatics.
    UNASSIGNED: Questionnaires were sent in Finland to 2000 randomly selected recipients aged 18-80 years, who had bought medication for obstructive airways disease during the previous 12 months. The questionnaire included questions on asthma medication, exacerbations, self-management and follow-up. Asthma symptom control was assessed by the Asthma Control Test (ACT).
    UNASSIGNED: A high proportion (82.4%) of the 541 responders with physician-diagnosed asthma reported regular use of asthma medication and 97.1% of them used inhaled corticosteroids. Almost all (97.0%) of the asthmatics were taught how to use their inhaler and 78.4% had an asthma self-management plan, but only 35.7% reported regular annual follow-up visits. According to symptoms, 60.0% had their asthma well-controlled (ACT score ≥20). On the other hand, 29.2% had a course of oral corticosteroid and 21.8% had an asthma-related unscheduled health care visit during the previous year, but only 2.6% reported a hospitalization. Asthma control was better in those not using regular asthma medication.
    UNASSIGNED: The guidelines are well adopted in Finnish adult asthma care except for regular follow-up visits. Majority of patients had good symptom control and hospitalizations were rare. Better asthma control among those not using regular asthma medication implies they are not undertreated but have a mild disease.
    导出

    更多引用

    收藏

    翻译标题摘要

    我要上传

       PDF(Pubmed)

  • 文章类型: Practice Guideline
    本文详细介绍了GesEPOC2021关于COPD加重综合征(CES)诊断和治疗的建议。指南提出了一种基于定义的综合方法,一种新的严重程度分类,以及对不同可治疗性状(TT)的识别,代表着个性化医疗迈出了新的一步。使用等级方法评估证据,合并了6个新的PICO问题。诊断过程包括四个阶段:1)建立CES的诊断,2)评估发作的严重程度,3)识别触发器,和4)地址TT。这个诊断过程区分了门诊方法,建议包括一组基本的测试,从更全面的医院方法来看,包括研究不同的生物标志物和影像学检查。对所有患者来说,立即缓解症状的支气管扩张剂治疗是必不可少的。而使用抗生素,全身性皮质类固醇,氧疗,辅助通气和合并症的治疗将根据严重程度和可能的TTs而有所不同。特别是如果痰颜色改变,将使用抗生素。当需要通气辅助时,在涉及肺炎的病例中,以及C反应蛋白升高(≥20mg/L)的患者。建议在需要入院的CES中使用全身性皮质类固醇,并建议在中度CES中使用。这些药物对血液嗜酸性粒细胞计数≥300细胞/mm3的患者更有效。急性期无创机械通气主要针对CES患者,尽管进行了初步治疗,但仍会出现呼吸性酸中毒。
    This article details the GesEPOC 2021 recommendations on the diagnosis and treatment of COPD exacerbation syndrome (CES). The guidelines propose a definition-based syndromic approach, a new classification of severity, and the recognition of different treatable traits (TT), representing a new step toward personalized medicine. The evidence is evaluated using GRADE methodology, with the incorporation of 6 new PICO questions. The diagnostic process comprises four stages: 1) establish a diagnosis of CES, 2) assess the severity of the episode, 3) identify the trigger, and 4) address TTs. This diagnostic process differentiates an outpatient approach, that recommends the inclusion of a basic battery of tests, from a more comprehensive hospital approach, that includes the study of different biomarkers and imaging tests. Bronchodilator treatment for immediate relief of symptoms is considered essential for all patients, while the use of antibiotics, systemic corticosteroids, oxygen therapy, and assisted ventilation and the treatment of comorbidities will vary depending on severity and possible TTs. The use of antibiotics will be indicated particularly if sputum color changes, when ventilatory assistance is required, in cases involving pneumonia, and in patients with elevated C-reactive protein (≥ 20 mg/L). Systemic corticosteroids are recommended in CES that requires admission and are suggested in moderate CES. These drugs are more effective in patients with blood eosinophil counts ≥ 300 cells/mm3. Acute-phase non-invasive mechanical ventilation is specified primarily for patients with CES who develop respiratory acidosis despite initial treatment.
    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: Practice Guideline
    本文详细介绍了GesEPOC2021关于COPD加重综合征(CES)诊断和治疗的建议。指南提出了一种基于定义的综合方法,一种新的严重程度分类,以及对不同可治疗性状(TT)的识别,代表着个性化医疗迈出了新的一步。使用等级方法评估证据,合并了6个新的PICO问题。诊断过程包括四个阶段:1)建立CES的诊断,2)评估发作的严重程度,3)识别触发器,和4)地址TT。这个诊断过程区分了门诊方法,建议包括一组基本的测试,从更全面的医院方法来看,包括研究不同的生物标志物和影像学检查。对所有患者来说,立即缓解症状的支气管扩张剂治疗是必不可少的。而使用抗生素,全身性皮质类固醇,氧疗,辅助通气和合并症的治疗将根据严重程度和可能的TTs而有所不同。特别是如果痰颜色改变,将使用抗生素。当需要通气辅助时,在涉及肺炎的病例中,以及C反应蛋白升高(≥20mg/L)的患者。建议在需要入院的CES中使用全身性皮质类固醇,并建议在中度CES中使用。这些药物对血液嗜酸性粒细胞计数≥300细胞/mm3的患者更有效。急性期无创机械通气主要针对CES患者,尽管进行了初步治疗,但仍会出现呼吸性酸中毒。
    This article details the GesEPOC 2021 recommendations on the diagnosis and treatment of COPD exacerbation syndrome (CES). The guidelines propose a definition-based syndromic approach, a new classification of severity, and the recognition of different treatable traits (TT), representing a new step toward personalized medicine. The evidence is evaluated using GRADE methodology, with the incorporation of 6 new PICO questions. The diagnostic process comprises four stages: 1) establish a diagnosis of CES, 2) assess the severity of the episode, 3) identify the trigger, and 4) address TTs. This diagnostic process differentiates an outpatient approach, that recommends the inclusion of a basic battery of tests, from a more comprehensive hospital approach, that includes the study of different biomarkers and imaging tests. Bronchodilator treatment for immediate relief of symptoms is considered essential for all patients, while the use of antibiotics, systemic corticosteroids, oxygen therapy, and assisted ventilation and the treatment of comorbidities will vary depending on severity and possible TTs. The use of antibiotics will be indicated particularly if sputum color changes, when ventilatory assistance is required, in cases involving pneumonia, and in patients with elevated C-reactive protein (≥ 20 mg/L). Systemic corticosteroids are recommended in CES that requires admission and are suggested in moderate CES. These drugs are more effective in patients with blood eosinophil counts ≥ 300 cells/mm3. Acute-phase non-invasive mechanical ventilation is specified primarily for patients with CES who develop respiratory acidosis despite initial treatment.
    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: Practice Guideline
    本文详细介绍了GesEPOC2021关于COPD加重综合征(CES)诊断和治疗的建议。指南提出了一种基于定义的综合方法,一种新的严重程度分类,以及对不同可治疗性状(TT)的识别,代表着个性化医疗迈出了新的一步。使用等级方法评估证据,合并了6个新的PICO问题。诊断过程包括四个阶段:1)建立CES的诊断,2)评估发作的严重程度,3)识别触发器,和4)地址TT。这个诊断过程区分了门诊方法,建议包括一组基本的测试,从更全面的医院方法来看,包括研究不同的生物标志物和影像学检查。对所有患者来说,立即缓解症状的支气管扩张剂治疗是必不可少的。而使用抗生素,全身性皮质类固醇,氧疗,辅助通气和合并症的治疗将根据严重程度和可能的TTs而有所不同。特别是如果痰颜色改变,将使用抗生素。当需要通气辅助时,在涉及肺炎的病例中,以及C反应蛋白升高(≥20mg/L)的患者。建议在需要入院的CES中使用全身性皮质类固醇,并建议在中度CES中使用。这些药物对血液嗜酸性粒细胞计数≥300细胞/mm3的患者更有效。急性期无创机械通气主要针对CES患者,尽管进行了初步治疗,但仍会出现呼吸性酸中毒。
    This article details the GesEPOC 2021 recommendations on the diagnosis and treatment of COPD exacerbation syndrome (CES). The guidelines propose a definition-based syndromic approach, a new classification of severity, and the recognition of different treatable traits (TT), representing a new step toward personalized medicine. The evidence is evaluated using GRADE methodology, with the incorporation of 6 new PICO questions. The diagnostic process comprises four stages: 1) establish a diagnosis of CES, 2) assess the severity of the episode, 3) identify the trigger, and 4) address TTs. This diagnostic process differentiates an outpatient approach, that recommends the inclusion of a basic battery of tests, from a more comprehensive hospital approach, that includes the study of different biomarkers and imaging tests. Bronchodilator treatment for immediate relief of symptoms is considered essential for all patients, while the use of antibiotics, systemic corticosteroids, oxygen therapy, and assisted ventilation and the treatment of comorbidities will vary depending on severity and possible TTs. The use of antibiotics will be indicated particularly if sputum color changes, when ventilatory assistance is required, in cases involving pneumonia, and in patients with elevated C-reactive protein (≥ 20 mg/L). Systemic corticosteroids are recommended in CES that requires admission and are suggested in moderate CES. These drugs are more effective in patients with blood eosinophil counts ≥ 300 cells/mm3. Acute-phase non-invasive mechanical ventilation is specified primarily for patients with CES who develop respiratory acidosis despite initial treatment.
    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
    背景:哮喘患者通常对目前的治疗感到满意,即使他们被诊断为不受医生控制。本研究调查了患者和医生在哮喘控制水平评估方面的差异。以及对未来风险的预测。
    方法:纳入接受吸入性皮质类固醇/长效β-2激动剂4周或更长时间的哮喘患者,并随访24周。使用以下指南评估哮喘控制水平:哮喘预防和管理指南,日本(JGL)和全球哮喘倡议(GINA)由医生,以及日本哮喘控制调查(JACS)和患者的6项哮喘控制问卷(ACQ6),在第0周和第24周。使用JGL对影响急性加重的预测因素进行分析,吉娜,JACS,和ACQ6在第0周。
    结果:共纳入420例患者。由医生和患者评估的哮喘控制水平的分布比较显示JGL和JACS之间无统计学差异(P=0.19)。暗示了一个对称分布,而ACQ6与JGL和GINA相比有显著差异(均P<0.001)。急性加重的预测因素是基于GINA的计划外就诊(比率;0.25,95%CI;0.14,0.44),以及根据JGL(比率;0.42,95%CI0.22,0.82)和JACS(比率;0.22,95%CI;0.13,0.40)连续3天使用口服类固醇。
    结论:我们的研究表明,基于治疗指南的评估和根据当地治疗指南验证的问卷对于改善哮喘控制水平的评估和降低未来风险非常重要。
    背景:UMIN000030419.
    BACKGROUND: Asthma patients often feel satisfied with their current treatment, even when they have been diagnosed as uncontrolled by physicians. The present study investigated the differences in the evaluation of asthma control levels between patients and physicians, and the prediction of future risks.
    METHODS: Asthma patients receiving inhaled corticosteroid/long-acting beta-2 agonists for 4 weeks or more were enrolled and followed-up for 24 weeks. Asthma control levels were evaluated using the following guidelines: Asthma Prevention and Management Guideline, Japan (JGL) and Global Initiative for Asthma (GINA) by physicians, and the Japan Asthma Control Survey (JACS) and a 6-item Asthma Control Questionnaire (ACQ6) by patients, at weeks 0 and 24. Analysis for predictive factors influencing exacerbation was performed using JGL, GINA, JACS, and ACQ6 at week 0.
    RESULTS: A total of 420 patients were enrolled. Comparison of the distribution of asthma control levels assessed by physicians and patients showed no statistically significant difference between JGL and JACS (P = 0.19), suggesting a symmetric distribution, while ACQ6 demonstrated a significant difference versus JGL and GINA (both P < 0.001). The predictive factors for exacerbation were unscheduled visits based on GINA (rate ratio; 0.25, 95% CI; 0.14, 0.44), and the use of oral steroids on 3 consecutive days based on JGL (rate ratio; 0.42, 95% CI 0.22, 0.82) and JACS (rate ratio; 0.22, 95% CI; 0.13, 0,40).
    CONCLUSIONS: Our study suggests that evaluation based on treatment guidelines and the questionnaire validated according to the local treatment guidelines is important for improved assessment of asthma control levels and the reduction of future risk.
    BACKGROUND: UMIN000030419.
    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
    充足的证据支持急性氧气过度给药与伤害之间的关联。澳大利亚和国际指南一致建议在慢性阻塞性肺疾病(COPD)人群中降低血氧饱和度。我们在澳大利亚大型城市医院网络中评估了COPD住院患者对急性氧气使用指南的依从性和结局。
    Ample evidence supports an association between acute oxygen over-administration and harm. Australian and international guidelines consistently recommend lower oxygen saturation aims in populations with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD). We assessed adherence to acute oxygen use guidelines and outcomes in hospitalised patients with COPD at a large Australian metropolitan hospital network.
    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
    在当代慢性阻塞性肺疾病(COPD)管理指南中,急性加重史对长期吸入疗法的选择具有重要作用.这项研究旨在评估充盈吸入处方在COPD时间过程中的人群水平趋势及其与恶化史的关系。
    我们使用了不列颠哥伦比亚省的行政健康数据库,加拿大(1997-2015),建立诊断为COPD患者的回顾性事件队列.我们在随访的每一年内对长效吸入药物处方进行了量化,并记录了它们在COPD时程中的趋势。使用广义线性模型,我们调查了频繁加重状态(前12个月内≥2次中度或≥1次重度加重)与就诊后按处方配药之间的关联.
    132,004例COPD患者(平均年龄68.6,49.2%为女性)。诊断第一年最常见的药物类别是吸入性皮质类固醇(ICS,使用率为49.9%),其次是长效β-2肾上腺素受体激动剂(LABA,31.8%)。长效毒蕈碱受体拮抗剂(LAMA)是最不常见的处方(10.4%)。在整个随访期间,ICS仍然是最常见的处方,每年约有50%的患者使用。39.0%的患者在诊断的第一年接受联合吸入疗法,ICS+LABA是最常见的(30.7%)。对于三联疗法,与恶化史的关联最明显,全科医生的比值比(OR)为2.68,专家为2.02(两者均p<0.001)。与专家相比,全科医生的这种协会通常更强,除了LABA或ICS的单一疗法。
    我们记录了单一疗法(特别是LAMA)的低利用率和联合疗法(特别是含ICS)的高利用率。与全科医生相比,专家在选择吸入疗法时不太可能考虑恶化史。
    BACKGROUND: In contemporary guidelines for the management of Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease (COPD), the history of acute exacerbations plays an important role in the choice of long-term inhaled therapies. This study aimed at evaluating population-level trends of filled inhaled prescriptions over the time course of COPD and their relation to the history of exacerbations.
    METHODS: We used administrative health databases in British Columbia, Canada (1997-2015), to create a retrospective incident cohort of individuals with diagnosed COPD. We quantified long-acting inhaled medication prescriptions within each year of follow-up and documented their trend over the time course of COPD. Using generalized linear models, we investigated the association between the frequent exacerbator status (≥2 moderate or ≥1 severe exacerbation(s) in the previous 12 months) and filling a prescription after a physician visit.
    RESULTS: 132,004 COPD patients were included (mean age 68.6, 49.2% female). The most common medication class during the first year of diagnosis was inhaled corticosteroids (ICS, used by 49.9%), followed by long-acting beta-2 adrenoreceptor agonists (LABA, 31.8%). Long-acting muscarinic receptor antagonists (LAMA) were the least commonly prescribed (10.4%). ICS remained the most common prescription throughout follow-up, being used by approximately 50% of patients during each year. 39.0% of patients received combination inhaled therapies in their first year of diagnosis, with ICS+LABA being the most common (30.7%). The association with exacerbation history was the most pronounced for triple therapy with an odds ratio (OR) of 2.68 for general practitioners and 2.02 for specialists (p<0.001 for both). Such associations were generally stronger among GPs compared with specialists, with the exception of monotherapy with LABA or ICS.
    CONCLUSIONS: We documented low utilization of monotherapies (specifically LAMA) and high utilization of combination therapies (particularly ICS containing). Specialists were less likely to consider exacerbation history in the choice of inhaled therapies compared with GPs.
    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
    国际指南建议将粘液溶解剂作为选定的COPD患者的附加疗法,因为它们可以减少恶化并改善健康状况。由于粘液溶解剂的证据各不相同,我们使用德尔菲法评估了国际COPD专家小组在COPD中使用粘液溶解剂方面的共识.
    来自12个国家的53名COPD专家被要求完成一份在线调查问卷,并使用5分量表对他们与15份陈述的一致性进行评分。评估的粘液溶解剂是碳半胱氨酸,erdosteine和N-乙酰半胱氨酸(NAC)。数据以匿名方式收集,并使用描述性统计呈现共识。
    47名受访者就上述声明达成共识。他们一致认为,定期使用粘液溶解剂治疗可有效减少恶化的频率,减少轻度至中度恶化的持续时间,并且可以增加COPD患者的首次加重时间和无症状时间。厄多斯泰因的共识一直最高。专家们一致认为,所有三种粘液溶解剂都具有抗氧化和抗炎活性。Erdosteine和NAC被认为可以改善某些类别的抗菌药物的功效。当添加到其他药物中时,所有三种粘液溶解剂都被认为对急性加重症状的短期治疗有效。专家组一致认为,批准剂量的粘液溶解剂具有良好的副作用,可以推荐用于支气管表型患者。
    共识研究结果支持更广泛地使用粘液溶解剂作为COPD的附加疗法。然而,在决定使用哪种粘液溶解剂时,必须考虑药理作用和临床有效性的差异。
    International guidelines recommend mucolytic agents as add-on therapy in selected patients with COPD because they may reduce exacerbations and improve health status. As the evidence varies among mucolytic agents, we used the Delphi method to assess consensus amongst an international panel of COPD experts on mucolytics use in COPD.
    53 COPD experts from 12 countries were asked to complete an online questionnaire and rate their agreement with 15 statements using a 5-point scale. The mucolytic agents evaluated were carbocysteine, erdosteine and N-acetylcysteine (NAC). Data were collected anonymously and consensus presented using descriptive statistics.
    The 47 respondents reached consensus on the statements. They agreed that regular treatment with mucolytic agents effectively reduces the frequency of exacerbations, reduces the duration of mild-to-moderate exacerbations, and can increase the time to first exacerbation and symptom-free time in COPD patients. Consensus was consistently highest for erdosteine. The experts agreed that all three mucolytics display antioxidant and anti-inflammatory activity. Erdosteine and NAC were thought to improve the efficacy of some classes of antibacterial drugs. All three mucolytics were considered effective for the short-term treatment of symptoms of acute exacerbations when added to other drugs. The panel agreed that approved doses of mucolytic agents have favorable side-effect profiles and can be recommended for regular use in patients with a bronchitic phenotype.
    Consensus findings support the wider use of mucolytic agents as add-on therapy for COPD. However, the differences in pharmacological actions and clinical effectiveness must be considered when deciding which mucolytic to use.
    导出

    更多引用

    收藏

    翻译标题摘要

    我要上传

       PDF(Sci-hub)

公众号