Utilization of Inhaled Corticosteroids by Hospital Patients with Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease, with a Review and Update on the Current Literature
Bibliographic record
Abstract
ABSTRACT Objective: To review the evidence-based literature on the role of inhaled corticosteroids (ICS) in the management of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) and to assess the utilization of ICS in patients admitted to hospital with exacerbations of COPD. Methods: A MEDLINE search with the terms “chronic obstructive pulmonary disease”, “COPD management”, “inhaled corticosteroids”, and “inhaled steroids” was conducted for the period 1978 to 2003, to assess the published evidence for ICS therapy. A chart review of inpatients with a diagnosis of COPD exacerbation was conducted for the 13-month period January 1, 2000, to January 31, 2001. Results: The literature review identified some weaknesses in the published evidence. Patients have not always been treated optimally with bronchodilators, and different outcomes have been measured in different trials. Recent trials have shown a reduction in exacerbations, and there is probably a subpopulation that would benefit from ICS. A total of 103 patients (46 men and 57 women) were identified for the chart review. Fifty-one (50%) of these patients had a prescription for ICS. However, bronchodilator therapy was optimized for only 13 (27%) of 49 ICS users. Exsmokers receiving specialist care were more likely to be receiving an ICS. They were also more likely to be receiving oral theophylline, although no other historical or clinical factor leading to institution of ICS therapy could be identified. Fluticasone (28 patients or 55% of those receiving ICS therapy) was the most frequently prescribed ICS. Spirometry results were documented for only 77 patients (75%). Conclusions: Although smoking cessation and initiation of home oxygen therapy are the only accepted evidence-based diseasemodifying therapies for COPD, there has been a recent focus on adjuvant treatment with ICS as a disease-modifying therapy, in particular to prevent or reduce exacerbations. The literature review suggested that therapy for COPD should be encouraged and should adhere to recent national guidelines. Bronchodilation should be optimized — with focus on compliance, inhaler tech-nique, and optimal therapy with short-acting anticholinergics, s2-agonists, or long-acting agents — before addition of ICS therapy is considered. Cost-effectiveness trials, along with consideration of advances in therapy, are necessary to identify the COPD patients most likely to benefit from ICS therapy. RESUME Objectif : Examiner le role des corticosteroides en inhalation (CSI) dans le traitement de bronchopneumopathie chronique obstructive (BPCO) a partir d’une revue de la litterature sur les donnees fondees sur les resultats et evaluer l’utilisation des CSI chez les patients hospitalises pour l’exacerbation de leur BPCO. Methodes : On a effectue des recherches dans MEDLINE a l’aide des termes anglais « chronic obstructive pulmonary disease », « COPD management », « inhaled corticosteroids » et « inhaled steroids » pour la periode s’echelonnant de 1978 a 2003, pour evaluer les donnees publiees sur le traitement par les CSI. On a evalue les dossiers des patients hospitalises pour l’exacerbation de leur BPCO, pendant une periode de treize mois s’echelonnant du 1er janvier 2000 au 31 janvier 2001. Resultats : L’examen de la litterature a revele certaines faiblesses. En effet, les patients n’ont pas toujours recu le traitement bronchodilatateur optimal, et differents resultats ont ete mesures dans divers essais. En revanche, de recentes etudes ont montre une reduction des exacerbations, et il semble y avoir une sous-population qui pourrait beneficier des CSI. Au total, les dossiers medicaux de 103 patients (46 hommes et 57 femmes) ont ete retenus pour evaluation. De ces patients, 51 (50 %) avaient recu une prescription de CSI. Toutefois, le traitement bronchodilatateur n’a ete optimise que pour 13 (27 %) des 49 utilisateurs de CSI. Les anciens fumeurs soignes par un specialiste etaient plus susceptibles de recevoir des CSI. Ils etaient aussi plus susceptibles de recevoir de la theophylline par voie orale, malgre qu’aucun autre facteur historique ou clinique commandant l’instauration du traitement par les CSI n’ait pu etre identifie. Le fluticasone etait le CSI le plus prescrit (28 ou 55 % des patients recevant des CSI). Les resultats de la spirometrie n’ont ete documentes que chez 77 patients (75 %). Conclusions : Bien que l’arret du tabagisme et l’instauration de l’oxygenotherapie a domicile soient les seuls traitements de fond reconnus contre la BPCO qui sont fondes sur les resultats, on a accorde recemment de l’interet au traitement adjuvant par les CSI comme traitement modificateur de cette maladie, plus particulierement pour en prevenir ou en reduire les exacerbations. L’analyse de la litterature porte a croire que le traitement des BPCO doit etre encourage et conforme aux recentes lignes directrices nationales. Le traitement bronchodilatateur doit etre optimise — en portant un interet particulier a l’observance, aux methodes d’inhalation et au traitement par les anticholinergiques a action rapide, les beta-agonistes ou les agents a liberation prolongee — avant d’envisager l’ajout d’un CSI. Des etudes coutefficacite et l’examen des avancees therapeutiques sont necessaires pour determiner les patients atteints de BPCO qui sont le plus susceptible de beneficier d’un traitement par les CSI.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.008 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.010 | 0.013 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".