Early use of inhaled corticosteroids in the emergency department treatment of acute asthma
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
BACKGROUND: Systemic corticosteroid therapy is central to the management of acute asthma The use of ICS may also be beneficial in this setting. OBJECTIVES: To determine the benefit of ICS for the treatment of patients with acute asthma managed in the emergency department (ED). SEARCH STRATEGY: Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) were identified from the Cochrane Airways Review Group register. Bibliographies from included studies, known reviews, and texts also were searched. SELECTION CRITERIA: Only RCTs or quasi-randomised trials were eligible for inclusion. Studies were included if patients presented with acute asthma to the ED or its equivalent, and were treated with ICS or placebo, in addition to standard therapy. Two reviewers independently selected potentially relevant articles, and then independently selected articles for inclusion. Methodological quality was independently assessed by two reviewers. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Data were extracted independently by two reviewers if the authors were unable to verify the validity of extracted information. Missing data were obtained from the authors or calculated from other data presented in the paper. MAIN RESULTS: Seven trials were selected for inclusion, but data were not available for one of them. In the six usable trials, (4 adult, 2 paediatric), a total of 352 patients were studied (179 ICS, 173 non-ICS treated). Patients treated with ICS were less likely to be admitted to hospital (OR: 0.33; 95% CI: 0.17, 0.64). This benefit was confined to patients not receiving concomitant systemic steroids (CS). Patients receiving concomitant CS showed a similar, but non-significant, trend towards reduced admissions compared to placebo treatment (OR 0.45; 95% CI: 0.18, 1.14). Patients receiving ICS also demonstrated small, significant improvements in peak expiratory flows (PEFR WMD: 8%; 95% CI: 3, 13 %) and forced expiratory volumes (FEV1 WMD: 5%; 95% CI: 0.4, 10 %). The treatment was well tolerated, with few reported adverse side effects. A secondary analysis compared ICS alone vs CS alone; in the four trials included, there was significant heterogeneity between the study results for admission rates which precluded meaningful pooling of the study results. REVIEWER'S CONCLUSIONS: Inhaled steroids reduced admission rates in patients with acute asthma, but it is unclear if there is a benefit of ICS when used in addition to systemic corticosteroids. There is insufficient evidence that ICS therapy results in clinically important changes in pulmonary function or clinical scores when used in acute asthma. Similarly, there is insufficient evidence that ICS alone is as effective as CS. Further research is needed to clarify if there is a benefit of ICS when used in addition to CS.
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction machine sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Le volet Gemma est une étiquette directe du modèle pour chaque travail de la base, lue sur la notice réduite au titre. Le volet Codex est un classifieur appris des 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et calibré sur les taux pondérés de l'échantillon; les champs sans appui suffisant ne portent aucun appel Codex. Le mode candidate est l'union des deux volets; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont pas des étiquettes humaines.
Scores du classifieur distillé par catégorie (deux têtes)
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,012 | 0,041 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,006 | 0,005 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,003 | 0,003 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,000 | 0,001 |
| Communication savante | 0,002 | 0,001 |
| Science ouverte | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,002 | 0,002 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,004 | 0,000 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule source (Gemma direct ou Codex distillé), pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».