Dept of Chest Medicine, Mont-Godinne Hospital, Université Catholique De Louvain, Yvoir, Belgium.
Eur Respir Rev. 2012 Jun 1;21(124):97-104. doi: 10.1183/09059180.00004911.
The optimal management of occupational asthma remains uncertain in clinical practice. The aim of this review was to analyse the published information pertaining to the management of occupational asthma in order to produce evidence-based statements and recommendations. A systematic literature search was conducted up to March 2010 to identify original studies addressing the following different treatment options: 1) persistence of exposure; 2) pharmacological treatment; 3) complete avoidance of exposure; 4) reduction of exposure; and 5) the use of personal protective equipment. After full text evaluation of 83 potentially relevant articles, 52 studies were retained for analysis. The conclusions from this systematic review are limited by the methodological weaknesses of most published studies. Critical analysis of available evidence indicates that: 1) persistent exposure to the causal agent is more likely to result in asthma worsening than complete avoidance; 2) there is insufficient evidence to determine whether pharmacological treatment can alter the course of asthma in subjects who remain exposed; 3) avoidance of exposure leads to recovery of asthma in less than one-third of affected workers; 4) reduction of exposure seems to be less beneficial than complete avoidance of exposure; and 5) personal respiratory equipment does not provide complete protection.
职业性哮喘的最佳管理在临床实践中仍存在不确定性。本综述的目的在于分析已发表的职业性哮喘管理信息,以产生基于证据的陈述和建议。系统检索至 2010 年 3 月,以确定以下不同治疗方案的原始研究:1)持续接触;2)药物治疗;3)完全避免接触;4)减少接触;和 5)使用个人防护设备。对 83 篇潜在相关文章进行全文评估后,保留了 52 项研究进行分析。由于大多数已发表研究的方法学弱点,本系统综述的结论受到限制。对现有证据的批判性分析表明:1)持续接触致病因子比完全避免接触更有可能导致哮喘恶化;2)尚缺乏证据确定药物治疗是否可以改变持续暴露者的哮喘病程;3)避免接触导致三分之一以下的受影响工人哮喘康复;4)减少接触似乎不如完全避免接触有益;和 5)个人呼吸设备不能提供完全保护。