Early administration of corticosteroids in emergency room treatment of acute asthma. Use of an 'evidence-based implementation' strategy to implement evidence-based care of asthma into rural district hospital emergency departments. A randomized, controlled study to evaluate the role of an in-home asthma disease management program provided by respiratory therapists in improving outcomes and reducing the cost of care. Asthma at the interface: bridging the gap between general practice and a district general hospital. Cost effectiveness of leukotriene receptor antagonists versus long-acting beta-2 agonists as add-on therapy to inhaled corticosteroids for asthma: a pragmatic trial. A controlled trial of methylprednisolone in the early emergency department treatment of acute asthma in children. Response profiles to fluticasone and montelukast in mild-to-moderate persistent childhood asthma. Intravenous aminophylline confers no benefit in acute asthma treated with intravenous steroids and inhaled bronchodilators. [Intravenous infusion of reproterol (a beta-2-mimetic agent) in the therapy of severe asthma attacks in childhood].
To determine the effect of early administration of high-dose intravenous corticosteroids on duration of emergency room treatment and hospital admission rate in patients with acute asthma.
                Randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial.
                The emergency room of a large, urban hospital with primary and referral care responsibilities.
                Eighty-one patients from 18 to 45 years of age with acute bronchial asthma and without pneumonitis or other serious underlying illnesses were studied on 91 occasions and were randomly assigned to control or experimental groups.
                The steroid group received 125 mg of intravenous methylprednisolone whereas the control group received intravenous normal saline 30 minutes after initial treatment. Additional treatment included aerosolized metaproterenol and oral theophylline therapy. Six hours after study entry, remaining patients were treated with 40 mg of intravenous methylprednisolone. Hospitalization was mandatory if total treatment time was greater than 12 hours.
                Age, sex, peak expiratory flow at entry, and prevalence of recent corticosteroids use were similar in both groups. Duration of emergency room treatment was 6.7 +/- 4.2 (SD) hours in the steroid group and 6.3 +/- 4.1 hours in the control group (P = 0.66). Hospitalization was necessary in 18% (95% CI, 7% to 30%) of the steroid group and in 13% (CI, 3% to 22%) of the control group. Frequency of return visits for acute asthma 2 days after emergency room discharge was 11% (CI, -1% to 22%) in the steroid group and 13% (CI, 2% to 23%) in the control group.
                These results fail to show any benefit for early administration of corticosteroids in patients with acute asthma. Routine administration of corticosteroids on initial presentation in such patients may not be warranted. To determine if an evidence-based implementation (EBI) could lead to the successful implementation of evidence based care for adult asthma in small rural district hospitals.
                A controlled trial involving eight small rural hospitals (four each in the study and control groups) was conducted. Retrospective pre-intervention audits were conducted at all eight hospitals for 7 months (1 January 2004 to 31 July 2004) and evidence-practice gaps identified. An EBI was then used to implement established guidelines for the management of asthma in the study hospitals. Post-intervention audits were then performed over a period of 7 months (1 October 2004 to 31 April 2005).
                There were 52 presentations of asthma in the study hospitals in the pre-implementation phase and 47 post-implementation. The corresponding numbers for the control hospitals were 46 and 42 respectively. There were no statistically significant differences in the severity between the groups. Following the EBI there were significant improvements at the study hospitals for the documentation of severity (8% to 62%, p <0.001), use of spirometry (12% to 62%, p <0.001) and the use of written short-term asthma plans (9% to 26%, p = 0.05). There was a decrease in use of ipratropium in mild asthma (44% to 30%, p = 0.228), an increase in the use of systemic steroids (61% to 72%, p = 0.255) and no change in prescribing antibiotics for afebrile patients with asthma (21% to 21% p = 0.956). There was no significant change in practice at the control hospitals except for a decrease in the use of systemic steroids (48% to 21%, p = 0.011). For the six clinical indicators aggregate there was a significant increase in compliance with guidelines at the study hospitals (36% to 62%, p < 0.001) but no change at the control hospitals (31% to 31%, p = 0.970).
                The pre-intervention audits demonstrated low levels of compliance with asthma guidelines across six clinical indicators. An EBI significantly improved compliance across these six indicators, and no improvement was noted in the control hospitals. This study demonstrates that an EBI can alter clinical practice in small rural district hospitals. Asthma management programs (AMP) may reduce costs and improve outcomes in patients with moderate to severe asthma. However, it is not known which personnel are best able to deliver such interventions and what settings are most effective. The purpose of this study was to compare the effects of an in-home AMP provided by respiratory therapists (RTs) to an AMP provided by nurses (RNs) and to usual care (UC) provided in physician offices or clinics.
                Subjects (age 18-64) who had been admitted to the emergency department (ED) or hospital for acute asthma exacerbation were randomized to three groups: AMP-RT, AMP-RN or UC. The AMP groups received five (5) weekly home visits to provide assessment and instruction; the UC group was instructed to return to their physician for routine follow-up. Outcomes assessed at 6 months included hospitalizations, in patient days, hospitalization cost, ED visits and cost, clinic visits, pulmonary function, symptoms, health related quality of life (HRQOL), asthma episode self-management score (AESM), environmental assessment, and patient satisfaction (PS). Variables were compared using ANOVA with a Neuman-Keuls follow-up for multiple comparisons using an intent-to-treat approach.
                Upon enrollment, (n = 159) there were no differences (p > .05) between groups for age, gender, pulmonary function or HRQOL (SF-36 and St. Georges Respiratory Questionnaire - SGRQ). At 6 months, both AMP groups (AMP-RN n = 54; AMP-RT n = 46) had significantly fewer (p < 0.05) hospitalizations and in-patient days, lower hospitalization costs, and greater HRQOL physical component summary change scores (PCS) and PS than UC (n = 59). AMP-RT also had greater PEFR, SGRQ Total and SGRQ Symptoms change scores when compared to UC and significantly better AESM and PS scores as compared to AMP-RN and UC.
                An in-home asthma management program can be effectively delivered by respiratory therapists and may reduce hospitalizations, in-patient days, cost and improve measures of HRQOL and PS in a population prone to asthma exacerbation. A clinic supervised by a nurse, using principles originally developed in general practice, was established in the paediatric department of a district general hospital. A randomised controlled study was conducted comparing children admitted with asthma or attending outpatients who were given a patient education programme and self management plan (intervention group) with a control group. The study comprised 91 patients aged 3-14 years admitted for asthma or attending a hospital outpatient department from November 1989 to November 1990. Seventy seven patients completed the study and kept diaries for a median of 283 days. Patients in the intervention group had significantly less restriction of activity (95% confidence interval (CI) -0.27 to -0.01) and fewer episodes of peak flow below 30% of best (95% CI 0.03 to 1.17). Patients in the intervention group were more likely to make the correct response to an acute exacerbation of their asthma than the control group (71% v 47%, 95% CI 9.51 to 39.1). The intervention group had fewer school absences and fewer home visits by a general practitioner. There was an increase in the readmission rate for the intervention group. A subgroup of patients who self managed by doubling their use of inhaled steroids during an exacerbation performed better than those patients who only increased their bronchodilator or were managed on salbutamol or sodium cromoglycate alone. Improvements in patient follow up and the structure of the self management plans used, particularly changing the peak flow level at which inhaled steroids are doubled, may further improve the outcome of patients attending the asthma clinic. Information is lacking on the relative effectiveness and cost effectiveness--in a real-life primary-care setting--of leukotriene receptor antagonists (LTRAs) and long-acting beta2 adrenergic receptor agonists (beta2 agonists) as add-on therapy for patients whose asthma symptoms are not controlled on low-dose inhaled corticosteroids (ICS).
                To estimate the cost effectiveness of LTRAs compared with long-acting beta2 agonists as add-on therapy for patients whose asthma symptoms are not controlled on low-dose ICS.
                An economic evaluation was conducted alongside a 2-year, pragmatic, randomized controlled trial set in 53 primary-care practices in the UK. Patients aged 12-80 years with asthma insufficiently controlled with ICS (n = 361) were randomly assigned to add-on LTRAs (n = 176) or long-acting beta2 agonists (n = 185). The main outcome measures were the incremental cost per point improvement in the Mini Asthma Quality of Life Questionnaire (MiniAQLQ), per point improvement in the Asthma Control Questionnaire (ACQ) and per QALY gained from perspectives of the UK NHS and society.
                Over 2 years, the societal cost per patient receiving LTRAs was pounds sterling 1157 versus pounds sterling 952 for long-acting beta2 agonists, a (significant, adjusted) increase of pounds sterling 214 (95% CI 2, 411) [year 2005 values]. Patients receiving LTRAs experienced a non-significant incremental gain of 0.009 QALYs (95% CI -0.077, 0.103). The incremental cost per QALY gained from the societal (NHS) perspective was pounds sterling 22,589 (pounds sterling 11,919). Uncertainty around this point estimate suggested that, given a maximum willingness to pay of pounds sterling 30,000 per QALY gained, the probability that LTRAs are a cost-effective alternative to long-acting beta2 agonists as add-on therapy was approximately 52% from both societal and NHS perspectives.
                On balance, these results marginally favour the repositioning of LTRAs as a cost-effective alternative to long-acting beta2 agonists as add-on therapy to ICS for asthma. However, there is much uncertainty surrounding the incremental cost effectiveness because of similarity of clinical benefit and broad confidence intervals for differences in healthcare costs.
                UK National Research Register N0547145240; Controlled Clinical Trials ISRCTN99132811. Asthma continues to be a leading cause for pediatric hospitalizations. A study using high-dose intravenous (i.v.) steroids early in the emergency department (ED) care of adults with acute asthma reported a 60% reduction in hospitalization rate. Limited data are available for children. We hypothesized that the addition of early administration of high-dose methylprednisolone (MP) in routine ED care of asthmatic children would reduce the need for hospitalization by 50%. Eighty-eight children with asthma, aged four to 18 years, were enrolled into a prospective, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled study of MP given within 45 (mean 23) minutes of arrival to the ED. After initial evaluation, children received either 2 mg/kg of MP IV or an equivalent amount of placebo (P). Patients then received the usual ED management of their acute exacerbation. Groups were similar in age, sex, and severity of illness (by asthma scoring, respiratory rate, and peak flow). ED treatment (number of aerosols and the use of theophylline) was similar for both groups. The mean time to disposition was 2.9 hours. Sixty-four percent of the children were discharged from the ED. No significant differences were found between the admission rates of the MP and P groups (41% MP vs 33% P, P = 0.44, chi 2, 95% CI for decrease in MP vs P groups -28 to +12%). The average hospital stay was shorter for those children treated with MP (79 hours vs 90 hours). We conclude that IV methylprednisolone given as an adjunct to routine ED care of children with acute asthma is unlikely to markedly reduce hospitalization rates. Outcome data are needed to base recommendations for controller asthma medication use in school-aged children.
                We sought to determine intraindividual and interindividual response profiles and predictors of response to an inhaled corticosteroid (ICS) and a leukotriene receptor antagonist (LTRA).
                An ICS, fluticasone propionate (100 mug twice daily), and an LTRA, montelukast (5-10 mg nightly, age dependent), were administered to children ages 6 to 17 years with mild-to-moderate persistent asthma using only as-needed bronchodilators in a multicenter, double-masked, 2-sequence, 16-week crossover trial. Clinical, pulmonary, and inflammatory responses to these controllers were evaluated.
                Improvements in most clinical asthma control measures occurred with both controllers. However, clinical outcomes (asthma control days [ACDs], the validated Asthma Control Questionnaire, and albuterol use), pulmonary responses (FEV(1)/forced vital capacity, peak expiratory flow variability, morning peak expiratory flow, and measures of impedance), and inflammatory biomarkers (exhaled nitric oxide [eNO]) improved significantly more with fluticasone than with montelukast treatment. eNO was both a predictor of ACDs (P = .011) and a response indicator (P = .003) in discriminating the difference in ACD response between fluticasone and montelukast.
                The more favorable clinical, pulmonary, and inflammatory responses to an ICS than to an LTRA provide pediatric-based group evidence to support ICSs as the preferred first-line therapy for mild-to-moderate persistent asthma in children. eNO, as a predictor of response, might help to identify individual children not receiving controller medication who achieve a greater improvement in ACDs with an ICS compared with an LTRA. The role of intravenous aminophylline in acute asthma is unclear despite meta-analysis of many studies comparing aminophylline with other bronchodilator therapies.
                The aim of this study is to determine whether continuous aminophylline infusion confers any benefit in acute severe asthmatics treated with intravenous steroids and inhaled bronchodilators.
                The study was randomised, double-blind and placebo-controlled. All patients received nebulised salbutamol (1 mL of 0.5%) and ipratropium bromide (1 mL of 0.025%) with glycol diluent (1 mL) at 0, two, four, six, eight and 12 hours, and six-hourly thereafter. In addition all patients were given intravenous hydrocortisone 250 mg six-hourly and oxygen to maintain normoxia. Aminophylline infusions were adjusted to maintain therapeutic levels. Peak expiratory flow rate (PEFR) was measured before and after nebulised bronchodilator on a two-hourly basis in the Emergency Department (ED) and six-hourly on the inpatient wards.
                Thirty-one patients were clinically sufficiently improved within 12 hours to be discharged home from the ED. The remaining 28 patients were admitted to the inpatient ward for a total trial duration of 48 hours. No significant difference was found between the placebo and treatment groups for measurements of PEFR, or for the duration of stay of the patients in hospital. The power of the study was 80% for a 25% to 33% difference at a 5% level of significance. Presentation values of PEFR and arterial blood gases did not predict which patients would require inpatient admission and which could be safely discharged home from the ED. 20 children (age range 0.8-14.7 years) with acute severe asthma were alternately randomized to receive one of two different treatment regimes. 10 children (control-group) received Salbutamol inhalation (75 micrograms/kg in 2 ml Saline every two hours). 10 children (reproterol-group) received reproterol infusion (0.2-2.0 micrograms/kg/min in Saline) and inhaled Saline only. Other therapy regimen were identical in both groups: Theophylline infusion, i.v. Prednisolone, adequate fluids intake and oxygen insufflation. Age, severity and maintenance therapy of asthma, and severity of the acute episode, were not significantly different in both groups. Treatment efficacy, assessed with a simple clinical score, the heart and respiratory rates, the peak expiratory flow (PEF) and the blood gases, was comparable in both groups. Side effects, i.e. tachycardia, blood pressure changes and tremor, were also similar and clinically not relevant in both groups. In two children, who previously needed repeated mechanical ventilation, severe respiratory failure could be successfully controlled only when the reproterol dose was raised 10 folds (2.0 micrograms/kg/min). Reproterol infusion can be recommended in children with acute severe asthma, who do not respond satisfactorily to current therapy regimen, particularly in children who previously experienced numerous intubations.
Presently, the available evidence does not support routine use of oral LTRAs in acute asthma. Further studies are required to assess whether intravenous treatment can reduce the risk of hospital admission, and what the most appropriate dose regimen is. Additional research is also needed into safety and efficacy of additional doses for those on maintenance therapy, and larger paediatric trials are required to allow subgroup analysis. Prolonged studies would be required to establish other health economic outcomes in admitted patients.