RESUMO
BACKGROUND: Acute exacerbations of asthma are common in children, however, treatment decisions for severe exacerbations are challenging due to a lack of robust evidence. In order to create more robust research, a core set of outcome measures needs to be developed. In developing these outcomes, it is important to understand the views of clinicians who care for these children in particular, views that relate to outcome measures and research priorities. METHODS: To determine the views of clinicians, a total of 26 semistructured interviews based on the theoretical domains framework were conducted. These included experienced clinicians from emergency, intensive care and inpatient paediatrics across 17 countries. The interviews were recorded, and later transcribed. All data analyses were conducted in Nvivo by using thematic analysis. RESULTS: The length of stay in hospital and patient-focused parameters, such as timing to return to school and normal activity, were the most frequently highlighted outcome measures, with clinicians identifying the need to achieve a consensus on key core outcome measure sets. Most research questions focused on understanding the best treatment options, including the role of novel therapies and respiratory support. CONCLUSION: Our study provides an insight into what research questions and outcome measures clinicians view as important. In addition, information on how clinicians define asthma severity and measure treatment success will assist with methodological design in future trials. The current findings will be used in parallel with a further Paediatric Emergency Research Network study focusing on the child and family perspectives and will contribute to develop a core outcome set for future research.
Assuntos
Asma , Humanos , Criança , Asma/terapia , Internacionalidade , Consenso , Pesquisa Qualitativa , Avaliação de Resultados em Cuidados de SaúdeRESUMO
OBJECTIVE: To determine the variability of primary and secondary outcomes used in trials of intravenous bronchodilators in children with acute severe paediatric asthma. METHODS: Systematic search of MEDLINE, EMBASE, Cochrane CENTRAL and the WHO International Clinical Trials Registry Platform for randomised trials in children (less than18 years) with acute severe paediatric asthma comparing intravenous bronchodilator therapy to another treatment. Initial search was performed on 7 January 2016 with an updated search performed on 6 September 2018. Primary and secondary outcomes were collated. RESULTS: We identified 35 published papers and four registered study protocols. 56 primary outcomes were found, the most common being a clinical asthma score (23/56; 41%). Other identified primary outcomes included bedside tests of respiratory function (11/56; 20%) and measures of length of stay (9/56; 16%). There were a total of 60 different secondary outcomes, the most common were various length of stay measures (24/60; 40%) and adverse events (11/60; 18%). CONCLUSION: Studies comparing intravenous treatment modalities for children with acute severe paediatric asthma exhibit great variation in the type, number and timing of outcome measures used. There are no patient or family-specific outcomes reported. There is a need to develop international consensus. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: CRD42017055331.