Beta2-agonists for acute bronchitis
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
BACKGROUND: The optimal treatment for acute bronchitis is not clear. Because many patients with acute bronchitis have airflow limitation as well as cough, beta2-agonists may be useful. OBJECTIVES: To determine whether beta2-agonists improve the symptoms of acute bronchitis in patients who do not have underlying pulmonary disease. SEARCH STRATEGY: The Cochrane Library (through August 2000), MEDLINE (1966 to 2000), EMBASE (1974 to 2000), and Conference Proceedings using "bronchodilator (exp)", "adrenergic beta-agonist (exp)", or "sympathomimetics (exp)" and "bronchitis" or "cough"; Science Citation Index for referenced publications; and letters to manufacturers of beta2-agonists. An updated search of the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) (issue 3, 2003); MEDLINE (January 2000 to July 2003); EMBASE (January 2000 to July 2003) was run in July 2003. SELECTION CRITERIA: Trials in which patients (adults or children over two years of age) without known pulmonary disease who were diagnosed with acute bronchitis or acute cough without other cause were randomized to beta2-agonist versus placebo, no treatment, or alternative treatment. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Three reviewers independently first selected outcomes and evaluated trial quality while blinded to study results, and then extracted data. Trials in children and in adults were analyzed separately. MAIN RESULTS: Two trials in children (n = 109) with acute cough and no evidence of airway obstruction did not find any benefits from beta2-agonists. Combined data did not show a significant difference in daily cough scores between patients given oral beta2-agonists and those in the control groups. Five trials in adults (n = 418) with acute cough or acute bronchitis had mixed results, but overall summary statistics did not reveal any significant benefits from oral (three trials) nor inhaled (two trials) beta2-agonists. There were no significant differences in daily cough scores nor in the number of patients still coughing after seven days (control rate 73%; RR = 0.77, 95% CI 0.54-1.09). Subgroups of patients with evidence of airflow limitation had lower symptom scores if given beta2-agonists in one trial; and the trials that did note quicker resolution of cough in patients given beta2-agonists were those that had a higher proportion of patients with wheezing at baseline. Patients given beta2-agonists were more likely to report tremor, shakiness, or nervousness than patients in the control groups (for trials in children control rate 0%; RR 6.76, 95% CI 0.86 to 53.12, NNH 9, 95% CI 5 to 100; for trials in adults, control rate 11%; RR 7.94, 95% CI 1.17 to 53.94, NNH 2.3, 95% CI 2 to 3). REVIEWER'S CONCLUSIONS: There is no evidence to support using beta2-agonists in children with acute cough who do not have evidence of airflow obstruction. There is also little evidence that the routine use of beta2-agonists for adults with acute cough is helpful. These agents may reduce symptoms, including cough, in patients with evidence of airflow obstruction; but this potential benefit is not well-supported by the available data and must be weighed against the adverse effects associated with beta2-agonists.
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 distillée sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.
Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,010 | 0,006 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,002 | 0,002 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,033 | 0,006 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Communication savante | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Science ouverte | 0,003 | 0,000 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,000 | 0,014 |
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; les deux têtes enseignantes s’accordent sur ce qui est montré ici.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».