Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Mostrar: 20 | 50 | 100
Resultados 1 - 20 de 77
Filtrar
1.
BMJ Open ; 11(2): e040528, 2021 Feb 05.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-33550231

RESUMEN

INTRODUCTION: Asthma affects millions of children worldwide-1.1 million children in the UK. Asthma symptoms cannot be cured but can be controlled with low-dose inhaled corticosteroids (ICSs) in the majority of individuals. Treatment with a low-dose ICS, however, fails to control asthma symptoms in around 10%-15% of children and this places the individual at increased risk for an asthma attack. At present, there is no clear preferred treatment option for a child whose asthma is not controlled by low-dose ICS and international guidelines currently recommend at least three treatment options. Herein, we propose a systematic review and individual participant data network meta-analysis (IPD-NMA) aiming to synthesise all available published and unpublished evidence from randomised controlled trials (RCTs) to establish the clinical effectiveness of pharmacological treatments in children and adolescents with uncontrolled asthma on ICS and help to make evidence-informed treatment choices. This will be used to parameterise a Markov-based economic model to assess the cost-effectiveness of alternative treatment options in order to inform decisions in the context of drug formularies and clinical guidelines. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: We will search in MEDLINE, the Cochrane Library, the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), Embase, NICE Technology Appraisals and the National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) Health Technology Assessment series for RCTs of interventions in patients with uncontrolled asthma on ICS. All studies where children and adolescents were eligible for inclusion will be considered, and authors or sponsors will be contacted to request IPD on patients aged <18. The reference lists of existing clinical guidelines, along with included studies and relevant reviews, will be checked to identify further relevant studies. Unpublished studies will be located by searching across a range of clinical trial registries, including internal trial registers for pharmaceutical companies. All studies will be appraised for inclusion against predefined inclusion and exclusion criteria by two independent reviewers with disagreements resolved through discussion with a third reviewer. We will perform an IPD-NMA-eventually supplemented with aggregate data for the RCTs without IPD-to establish both the probability that a treatment is best and the probability that a particular treatment is most likely to be effective for a specific profile of the patient. The IPD-NMA will be performed for each outcome variable within a Bayesian framework, using the WinBUGS software. Also, potential patient-level characteristics that may modify treatment effects will be explored, which represents one of the strengths of this study. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: The Committee on Research Ethics, University of Liverpool, has confirmed that ethics review is not required. The dissemination plan consists of publishing the results in an open-access medical journal, a plain-language summary available for parents and children, dissemination via local, national and international meetings and conferences and the press offices of our Higher Education Institutions (HEIs). A synopsis of results will be disseminated to NICE and British Thoracic Society/Scottish Intercollegiate Guidelines Network (SIGN) as highly relevant to future clinical guideline updates. PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER: CRD42019127599.

2.
Cochrane Database Syst Rev ; 12: CD010966, 2020 12 17.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-33331662

RESUMEN

BACKGROUND: Cystic fibrosis (CF) is a common life-shortening genetic condition caused by a variant in the cystic fibrosis transmembrane conductance regulator (CFTR) protein. A class II CFTR variant F508del (found in up to 90% of people with CF (pwCF)) is the commonest CF-causing variant. The faulty protein is degraded before reaching the cell membrane, where it needs to be to effect transepithelial salt transport. The F508del variant lacks meaningful CFTR function and corrective therapy could benefit many pwCF. Therapies in this review include single correctors and any combination of correctors and potentiators. OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the effects of CFTR correctors (with or without potentiators) on clinically important benefits and harms in pwCF of any age with class II CFTR mutations (most commonly F508del). SEARCH METHODS: We searched the Cochrane Cystic Fibrosis and Genetic Disorders Cystic Fibrosis Trials Register, reference lists of relevant articles and online trials registries. Most recent search: 14 October 2020. SELECTION CRITERIA: Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) (parallel design) comparing CFTR correctors to control in pwCF with class II mutations. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two authors independently extracted data, assessed risk of bias and evidence quality (GRADE); we contacted investigators for additional data. MAIN RESULTS: We included 19 RCTs (2959 participants), lasting between 1 day and 24 weeks; an extension of two lumacaftor-ivacaftor studies provided additional 96-week safety data (1029 participants). We assessed eight monotherapy RCTs (344 participants) (4PBA, CPX, lumacaftor, cavosonstat and FDL169), six dual-therapy RCTs (1840 participants) (lumacaftor-ivacaftor or tezacaftor-ivacaftor) and five triple-therapy RCTs (775 participants) (elexacaftor-tezacaftor-ivacaftor or VX-659-tezacaftor-ivacaftor); below we report only the data from elexacaftor-tezacaftor-ivacaftor combination which proceeded to Phase 3 trials. In 14 RCTs participants had F508del/F508del genotypes, in three RCTs F508del/minimal function (MF) genotypes and in two RCTs both genotypes. Risk of bias judgements varied across different comparisons. Results from 11 RCTs may not be applicable to all pwCF due to age limits (e.g. adults only) or non-standard design (converting from monotherapy to combination therapy). Monotherapy Investigators reported no deaths or clinically-relevant improvements in quality of life (QoL). There was insufficient evidence to determine any important effects on lung function. No placebo-controlled monotherapy RCT demonstrated differences in mild, moderate or severe adverse effects (AEs); the clinical relevance of these events is difficult to assess with their variety and small number of participants (all F508del/F508del). Dual therapy Investigators reported no deaths (moderate- to high-quality evidence). QoL scores (respiratory domain) favoured both lumacaftor-ivacaftor and tezacaftor-ivacaftor therapy compared to placebo at all time points. At six months lumacaftor 600 mg or 400 mg (both once daily) plus ivacaftor improved Cystic Fibrosis Questionnaire (CFQ) scores slightly compared with placebo (mean difference (MD) 2.62 points (95% confidence interval (CI) 0.64 to 4.59); 1061 participants; high-quality evidence). A similar effect was observed for twice-daily lumacaftor (200 mg) plus ivacaftor (250 mg), but with low-quality evidence (MD 2.50 points (95% CI 0.10 to 5.10)). The mean increase in CFQ scores with twice-daily tezacaftor (100 mg) and ivacaftor (150 mg) was approximately five points (95% CI 3.20 to 7.00; 504 participants; moderate-quality evidence). At six months, the relative change in forced expiratory volume in one second (FEV1) % predicted improved with combination therapies compared to placebo by: 5.21% with once-daily lumacaftor-ivacaftor (95% CI 3.61% to 6.80%; 504 participants; high-quality evidence); 2.40% with twice-daily lumacaftor-ivacaftor (95% CI 0.40% to 4.40%; 204 participants; low-quality evidence); and 6.80% with tezacaftor-ivacaftor (95% CI 5.30 to 8.30%; 520 participants; moderate-quality evidence). More pwCF reported early transient breathlessness with lumacaftor-ivacaftor, odds ratio 2.05 (99% CI 1.10 to 3.83; 739 participants; high-quality evidence). Over 120 weeks (initial study period and follow-up) systolic blood pressure rose by 5.1 mmHg and diastolic blood pressure by 4.1 mmHg with twice-daily 400 mg lumacaftor-ivacaftor (80 participants; high-quality evidence). The tezacaftor-ivacaftor RCTs did not report these adverse effects. Pulmonary exacerbation rates decreased in pwCF receiving additional therapies to ivacaftor compared to placebo: lumacaftor 600 mg hazard ratio (HR) 0.70 (95% CI 0.57 to 0.87; 739 participants); lumacaftor 400 mg, HR 0.61 (95% CI 0.49 to 0.76; 740 participants); and tezacaftor, HR 0.64 (95% CI, 0.46 to 0.89; 506 participants) (moderate-quality evidence). Triple therapy Three RCTs of elexacaftor to tezacaftor-ivacaftor in pwCF (aged 12 years and older with either one or two F508del variants) reported no deaths (high-quality evidence). All other evidence was graded as moderate quality. In 403 participants with F508del/minimal function (MF) elexacaftor-tezacaftor-ivacaftor improved QoL respiratory scores (MD 20.2 points (95% CI 16.2 to 24.2)) and absolute change in FEV1 (MD 14.3% predicted (95% CI 12.7 to 15.8)) compared to placebo at 24 weeks. At four weeks in 107 F508del/F508del participants, elexacaftor-tezacaftor-ivacaftor improved QoL respiratory scores (17.4 points (95% CI 11.9 to 22.9)) and absolute change in FEV1 (MD 10.0% predicted (95% CI 7.5 to 12.5)) compared to tezacaftor-ivacaftor. There was probably little or no difference in the number or severity of AEs between elexacaftor-tezacaftor-ivacaftor and placebo or control (moderate-quality evidence). In 403 F508del/F508del participants, there was a longer time to protocol-defined pulmonary exacerbation with elexacaftor-tezacaftor-ivacaftor over 24 weeks (moderate-quality evidence). AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: There is insufficient evidence that corrector monotherapy has clinically important effects in pwCF with F508del/F508del. Both dual therapies (lumacaftor-ivacaftor, tezacaftor-ivacaftor) result in similar improvements in QoL and respiratory function with lower pulmonary exacerbation rates. Lumacaftor-ivacaftor was associated with an increase in early transient shortness of breath and longer-term increases in blood pressure (not observed for tezacaftor-ivacaftor). Tezacaftor-ivacaftor has a better safety profile, although data are lacking in children under 12 years. In this population, lumacaftor-ivacaftor had an important impact on respiratory function with no apparent immediate safety concerns; but this should be balanced against the blood pressure increase and shortness of breath seen in longer-term adult data when considering lumacaftor-ivacaftor. There is high-quality evidence of clinical efficacy with probably little or no difference in AEs for triple (elexacaftor-tezacaftor-ivacaftor) therapy in pwCF with one or two F508del variants aged 12 years or older. Further RCTs are required in children (under 12 years) and those with more severe respiratory function.


Asunto(s)
Regulador de Conductancia de Transmembrana de Fibrosis Quística/efectos de los fármacos , Regulador de Conductancia de Transmembrana de Fibrosis Quística/genética , Fibrosis Quística/tratamiento farmacológico , Fibrosis Quística/genética , Mutación , Adulto , Aminofenoles/uso terapéutico , Aminopiridinas/uso terapéutico , Benzodioxoles/uso terapéutico , Sesgo , Niño , Combinación de Medicamentos , Humanos , Indoles/uso terapéutico , Fenilbutiratos/uso terapéutico , Pirazoles/uso terapéutico , Piridinas/uso terapéutico , Calidad de Vida , Quinolinas/uso terapéutico , Quinolonas/uso terapéutico , Ensayos Clínicos Controlados Aleatorios como Asunto
3.
BMJ ; 371: m4795, 2020 12 15.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-33323386
4.
J Am Coll Emerg Physicians Open ; 1(5): 1000-1008, 2020 Oct.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-33145551

RESUMEN

Background: Acute exacerbations of asthma are common in children. Multiple asthma severity scores exist, but current emergency department (ED) use of severity scores is not known. Methods: A systematic review was undertaken to identify the parameters collected in pediatric asthma severity scores. A survey of Paediatric Emergency Research in the United Kingdom and Ireland (PERUKI) sites was undertaken to ascertain routinely collected asthma data and information about severity scores. Included studies examined severity of asthma exacerbation in children 5-18 years of age with extractable severity parameters. Results: Sixteen articles were eligible, containing 17 asthma severity scores. The severity scores assessed combinations of 15 different parameters (median, 6; range, 2-8). The most common parameters considered were expiratory wheeze (15/17), inspiratory wheeze (13/17), respiratory rate (10/17), and general accessory muscle use (9/17). Fifty-nine PERUKI centers responded to the questionnaire. Twenty centers (33.1%) currently assess severity, but few use a published score. The most commonly recorded routine data required for severity scores were oxygen saturations (59/59, 100%), heart rate, and respiratory rate (58/59, 98.3% for both). Among well-validated scores like the Pulmonary Index Score (PIS), Pediatric Asthma Severity Score (PASS), Childhood Asthma Score (CAS), and the Pediatric Respiratory Assessment Measure (PRAM), only 6/59 (10.2%), 3/59 (5.1%), 1/59 (1.7%), and 0 (0%) of units respectively routinely collect the data required to calculate them. Conclusion: Standardized published pediatric asthma severity scores are infrequently used. Improved routine data collection focusing on the key parameters common to multiple scores could improve this, facilitating research and audit of pediatric acute asthma.

5.
Syst Rev ; 9(1): 269, 2020 Nov 25.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-33239107

RESUMEN

BACKGROUND: Acute bronchiolitis caused by respiratory syncytial virus (RSV) has been associated with greater risk of recurrent wheezing and asthma. However, it is unclear whether this association is causal. RSV-specific monoclonal antibodies have been shown to reduce RSV-related hospitalisations in high-risk infants, but the longer-term follow-up has given conflicting evidence for prevention of recurrent wheeze or asthma. OBJECTIVE: We performed a systematic review and meta-analysis to determine whether monoclonal antibody prophylaxis against RSV bronchiolitis reduces the risk of subsequent recurrent wheeze or asthma. If so, this may support the hypothesis of causality. METHODS: Studies were identified via an online database search using Embase, MEDLINE, PubMed, Web of Science and the Cochrane Library. Manufacturers of monoclonal antibodies were contacted directly for unpublished data. The intervention of interest was RSV monoclonal antibody prophylaxis, and the primary outcome measure was recurrent wheeze and/or asthma. Studies were screened according to inclusion/exclusion criteria. Included studies were evaluated for quality and assessed for bias independently by 3 reviewers using the 'Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation' (GRADE) approach. Results were extracted into 2 × 2 outcome tables and a meta-analysis carried out producing forest plots based on relative risk. Heterogeneity was assessed using the I2 statistic. RESULTS: The search identified 141 articles, which, after screening, resulted in eight studies (2 randomised controlled trials), thus including 11,195 infants in the meta-analysis. The overall result demonstrated a non-statistically significant reduction in relative risk of developing recurrent wheeze or asthma (RR 0.60; 95% CI 0.31 to 1.16). Study quality was generally low with evidence of publication bias and statistical heterogeneity. However, sub-group analysis excluding studies deemed to be 'very low' quality showed a relative risk of 0.42 (95% CI 0.22 to 0.80, p = 0.008). A further sub-group analysis for infants aged 32 to < 36 weeks showed a statistically significant relative risk of 0.35 (95% CI 0.14 to 0.86, p = 0.02). DISCUSSION: We did not identify an overall statistically significant benefit. However, our two sub-group analyses did find statistically significant benefits of monoclonal antibody therapy on the risk of recurrent wheeze and asthma. The main limitation of this study is the lack of high-quality randomised controlled trials, highlighting the need for more research in this field.

6.
Pediatr Pulmonol ; 55(12): 3573-3578, 2020 12.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-33058493

RESUMEN

The novel coronavirus disease-2019 (COVID-19), caused by the pathogen severe acute respiratory syndrome-CoV-2, is causing a global pandemic, with over 26.9 million cases and 880,000 deaths as of September 6, 2020. While there has been speculation and observational research about the impact of COVID-19 on asthma, much remains unknown. The goal of this article is to provide a scoping review on pediatric asthma and COVID-19 and summarize what we do and do not know from the first wave of the pandemic.


Asunto(s)
Asma/diagnóstico , Asma/terapia , Infecciones por Coronavirus/epidemiología , Prestación de Atención de Salud , Exposición a Riesgos Ambientales , Máscaras , Neumonía Viral/epidemiología , Determinantes Sociales de la Salud , Asma/epidemiología , Betacoronavirus , Niño , Control de Enfermedades Transmisibles , Comorbilidad , Coronavirus , Infecciones por Coronavirus/diagnóstico , Diagnóstico Diferencial , Manejo de la Enfermedad , Humanos , Pandemias , Neumonía Viral/diagnóstico , Espirometría , Contaminación por Humo de Tabaco
7.
J Asthma ; : 1-2, 2020 Oct 01.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-32962456

RESUMEN

During the Covid19 pandemic there has been much discussion about in-hospital procedures that may generate aerosols. One such procedure, that has led to confusion and concern, is nebulisation of children. In this paper, we discuss the evidence around whether nebulisation procedures generate aerosols, and offer strategies around nebulisation of children with asthma.

8.
Paediatr Child Health (Oxford) ; 30(12): 438-443, 2020 Dec.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-32983255

RESUMEN

A pandemic caused by the novel coronavirus, severe acute respiratory syndrome - coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2), has caused high rates of mortality, predominantly in adults. Children are significantly less affected by SARS-CoV-2 with far lower rates of recorded infections in children compared to adults, milder symptoms in the majority of children and very low mortality rates. A suspected late manifestation of the disease, paediatric inflammatory multisystem syndrome - temporally associated with SARS-CoV-2 (PIMS-TS), has been seen in small numbers of children and has a more severe disease course than acute SARS-CoV-2. The pandemic has meant that children around the world have been kept off school, isolated from their extended family and friends and asked to stay inside. The UK has been declared as being in an economic recession and unemployment rates are increasing. These indirect effects of SARS-CoV-2 are likely to have a significant impact on many children for years to come. Consolidating the knowledge that has accumulated during the first wave of this pandemic is essential for recognising the clinical signs, symptoms and effective treatment strategies for children; identifying children who may be at increased risk of severe SARS-CoV-2 infection; planning the safe delivery of healthcare and non-health related services that are important for childrens' wellbeing; and engaging in, and developing, research to address the things that are not yet known. This article summarises the evidence that has emerged from the early phase of the pandemic and offers an overview for those looking after children or planning services.

9.
BMJ ; 370: m3249, 2020 08 27.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-32960186

RESUMEN

OBJECTIVE: To characterise the clinical features of children and young people admitted to hospital with laboratory confirmed severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection in the UK and explore factors associated with admission to critical care, mortality, and development of multisystem inflammatory syndrome in children and adolescents temporarily related to coronavirus disease 2019 (covid-19) (MIS-C). DESIGN: Prospective observational cohort study with rapid data gathering and near real time analysis. SETTING: 260 hospitals in England, Wales, and Scotland between 17 January and 3 July 2020, with a minimum follow-up time of two weeks (to 17 July 2020). PARTICIPANTS: 651 children and young people aged less than 19 years admitted to 138 hospitals and enrolled into the International Severe Acute Respiratory and emergency Infections Consortium (ISARIC) WHO Clinical Characterisation Protocol UK study with laboratory confirmed SARS-CoV-2. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Admission to critical care (high dependency or intensive care), in-hospital mortality, or meeting the WHO preliminary case definition for MIS-C. RESULTS: Median age was 4.6 (interquartile range 0.3-13.7) years, 35% (225/651) were under 12 months old, and 56% (367/650) were male. 57% (330/576) were white, 12% (67/576) South Asian, and 10% (56/576) black. 42% (276/651) had at least one recorded comorbidity. A systemic mucocutaneous-enteric cluster of symptoms was identified, which encompassed the symptoms for the WHO MIS-C criteria. 18% (116/632) of children were admitted to critical care. On multivariable analysis, this was associated with age under 1 month (odds ratio 3.21, 95% confidence interval 1.36 to 7.66; P=0.008), age 10-14 years (3.23, 1.55 to 6.99; P=0.002), and black ethnicity (2.82, 1.41 to 5.57; P=0.003). Six (1%) of 627 patients died in hospital, all of whom had profound comorbidity. 11% (52/456) met the WHO MIS-C criteria, with the first patient developing symptoms in mid-March. Children meeting MIS-C criteria were older (median age 10.7 (8.3-14.1) v 1.6 (0.2-12.9) years; P<0.001) and more likely to be of non-white ethnicity (64% (29/45) v 42% (148/355); P=0.004). Children with MIS-C were five times more likely to be admitted to critical care (73% (38/52) v 15% (62/404); P<0.001). In addition to the WHO criteria, children with MIS-C were more likely to present with fatigue (51% (24/47) v 28% (86/302); P=0.004), headache (34% (16/47) v 10% (26/263); P<0.001), myalgia (34% (15/44) v 8% (21/270); P<0.001), sore throat (30% (14/47) v (12% (34/284); P=0.003), and lymphadenopathy (20% (9/46) v 3% (10/318); P<0.001) and to have a platelet count of less than 150 × 109/L (32% (16/50) v 11% (38/348); P<0.001) than children who did not have MIS-C. No deaths occurred in the MIS-C group. CONCLUSIONS: Children and young people have less severe acute covid-19 than adults. A systemic mucocutaneous-enteric symptom cluster was also identified in acute cases that shares features with MIS-C. This study provides additional evidence for refining the WHO MIS-C preliminary case definition. Children meeting the MIS-C criteria have different demographic and clinical features depending on whether they have acute SARS-CoV-2 infection (polymerase chain reaction positive) or are post-acute (antibody positive). STUDY REGISTRATION: ISRCTN66726260.


Asunto(s)
Betacoronavirus , Infecciones por Coronavirus/epidemiología , Hospitalización/estadística & datos numéricos , Neumonía Viral/epidemiología , Síndrome de Respuesta Inflamatoria Sistémica/epidemiología , Adolescente , Factores de Edad , Niño , Preescolar , Estudios de Cohortes , Infecciones por Coronavirus/complicaciones , Infecciones por Coronavirus/terapia , Cuidados Críticos , Femenino , Mortalidad Hospitalaria , Humanos , Lactante , Recién Nacido , Masculino , Pandemias , Neumonía Viral/complicaciones , Neumonía Viral/terapia , Respiración Artificial , Síndrome de Respuesta Inflamatoria Sistémica/diagnóstico , Síndrome de Respuesta Inflamatoria Sistémica/terapia , Reino Unido , Adulto Joven
10.
Int J Med Inform ; 142: 104247, 2020 10.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-32871491

RESUMEN

OBJECTIVE: Evaluating Health Information Technologies (HITs) can be challenging, but studies are necessary so that the most beneficial interventions can be identified. Our objective was to systematically review the available recommendations for improving the methods used in HIT evaluations. METHODS: HIT evaluation frameworks were identified from database (MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL) and grey literature searches. Outcome measures included framework recommendations and characteristics. Recommendations were coded and organised using thematic analysis methods. A scoring instrument was used to measure framework quality. RESULTS: The search identified 23 frameworks and 272 recommendations. These were organised into five evaluation domains and 42 themes. The themes included recommendations for improving the evaluation of technical aspects of HITs (e.g. describing aspects of HIT functionality) and suggestions for improving the evaluation of complex factors that may influence the overall effects of HITs (e.g. careful reporting of whether the HIT became integrated into existing working patterns). The frameworks were not generally developed in association with healthcare professionals, or with input from patients. The frameworks tended not to have been developed using systematic methods designed to reduce the risk of bias. DISCUSSION: HIT evaluations are important but they are challenging to conduct and appraise. This review was conducted using systematic methods enabling the organisation of framework recommendations into key themes. These findings may help investigators to successfully plan, conduct and appraise HIT evaluations. The quality appraisal demonstrated that HIT evaluation research may be improved by using more systematic methods and the involvement of participants from a range of differing backgrounds.

12.
BMJ Paediatr Open ; 4(1): e000724, 2020.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-32821859

RESUMEN

Background: Optimal feeding of very low birthweight (VLBW <1500 g)/very preterm (gestation <32 weeks) infants in resource-limited settings in sub-Saharan Africa (sSA) is critical to reducing high mortality and poor outcomes. Objective: To review evidence on feeding of VLBW/very preterm infants relevant to sSA. Methods: We searched the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, Embase, PubMed and Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature (CINAHL) from inception to July 2019 to identify reviews of randomised and quasi-randomised controlled trials of feeding VLBW/very preterm infants. We focused on interventions that are readily available in sSA. Primary outcomes were weight gain during hospital stay and time to achieve full enteral feeds (120 mL/kg/day). Secondary outcomes were growth, common morbidities, mortality, duration of hospital stay and cognitive development. Quality of evidence (QOE) was assessed using the Measurement Tool to Assess Systematic Reviews (AMSTAR2). Results: Eight systematic reviews were included. Higher feed volume of day 1 (80 mL/kg) reduced late-onset sepsis and time to full enteral feeds, and higher feed volume (up to 300 mL/kg/day) improved weight gain without adverse events (QOE: low-moderate). Rapid advancement of feeds (30-40 mL/kg/day) was not associated with harm. Breast milk fortification with energy and protein increased growth and with prebiotics increased growth and reduced duration of admission (QOE: low-very low) and did not result in harm. Evidence regarding feeding tube placement and continuous versus bolus feeds was insufficient to draw conclusions. We found no reviews meeting our selection criteria regarding when to start feeds, use of preterm formula, cup-and-spoon feeding or gravity versus push feeds and none of the reviews included trials from low-income countries of sSA. Conclusions: The evidence base informing feeding of VLBW/very preterm babies in resource-limited settings in sSA is extremely limited. Pragmatic studies are needed to generate evidence to guide management and improve outcomes for these highly vulnerable infants. PROSPERO registration number: CRD42019140204.

15.
Arch Dis Child ; 2020 Jul 24.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-32709687

RESUMEN

Asthma is the most common chronic condition of childhood. In this review, we discuss an overview of strategies to empower children and young people with asthma. The key aspects of empowerment are to enable shared decision making and self-management, and help children minimise the impact of asthma on their life. The evidence behind these strategies is either sparse or heterogenous, and it is difficult to identify which interventions are most likely to improve clinical outcomes. Wider determinants of health, in high-resource and low-resource settings, can be disempowering for children with asthma. New approaches to technology could help empower young people with asthma and other chronic health conditions.

18.
J Asthma ; : 1-8, 2020 Jun 27.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-32546110

RESUMEN

Objective: Although valved spacers are the preferred method for administering metered-dose inhaler bronchodilators such as albuterol in pediatric acute asthma, their high cost and their lack of availability have limited their use, especially in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs). Because of this, it is a common practice to use home-made spacers, although a formal analysis evaluating their cost-effectiveness is lacking. Therefore, the objective of this study was to analyze the cost-effectiveness of home-made spacers compared to commercial valved spacers for delivering bronchodilator therapy in pediatric acute asthma.Methods: A decision-analysis model was used to estimate health outcomes and costs of a simulated cohort of pediatric patients treated for acute asthma. Effectiveness parameters were obtained from a systematic review of the literature. Cost data were obtained from hospital bills and from the national manual of drug prices in Colombia. The study was carried out from the perspective of the national healthcare system in Colombia, a middle-income country (MIC). The main outcome of the model was avoidance of hospital admission.Results: Base-case analysis showed that compared to commercial valved spacers, administering bronchodilators with home-made spacers results in lower overall treatment costs (US$126.75 vs. US$128.59 average cost per patient) without a significant difference in the probability of hospitalization avoided (0.8500 vs. 0.8500).Conclusions: The present study shows that in Colombia, an MIC, compared with commercial valved spacers, the use of home-made spacers for administering bronchodilator therapy is more cost-effective because it yields a similar probability of hospital admission at lower overall treatment costs.

20.
BMJ Paediatr Open ; 4(1): e000669, 2020.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-32548311

RESUMEN

Background: There is a scarcity of information regarding the most important outcomes for research in neonatal units in low-resource settings. Identification of important outcomes by different stakeholder groups would inform the development of a core outcome set (COS) for use in neonatal research. Objective: To determine the perceptions and opinions of parents of newborn babies regarding what outcomes were most important to them in order to contribute towards development of a COS for neonatal research in sub-Saharan Africa. Methods: Semistructured interviews were undertaken with parents, mostly mothers, of babies admitted to one neonatal unit in North central and one in Southwest Nigeria. Participants were purposively sampled to include parents of babies with common neonatal problems such as prematurity. Results: We conducted 31 interviews. The most frequently raised outcomes were breast feeding, good health outcomes for their baby, education, growth and financial cost. Parents placed more emphasis on quality of life and functional status than health complications. Conclusions: The opinions of parents need to be considered in developing a COS for neonatal research in low-resource settings. Further research should assess the opinions of families in other low-resource settings and also engage a broader range of stakeholders.

SELECCIÓN DE REFERENCIAS
DETALLE DE LA BÚSQUEDA