respiratory medicine (see thoracic medicine)

呼吸医学 ( 胸腔医学 )
  • 文章类型: Journal Article
    背景:支气管肺发育不良(BPD)引起的慢性呼吸道并发症仍然是早产最常见的并发症,并对以后的呼吸道有影响,心血管和神经发育结果。呼吸系统疾病的早期阶段的特征是内源性表面活性剂的快速消耗和缓慢的补充。外源性表面活性剂常规给予妊娠28周前出生的婴儿作为预防。内源性表面活性剂包括四种蛋白质,称为表面活性剂蛋白(SP)A,B,目前的牛衍生和猪衍生的表面活性剂制剂仅含有SPsB和C。SP-D作为先天免疫系统的一部分在肺免疫稳态中具有关键作用。使用重组SP-D的实验室研究表明炎症减少,这可能是降低BPD相关发病率的途径。响应使用人SPD(rfhSP-D)的重组片段,在I期安全性和剂量递增试验中,作为确定其在人体中的作用的第一阶段。
    方法:这是一个单中心,剂量递增,I期安全性研究旨在招募24例妊娠30周前出生的呼吸窘迫综合征婴儿。除了常规的表面活性剂替代疗法,参与者将通过气管内途径接受三种剂量的rfhSP-D,剂量为1mg/kg,2mg/kg或4mg/kg。该研究使用贝叶斯连续重新评估方法来做出剂量递增决策。本试验中的剂量限制性事件(DLE)将根据公布的新生儿不良事件严重程度评分进行分级。这项研究的主要结果是根据DLE的概况评估每个剂量水平的rfhSP-D的安全性,以建立rfhSP-D的推荐2期剂量(RP2D)。
    背景:RESPONSE研究已获得伦敦-布伦特NHS研究健康管理局伦理委员会的伦理批准。研究结果将发表在同行评审的期刊上,并在国家和国际会议上发表。
    背景:ISRCTN17083028,NCT05898633。
    方法:响应协议V.4.02024年7月24日。
    BACKGROUND: Chronic respiratory morbidity from bronchopulmonary dysplasia (BPD) remains the most common complication of preterm birth and has consequences for later respiratory, cardiovascular and neurodevelopmental outcomes. The early phases of respiratory illness are characterised by rapid consumption of endogenous surfactant and slow replenishment. Exogenous surfactant is routinely administered to infants born before 28 weeks of gestation as prophylaxis. Endogenous surfactant includes four proteins, known as surfactant proteins (SPs) A, B, C and D. Current bovine-derived and porcine-derived surfactant preparations only contain SPs B and C. SP-D has a key role in lung immune homeostasis as part of the innate immune system. Laboratory studies using recombinant SP-D have demonstrated reduced inflammation, which may be a pathway to reducing the associated morbidity from BPD. RESPONSE uses a recombinant fragment of human SP D (rfhSP-D), in a phase I safety and dose-escalation trial as the first stage in determining its effect in humans.
    METHODS: This is a single-centre, dose-escalation, phase I safety study aiming to recruit 24 infants born before 30 weeks gestation with respiratory distress syndrome. In addition to routine surfactant replacement therapy, participants will receive three doses of rfhSP-D via endotracheal route at either 1 mg/kg, 2 mg/kg or 4 mg/kg. The study uses a Bayesian continual reassessment method to make dose escalation decisions. Dose-limiting events (DLE) in this trial will be graded according to the published Neonatal Adverse Event Severity Score. The primary outcome of this study is to evaluate the safety profile of rfhSP-D across each dose level based on the profile of DLE to establish the recommended phase 2 dose (RP2D) of rfhSP-D.
    BACKGROUND: The RESPONSE study has received ethical approval from London-Brent NHS Research Health Authority ethics committee. Results from the study will be published in peer-reviewed journals and presented at national and international conferences.
    BACKGROUND: ISRCTN17083028, NCT05898633.
    METHODS: RESPONSE Protocol V.4.0 24th July 2024.
    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
    背景:阻塞性睡眠呼吸暂停(OSA)是常见的,但诊断不足,睡眠障碍。如果未经治疗,它导致不良的健康结果,包括老年痴呆症,癌症,心血管疾病和全因死亡率。我们的目标是确定将OSA检测转移到普通实践的可行性和成本效益,以及基于全科医生(GP)的筛查如何影响整体检出率。
    方法:使用新型药品和保健产品监管机构注册装置(AcuPebbleSA100)在一般实践中发现OSA病例的随机对照试验,与常规护理和内部可行性阶段进行比较。来自西米德兰兹郡临床研究网络的各种一般实践(大约40个)样本将从他们的记录中识别参与者。符合条件的参与者将年龄在50-70岁,体重指数>30kg/m2,糖尿病(1型或2型)和/或高血压(办公室血压>145/90mmHg或正在治疗)。他们将排除已知OSA或慢性阻塞性肺疾病的个体,或者他们认为无法参加的人。经过资格筛选,同意和基线评估,参与者将被随机分为干预组或对照组.干预组的参与者将通过邮寄AcuPebble睡眠测试套件获得。控制臂中的那些将继续进行常规护理。后续问卷将在6个月完成。该研究有能力(90%)检测到5%的差异,每个手臂需要606名患者(每个手臂将招募713名患者以进行减员)。由于干预的性质,参与者和全科医生不会对分配视而不见。
    结果:主要:干预组与对照组的中度至重度OSA检出率。次要:轻度干预组的诊断时间和治疗时间与对照组相比,中度和重度OSA;比较不同测试途径的成本-效果分析。
    背景:试验于2022年11月1日开始。道德批准于2023年6月9日获得牛津中南部A研究伦理委员会(23/SC/0188)(协议修正案1.3版;更新修正案并批准于2023年8月29日重新编号为V2.0)。患者招募于2024年1月7日开始;最初的计划结束日期为2025年4月31日。结果将在试验日期结束后的12个月内上传到ISRCTN登记册,在会议上介绍,提交给同行评审的期刊,并通过我们的患者和公众参与网络分发。沃里克大学将作为试验的发起人。该试验将按照赞助商和初级保健临床试验单位的标准操作程序进行。
    背景:ISRCTN16982033。
    BACKGROUND: Obstructive sleep apnoea (OSA) is a common, but underdiagnosed, sleep disorder. If untreated, it leads to poor health outcomes, including Alzheimer\'s disease, cancer, cardiovascular disease and all-cause mortality. Our aim is to determine the feasibility and cost-effectiveness of moving the testing for OSA into general practice and how general practitioner (GP)-based screening affects overall detection rates.
    METHODS: Randomised controlled trial of case finding of OSA in general practice using a novel Medicines and Healthcare products Regulatory Agency-registered device (AcuPebble SA100) compared with usual care with internal feasibility phase. A diverse sample of general practices (approximately 40) from across the West Midlands Clinical Research Network will identify participants from their records. Eligible participants will be aged 50-70 years with body mass index >30 kg/m2 and diabetes (type 1 or 2) and/or hypertension (office blood pressure >145/90 mm Hg or on treatment). They will exclude individuals with known OSA or chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, or those they deem unable to take part. After eligibility screening, consent and baseline assessment, participants will be randomised to either the intervention or control group. Participants in the intervention arm will receive by post the AcuPebble sleep test kit. Those in the control arm will continue with usual care. Follow-up questionnaires will be completed at 6 months. The study is powered (90%) to detect a 5% difference and will require 606 patients in each arm (713 will be recruited to each arm to allow for attrition). Due to the nature of the intervention, participants and GPs will not be blinded to the allocation.
    RESULTS: Primary: Detection rate of moderate-to-severe OSA in the intervention group versus control group. Secondary: Time to diagnosis and time to treatment for intervention versus control group for mild, moderate and severe OSA; cost-effectiveness analysis comparing the different testing pathways.
    BACKGROUND: The trial started on 1 November 2022. Ethical approval was granted from the South Central Oxford A Research Ethics Committee on 9 June 2023 (23/SC/0188) (protocol amendment version 1.3; update with amendment and approval to renumber to V2.0 on 29 August 2023). Patient recruitment began on 7 January 2024; initial planned end date will be on 31 April 2025.Results will be uploaded to the ISRCTN register within 12 months of the end of the trial date, presented at conferences, submitted to peer-reviewed journals and distributed via our patient and public involvement networks.The University of Warwick will act as the trial sponsor. The trial will be conducted in accordance with the Sponsor and Primary Care Clinical Trials Unit standard operating procedures.
    BACKGROUND: ISRCTN 16982033.
    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
    背景:在神经重症监护病房中经常使用氧气。避免低氧血症是急性脑损伤(ABI)患者的关键目标。然而,多项研究表明,在这些患者中,高氧血症也可能与较高的死亡率和较差的神经系统预后有关.由于前瞻性研究的数量有限,这方面的证据仍然存在争议,缺乏对高氧血症的共同定义,实验设计的异质性和ABI的不同原因。探讨高氧血症与住院成人ABI患者神经功能转归和死亡率的相关性。我们将对观察性研究和随机对照试验进行系统评价和荟萃分析.
    方法:系统评价方法已根据系统评价和荟萃分析(PRISMA)指南的首选报告项目定义,并遵循PRISMA方案结构。直到2024年6月发表的研究将在电子数据库MEDLINE中确定,Embase,Scopus,WebofScience,科克伦图书馆,护理和相关健康文献和临床试验的累积指数。检索到的记录将由四名成对工作的作者独立筛选,选择的变量将从报告关于“高氧血症”和“无高氧血症”对住院ABI患者的神经系统结局和死亡率的影响的研究中提取。我们将在报告时使用协变量调整的OR作为结果测量,因为它们考虑了潜在的共同创始人,并提供了对高氧血症和结果之间关联的更准确的估计;当不可用时,我们将使用单变量OR。如果研究将结果显示为相对风险,只要该疾病的患病率接近10%,它将被认为等同于OR。将应用随机效应荟萃分析计算两种结果的汇总估计。研究间的异质性将使用I2统计量进行评估;偏倚风险将通过非随机干预研究中的偏倚风险进行评估。纽卡斯尔-渥太华或RoB2工具。根据数据可用性,我们计划按ABI类型进行亚组分析(创伤性脑损伤,心脏骤停后,蛛网膜下腔出血,脑出血和缺血性中风),动脉氧分压值,学习质量,学习时间,神经学评分和其他选定的感兴趣的临床变量。
    背景:不需要特定的伦理批准同意,因为这是对先前发布的匿名数据的审查。研究结果将通过在同行评审的期刊上发表并在相关会议和研讨会上发表与科学界分享。它还将是共同的关键利益相关者,如国家或国际卫生当局,医疗保健专业人员和普通民众,通过科学外展期刊和研究机构通讯。
    BACKGROUND: Oxygen is frequently prescribed in neurocritical care units. Avoiding hypoxaemia is a key objective in patients with acute brain injury (ABI). However, several studies suggest that hyperoxaemia may also be related to higher mortality and poor neurological outcomes in these patients. The evidence in this direction is still controversial due to the limited number of prospective studies, the lack of a common definition for hyperoxaemia, the heterogeneity in experimental designs and the different causes of ABI. To explore the correlation between hyperoxaemia and poor neurological outcomes and mortality in hospitalised adult patients with ABI, we will conduct a systematic review and meta-analysis of observational studies and RCTs.
    METHODS: The systematic review methods have been defined according to Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines and follow the PRISMA-Protocols structure. Studies published until June 2024 will be identified in the electronic databases MEDLINE, Embase, Scopus, Web of Science, The Cochrane Library, Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature and ClinicalTrials.gov. Retrieved records will be independently screened by four authors working in pairs, and the selected variables will be extracted from studies reporting data on the effect of \'hyperoxaemia\' versus \'no hyperoxaemia on neurological outcomes and mortality in hospitalised patients with ABI. We will use covariate-adjusted ORs as outcome measures when reported since they account for potential cofounders and provide a more accurate estimate of the association between hyperoxaemia and outcomes; when not available, we will use univariate ORs. If the study presents the results as relative risks, it will be considered equivalent to the OR as long as the prevalence of the condition is close to 10%. Pooled estimates of both outcomes will be calculated applying random-effects meta-analysis. Interstudy heterogeneity will be assessed using the I2 statistic; risk of bias will be assessed through Risk Of Bias In Non-Randomised Studies of Interventions, Newcastle-Ottawa or RoB2 tools. Depending on data availability, we plan to conduct subgroup analyses by ABI type (traumatic brain injury, postcardiac arrest, subarachnoid haemorrhage, intracerebral haemorrhage and ischaemic stroke), arterial partial pressure of oxygen values, study quality, study time, neurological scores and other selected clinical variables of interest.
    BACKGROUND: Specific ethics approval consent is not required as this is a review of previously published anonymised data. Results of the study will be shared with the scientific community via publication in a peer-reviewed journal and presentation at relevant conferences and workshops. It will also be shared key stakeholders, such as national or international health authorities, healthcare professionals and the general population, via scientific outreach journals and research institutes\' newsletters.
    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
    背景:非呼吸机相关医院获得性肺炎(nv-HAP)是最常见的医疗保健相关感染(HCAI),与高死亡率和高发病率相关,并给医疗保健系统带来重大负担。目前的诊断依赖于胸部X线检查以确认肺炎和痰培养以确定微生物学原因。这种方法导致肺炎的过度诊断,很少识别出致病病原体,并使不必要和不精确的抗生素使用长期存在。HAP-FAST研究旨在评估一项随机试验的可行性,以评估低剂量的临床影响。使用BIOFIRE®FILMARRAY®肺炎+面板(FAPP)对疑似nv-HAP患者进行非对比增强胸部CT扫描和快速分子痰液分析。
    方法:HAP-FAST可行性研究由一项随机试验组成,定性研究,对临床样本进行成本分析和探索性分析,以研究HAP的免疫病理生理学。参与者是从英国西北部的四家急性医院中确定和招募的。使用没有事先同意的研究模型,试点试验将招募220名成年参与者,无论有没有心智能力,和疑似HAP。HAP-FAST是一种非盲的,顺序,多重赋值,随机试验有两个可能的随机化阶段:第一,胸部X线(CXR)或CT;其次,如果被视为nv-HAP,FAPP或单独的标准微生物处理(无FAPP)。将为FAPP结果提供病原体特异性抗生素指导。随机化使用基于网络的平台并随访90天。未来试验的可行性将通过评估试验过程来确定,结果测量以及患者和工作人员的经验。
    背景:这项研究经过了英国NHS研究伦理委员会和健康研究管理局的联合审查。结果将通过同行评审的期刊传播,通过资助者网站和一系列媒体吸引公众。
    背景:NCT05483309。
    BACKGROUND: Non-ventilator-associated hospital-acquired pneumonia (nv-HAP) is the most common healthcare-associated infection (HCAI), is associated with high mortality and morbidity and places a major burden on healthcare systems. Diagnosis currently relies on chest x-rays to confirm pneumonia and sputum cultures to determine the microbiological cause. This approach leads to over-diagnosis of pneumonia, rarely identifies a causative pathogen and perpetuates unnecessary and imprecise antibiotic use. The HAP-FAST study aims to evaluate the feasibility of a randomised trial to evaluate the clinical impact of low-dose, non-contrast-enhanced thoracic CT scans and rapid molecular sputum analysis using the BIOFIRE® FILMARRAY® pneumonia plus panel (FAPP) for patients suspected with nv-HAP.
    METHODS: The HAP-FAST feasibility study consists of a pilot randomised trial, a qualitative study, a costing analysis and exploratory analyses of clinical samples to investigate the immune-pathophysiology of HAP. Participants are identified and recruited from four acute hospitals in the Northwest of the UK. Using a Research Without Prior Consent model, the pilot trial will recruit 220 adult participants, with or without mental capacity, and with suspected HAP. HAP-FAST is a non-blinded, sequential, multiple assignment, randomised trial with two possible stages of randomisation: first, chest x-ray (CXR) or CT; second, if treated as nv-HAP, FAPP or standard microbiological processing alone (no FAPP). Pathogen-specific antibiotic guidance will be provided for FAPP results. Randomisation uses a web-based platform and followed up for 90 days. The feasibility of a future trial will be determined by assessing trial processes, outcome measures and patient and staff experiences.
    BACKGROUND: This study has undergone combined review by the UK NHS Research Ethics Committee and Health Research Authority. Results will be disseminated via peer-reviewed journals, via the funders\' website and through a range of media to engage the public.
    BACKGROUND: NCT05483309.
    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
    背景:肺活量测定是一种即时肺功能检查,有助于支持慢性肺部疾病的诊断和监测。在初级保健中,肺活量测定的质量和解释准确性是可变的。这项研究旨在评估人工智能(AI)决策支持软件是否提高了初级保健临床医生在解释肺活量测定方面的表现,对照参考标准(专家解释)。
    方法:并行,两组,统计学家盲目,英国初级保健临床医生的随机对照试验,指的是谁,或解释,肺活量测定。接受过呼吸医学专科培训至顾问级别的人员被排除在外。228名初级保健临床医生参与者的最低目标将以1:1的分配进行随机分配,以评估50名去识别,通过具有(干预组)或不具有(对照组)AI决策支持软件报告的在线平台进行真实世界患者肺活量测定会议。结果将涵盖初级保健临床医生肺活量测定解释表现,包括技术质量评估措施,肺活量测定模式识别和诊断预测,与参考标准相比。还将评估临床医生对肺活量测定解释的自我评估信心。主要结果是50次肺活量测定中参与者的首选诊断与参考诊断相符的比例。非配对t检验和协方差分析将用于估计干预组和对照组之间主要结果的差异。
    背景:威尔士卫生研究局已对该研究进行了审查并给予了好评(参考:22/HRA/5023)。结果将提交在同行评审的期刊上发表,在相关的国家和国际会议上提出,通过社交媒体传播,患者和公共路线,并直接与利益相关者共享。
    背景:NCT05933694。
    BACKGROUND: Spirometry is a point-of-care lung function test that helps support the diagnosis and monitoring of chronic lung disease. The quality and interpretation accuracy of spirometry is variable in primary care. This study aims to evaluate whether artificial intelligence (AI) decision support software improves the performance of primary care clinicians in the interpretation of spirometry, against reference standard (expert interpretation).
    METHODS: A parallel, two-group, statistician-blinded, randomised controlled trial of primary care clinicians in the UK, who refer for, or interpret, spirometry. People with specialist training in respiratory medicine to consultant level were excluded. A minimum target of 228 primary care clinician participants will be randomised with a 1:1 allocation to assess fifty de-identified, real-world patient spirometry sessions through an online platform either with (intervention group) or without (control group) AI decision support software report. Outcomes will cover primary care clinicians\' spirometry interpretation performance including measures of technical quality assessment, spirometry pattern recognition and diagnostic prediction, compared with reference standard. Clinicians\' self-rated confidence in spirometry interpretation will also be evaluated. The primary outcome is the proportion of the 50 spirometry sessions where the participant\'s preferred diagnosis matches the reference diagnosis. Unpaired t-tests and analysis of covariance will be used to estimate the difference in primary outcome between intervention and control groups.
    BACKGROUND: This study has been reviewed and given favourable opinion by Health Research Authority Wales (reference: 22/HRA/5023). Results will be submitted for publication in peer-reviewed journals, presented at relevant national and international conferences, disseminated through social media, patient and public routes and directly shared with stakeholders.
    BACKGROUND: NCT05933694.
    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
    背景:儿童肺炎是2-59个月儿童发病和死亡的主要原因,特别是在低收入和中等收入国家(LMICs),医疗保健提供者在诊断和治疗儿童肺炎方面面临重大挑战。许多低收入国家已采取措施,通过修订其国家政策并使其与世卫组织修订的肺炎管理指南保持一致来解决这一问题。这些修订后的指南旨在促进2-59个月大的胸痛肺炎儿童的门诊管理。尽管做出了这些努力,关于这些儿童在初级卫生保健环境中的管理和结果的经验证据有限.这项研究旨在评估2-59个月大的儿童的生存状况,这些儿童在初级医疗机构出现胸部拉伤肺炎。
    方法:前瞻性,观察性队列研究将在埃塞俄比亚进行,尼日利亚,乌干达,赞比亚,印度和巴基斯坦在2-59个月的儿童中,在选定的初级医疗机构中出现胸部拉伤肺炎。符合条件的参与者将由接受过儿童疾病综合管理培训的机构医疗保健提供者注册和管理,并将在第15天进行随访,以记录与治疗相关的信息和生命状况。包括在儿童死亡的情况下进行口头尸检。每个站点的样本大小将是310。分析将涉及在对所有站点的去识别数据进行汇总分析之前,探索特定站点的趋势。首次数据收集于2022年9月在埃塞俄比亚站点开始,随后是其他站点。数据收集将持续到2025年6月。
    背景:研究方案,入学表格和同意书将由冈达尔大学的机构审查委员会进行道德审查,Gondar,埃塞俄比亚;INCLEN信托国际独立道德委员会,新德里,印度;伊巴丹大学伦理审查委员会,拉各斯州伦理审查委员会和伦敦大学学院伦理审查委员会,英国;机构审查委员会,国际研究力量,伊斯兰堡,巴基斯坦;机构审查委员会,人民初级保健倡议-信德省,卡拉奇和国家生物伦理委员会,伊斯兰堡,巴基斯坦;马凯雷雷大学生物医学科学院研究伦理委员会,坎帕拉,乌干达;赞比亚大学生物医学研究伦理委员会,卢萨卡,赞比亚和世卫组织伦理审查委员会,日内瓦瑞士。伦理程序包括世卫组织和地方审查委员会的评估,使用当地/国家语言的父母同意,许可证登记,后续行动,and,如果需要,临床视频记录儿童拉胸肺炎,确保他们的资格。遵守当地法规包括预先收集道德批准,风险管理策略和安全,去识别的数据存储。调查结果将通过研讨会传播,出版物和会议,让不同的利益相关者参与促进合作。
    背景:ISRCTN12687253。
    BACKGROUND: Childhood pneumonia is a leading cause of morbidity and mortality among children aged 2-59 months, particularly in low-income and middle-income countries (LMICs), where healthcare providers face significant challenges in diagnosing and treating childhood pneumonia. Many LMICs have taken steps to address this issue by revising their national policies and aligning them with WHO\'s revised guidelines for pneumonia management. These revised guidelines aim to facilitate the outpatient management of children aged 2-59 months chest indrawing pneumonia. Despite these efforts, there is limited empirical evidence regarding the management and outcomes of these children in primary-level healthcare settings. This study aims to assess the survival status of children aged 2-59 months with chest indrawing pneumonia presenting at primary healthcare facilities.
    METHODS: A prospective, observational cohort study will be conducted in Ethiopia, Nigeria, Uganda, Zambia, India and Pakistan on children aged 2-59 months presenting at selected primary-level healthcare facilities with chest indrawing pneumonia. Eligible participants will be enrolled and managed by facility healthcare providers who are trained in Integrated Management of Childhood Illness and will be followed up on day 15 to record the treatment-related information and vital status, including conducting verbal autopsies in case of child death. The sample size for each site will be 310. The analysis will involve exploring site-specific trends before conducting a pooled analysis of de-identified data from all sites. The first data collection started at the Ethiopian site in September 2022, followed by other sites. The data collection will continue until June 2025.
    BACKGROUND: The study protocol, enrolment forms and consent forms will undergo ethical review by the Institutional Review Boards of the University of Gondar, Gondar, Ethiopia; the INCLEN Trust International Independent Ethics Committee, New Delhi, India; Ethical Review Committee of the University of Ibadan, Ethical Review Committees of Lagos State and Ethical Review Committee of University College London, UK; Institutional Review Board, International Research Force, Islamabad, Pakistan; Institutional Review Board, People\'s Primary Healthcare Initiative-Sindh, Karachi and National Bioethics Committee, Islamabad, Pakistan; Makerere University School of Biomedical Sciences Research Ethical Committee, Kampala, Uganda; University of Zambia Biomedical Research Ethics committee, Lusaka, Zambia and Ethical Review Committee of WHO, Geneva, Switzerland. Ethical procedures include WHO and local review board evaluations, parental consent in the local/national language, permits enrolment, follow-up, and, if required, clinical video recording for children with chest indrawing pneumonia, ensuring their eligibility. Adherence to local regulations encompasses precollection ethical approvals, risk management strategies and secure, de-identified data storage. Findings will be disseminated through seminars, publications and meetings, engaging diverse stakeholders to foster collaborations.
    BACKGROUND: ISRCTN12687253.
    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
    目的:评估哮喘的特点和治疗模式,包括短效β2激动剂(SABA)处方,在SABA在哮喘中使用(SABINAIII)研究的新加坡队列中的初级和专科护理。
    方法:横截面,观察性研究。
    方法:在新加坡的五个地点进行的多中心研究。
    方法:哮喘患者(年龄≥12岁),人口统计数据,使用电子病例报告表收集疾病特征和哮喘治疗处方。患者根据研究者定义的哮喘严重程度(2017年全球哮喘倡议建议指导)和实践类型(初级/专科护理)进行分类。
    结果:在分析的205例患者中(平均(SD)年龄,53.6(16.8)岁;女性,62%),55.9%由专科医生登记,44.1%由初级保健医生登记。大多数研究患者(80.5%)患有中度至重度哮喘(86.0%为专科护理,74.4%为初级护理)。在入学前的12个月里,18.0%的患者经历了≥1次严重加重。78.0%的患者哮喘得到良好或部分控制。总的来说,在过去的12个月中,所有患者中有17.1%的患者被处方超过SABA(≥3SABA罐/年),与初级保健相比,专科护理中的过度处方更大(26.3%vs5.6%).只有2.9%的患者接受SABA单药治疗,而41.0%的人除了维持治疗外还接受SABA治疗。在后者中,40.5%的人被过量使用SABA。总的来说,在研究访视期间,处方≥3个SABA罐(vs0-2个SABA罐)的患者被评估为哮喘未控制的比例较高(42.9%vs17.6%).14.1%和84.9%的患者采用吸入性皮质类固醇(ICS)或ICS/长效β2激动剂固定剂量组合形式的维持治疗,分别,在入学前的12个月。
    结论:在这个新加坡队列中,除了维持治疗外,〜17%的所有患者和超过40%的患者都处方SABA过量。这些发现强调需要将临床实践与最新的循证治疗建议保持一致。
    背景:NCT03857178。
    OBJECTIVE: To evaluate asthma characteristics and treatment patterns, including short-acting β2-agonist (SABA) prescriptions, in primary and specialist care in the Singapore cohort of the SABA use IN Asthma (SABINA III) study.
    METHODS: Cross-sectional, observational study.
    METHODS: Multicentre study conducted at five sites across Singapore.
    METHODS: In patients with asthma (aged ≥12 years), data on demographics, disease characteristics and asthma treatment prescriptions were collected using electronic case report forms. Patients were classified by investigator-defined asthma severity (guided by 2017 Global Initiative for Asthma recommendations) and practice type (primary/specialist care).
    RESULTS: Of the 205 patients analysed (mean (SD) age, 53.6 (16.8) years; female, 62%), 55.9% were enrolled by specialists and 44.1% by primary care physicians. Most study patients (80.5%) had moderate-to-severe asthma (86.0% in specialist care and 74.4% in primary care). In the 12 months before study enrolment, 18.0% of patients experienced ≥1 severe exacerbation. Asthma was well or partly controlled in 78.0% of patients. Overall, 17.1% of all patients were overprescribed SABA (≥3 SABA canisters/year) in the preceding 12 months, and overprescription was greater in specialist versus primary care (26.3% vs 5.6%). Only 2.9% of patients were prescribed SABA monotherapy, while 41.0% received SABA in addition to maintenance therapy. Among the latter, 40.5% were overprescribed SABA. Overall, a higher percentage of patients prescribed ≥3 SABA canisters (vs 0-2 SABA canisters) were assessed as having uncontrolled asthma during the study visit (42.9% vs 17.6%). Maintenance therapy in the form of inhaled corticosteroids (ICS) or ICS/long-acting β2 agonist fixed-dose combinations were prescribed to 14.1% and 84.9% of patients, respectively, in the 12 months before enrolment.
    CONCLUSIONS: In this Singapore cohort, ~17% of all patients and more than 40% of patients prescribed SABA in addition to maintenance therapy were overprescribed SABA. These findings emphasise the need to align clinical practices with the latest evidence-based treatment recommendations.
    BACKGROUND: NCT03857178.
    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
    背景:怀孕期间吸烟对未出生的婴儿有害,婴儿和妇女。尼古丁替代疗法(NRT)是英国通常的戒烟支持。然而,这通常是在剂量不足的情况下使用的,间歇性或时间太短而无法有效。这项随机对照试验(RCT)探讨了定制干预措施是否,在怀孕期间分娩,提高对NRT的依从性,对促进戒烟有效且具有成本效益。
    方法:对年龄≥16岁且每天吸烟≥1支(孕前吸烟≥5支)且同意使用NRT尝试戒烟的孕妇进行双臂平行组RCT。招聘来自产前护理机构和社交媒体广告。参与者使用不同块大小的分组随机化进行随机化,按孕龄(<14或≥14周)进行分层,以接受:(1)常规护理(UC)戒烟支持或(2)UC加干预措施以提高对NRT的依从性,叫\'宝贝,我和NRT(BMN),包括依从性咨询,自动定制的短信,传单和网站。主要结果是在分娩时或分娩前后经过生化验证的戒烟,从妊娠36周开始测量。次要结果包括NRT依从性,其他吸烟措施和分娩结果。问卷调查收集由病历信息增强的随访数据。我们预计对照组和干预组的戒烟率为10%和16%,分别(风险比=1.6)。通过招募1320名参与者,试验应有90%的功效(α=5%)来检测这种干预效果.经济分析将使用怀孕期间吸烟的经济学模型来确定成本效益。
    背景:伦理批准由布卢姆斯伯里国家卫生服务研究伦理委员会(21/LO/0123)。将获得所有参与者的书面知情同意书。调查结果将向公众传播,资助者,相关实践/政策代表,研究人员和参与者。
    背景:ISRCTN16830506。
    方法:5.0,2023年10月10日。
    BACKGROUND: Smoking during pregnancy is harmful to unborn babies, infants and women. Nicotine replacement therapy (NRT) is offered as the usual stop-smoking support in the UK. However, this is often used in insufficient doses, intermittently or for too short a time to be effective. This randomised controlled trial (RCT) explores whether a bespoke intervention, delivered in pregnancy, improves adherence to NRT and is effective and cost-effective for promoting smoking cessation.
    METHODS: A two-arm parallel-group RCT was conducted for pregnant women aged ≥16 years and who smoke ≥1 daily cigarette (pre-pregnancy smoked ≥5) and who agree to use NRT in an attempt to quit. Recruitment is from antenatal care settings and via social media adverts. Participants are randomised using blocked randomisation with varying block sizes, stratified by gestational age (<14 or ≥14 weeks) to receive: (1) usual care (UC) for stop smoking support or (2) UC plus an intervention to increase adherence to NRT, called \'Baby, Me and NRT\' (BMN), comprising adherence counselling, automated tailored text messages, a leaflet and website. The primary outcome is biochemically validated smoking abstinence at or around childbirth, measured from 36 weeks gestation. Secondary outcomes include NRT adherence, other smoking measures and birth outcomes. Questionnaires collect follow-up data augmented by medical record information. We anticipate quit rates of 10% and 16% in the control and intervention groups, respectively (risk ratio=1.6). By recruiting 1320 participants, the trial should have 90% power (alpha=5%) to detect this intervention effect. An economic analysis will use the Economics of Smoking in Pregnancy model to determine cost-effectiveness.
    BACKGROUND: Ethics approval was granted by Bloomsbury National Health Service\'s Research Ethics Committee (21/LO/0123). Written informed consent will be obtained from all participants. Findings will be disseminated to the public, funders, relevant practice/policy representatives, researchers and participants.
    BACKGROUND: ISRCTN16830506.
    METHODS: 5.0, 10 Oct 2023.
    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
    背景:慢性阻塞性肺病患者的定期临床回顾为优化管理提供了机会,并在国家和国际指南中被推荐。然而,关于年度审查与护理质量其他方面之间关系的数据有限,这可能会影响医疗保健专业人员和专员的决策。
    方法:使用来自74827名COPD患者的数据,在2014年至2022年期间,我们进行了校正逻辑回归(调整年度),并比较了接受过年度审查的患者(65.3%)和未接受年度审查的患者(34.7%)之间的关键护理项目.为了进一步捕捉患者的体验,我们还分析了2021年英国哮喘+肺脏年度COPD调查对以下问题的4228份自由文本回复:“什么是可以改善您的COPD护理?”
    结果:我们发现,缺乏年度审查与所有研究领域的COPD护理明显恶化有关;吸入器训练(是:80.8%vs否:38.4%,调整后OR(AOR):8.18,95%CI(7.89至8.47),有书面护理计划(89.6%和56.9%,AOR6.68(95%CI6.35至7.05)和药物知识(72.6%vs33.6%,AOR5.73(95%CI5.51至5.96)。对2021年COPD调查回应的主题分析确定了改善护理的三个领域:(1)医疗服务的获取和支持,(2)改善治疗效果,(3)COPD与社会环境的相互作用。
    结论:未能进行年度COPD综述与患者报告的护理质量较差相关。并行,COPD患者表示希望获得更多支持和获得医疗保健服务.
    BACKGROUND: Regular clinical reviews of people with COPD provide an opportunity to optimise management and are recommended in national and international guidelines. However, there are limited data about the relationship between having an annual review and other aspects of care quality, which might influence decision-making by healthcare professionals and commissioners.
    METHODS: Using data from 74 827 people with COPD completing the Asthma+Lung UK COPD Patient Passport, between 2014 and 2022, we conducted adjusted logistic regression (adjusting for year) and compared receipt of key items of care between those reporting that they had had an annual review (65.3%) and those who did not (34.7%). To further capture patient experience, we also analysed 4228 free-text responses to the 2021 Asthma+Lung UK annual COPD survey to the question \'What is the one thing that could improve your COPD care?\'
    RESULTS: We found that the absence of an annual review was associated with significantly worse COPD care across all domains studied; in particular, inhaler training (yes: 80.8% vs no: 38.4%, adjusted OR (AOR): 8.18, 95% CI (7.89 to 8.47), having a written care plan (89.6% vs 56.9%, AOR 6.68 (95% CI 6.35 to 7.05) and medication knowledge (72.6% vs 33.6%, AOR 5.73 (95% CI 5.51 to 5.96). Thematic analysis of the 2021 COPD survey responses identified three areas to improve care: (1) access and support from healthcare services, (2) improved treatment effectiveness and (3) interaction between COPD and the social environment.
    CONCLUSIONS: Failure to deliver annual COPD reviews is associated with worse patient-reported experience of care quality. In parallel, people with COPD express a desire for greater support and access to healthcare services.
    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
    目的:吸入性糖皮质激素/长效β2激动剂(ICS/LABA)治疗慢性阻塞性肺疾病(COPD)与单药治疗相比,改善肺功能和健康状况,降低COPD加重风险。这项研究描述了治疗用途,医疗保健资源利用(HCCU),开始单设备ICS/LABA作为初始维持治疗(IMT)后的医疗保健成本和结果。
    方法:回顾性队列研究。
    方法:初级保健,英格兰。
    方法:关联数据来自临床实践研究数据链Aurum和医院事件统计数据集。
    方法:纳入了2015年7月至2018年12月期间患有COPD和≥1个单一设备ICS/LABA处方的患者。
    方法:治疗途径,与COPD相关的HCCU和医疗保健费用,COPD加重,三联疗法的时间,药物依从性(覆盖天数比例≥80%)和至停药的指数化治疗时间.在12个月的随访期内评估了没有先前维持治疗史的患者(IMT使用者)和非三重使用者的数据。
    结果:在13451个ICS/LABA新用户中,5162是IMT用户(布地奈德/福莫特罗,n=1056;二丙酸倍氯米松/福莫特罗,n=2427;其他ICS/LABA,n=1679),对于那些在指数后3个月和12个月,45.6%和39.4%仍接受任何ICS/LABA。在>6至≤12个月时,与3个月时相比,住院时间≥1次的IMT使用者比例(10.1%)和住院时间≥1次的IMT使用者比例(12.6%)有所增加(9.0%和7.4%,分别)。住院患者对COPD相关医疗总费用的贡献最大。对于非三重IMT用户,在指数后3个月和12个月,4.5%和13.7%的患者有≥1次中重度COPD加重。三联疗法开始的时间和指示药物停药的时间在治疗之间为45.9至50.2个月和2.3至2.8个月。所有时间点的依从性都很低(21.5-27.6%)。不同索引疗法的结果相似。
    结论:在治疗开始后的一年,ICS/LABA依从性差,许多患者停止或转换治疗,提示在英格兰,对于开始单装置ICS/LABA治疗的患者,需要更多的考虑和优化治疗.
    Management of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) with inhaled corticosteroid/long-acting β2-agonist (ICS/LABA) improves lung function and health status and reduces COPD exacerbation risk versus monotherapy. This study described treatment use, healthcare resource utilisation (HCRU), healthcare costs and outcomes following initiation of single-device ICS/LABA as initial maintenance therapy (IMT).
    Retrospective cohort study.
    Primary care, England.
    Linked data from the Clinical Practice Research Datalink Aurum and Hospital Episode Statistics datasets.
    Patients with COPD and ≥1 single-device ICS/LABA prescription between July 2015 and December 2018 were included.
    Treatment pathways, COPD-related HCRU and healthcare costs, COPD exacerbations, time to triple therapy, medication adherence (proportion of days covered ≥80%) and indexed treatment time to discontinuation. Data for patients without prior maintenance therapy history (IMT users) and non-triple users were assessed over a 12-month follow-up period.
    Of 13 451 new ICS/LABA users, 5162 were IMT users (budesonide/formoterol, n=1056; beclomethasone dipropionate/formoterol, n=2427; other ICS/LABA, n=1679), for whom at 3 and 12 months post-index, 45.6% and 39.4% were still receiving any ICS/LABA. At >6 to ≤12 months, the proportion of IMT users with ≥1 outpatient visit (10.1%) and proportion with ≥1 inpatient stay (12.6%) had increased from those at 3 months (9.0% and 7.4%, respectively). Inpatient stays contributed most to total COPD-related healthcare costs. For non-triple IMT users, at 3 and 12 months post-index, 4.5% and 13.7% had ≥1 moderate-to-severe COPD exacerbation. Time to triple therapy initiation and time to discontinuation of index medication ranged from 45.9 to 50.2 months and 2.3 to 2.8 months between treatments. Adherence was low across all time points (21.5-27.6%). Results were similar across indexed therapies.
    In the year following treatment initiation, ICS/LABA adherence was poor and many patients discontinued or switched therapies, suggesting that more consideration and optimisation of treatment is required in England for patients initiating single-device ICS/LABA therapy.
    导出

    更多引用

    收藏

    翻译标题摘要

    我要上传

       PDF(Pubmed)

公众号