Allergy, Asthma and Clinical Immunology Service, The Alfred Hospital, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia.
Allergy, Asthma and Clinical Immunology Service, The Alfred Hospital, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia.
J Allergy Clin Immunol Pract. 2017 Jul-Aug;5(4):956-964.e3. doi: 10.1016/j.jaip.2016.12.030. Epub 2017 Mar 9.
Systematic evaluation is advocated for difficult asthma, but how best to deliver such care is unclear and outcome data are scarce.
We describe our institution's structured approach to difficult asthma management and report on the outcomes of such an approach.
Eighty-two consecutive patients with difficult asthma referred to our clinic from respiratory specialists were evaluated in 3 key areas: diagnostic confirmation, comorbidity detection, and inflammatory phenotyping. We then optimized treatment including relevant comorbidity interventions. The outpatient protocol was supported by comorbidity questionnaires, an electronic clinic template, and standardized panel discussion. Asthma outcomes were assessed at 6 months.
Sixty-eight patients completed follow-up. Asthma diagnosis was refuted in 3 patients and the remaining 65 patients were included in the study analysis. There was no overall escalation of inhaled or oral corticosteroids. Patients had a median of 3 comorbidities, and a median of 3 comorbidity interventions. Control of chronic rhinosinusitis and dysfunctional breathing improved among patients with these diagnoses (22-item Sino-Nasal Outcome Test score from 47 ± 20 to 37 ± 22, P = .017; Nijmegen score from 32 ± 6 to 25 ± 9, P = .003). There were overall improvements in the Asthma Control Test score (from 14 ± 5 to 16 ± 6, P < .001), the Asthma Quality of Life Questionnaire (from 4.29 ± 1.4 to 4.65 ± 1.5, P = .073), and the frequency of exacerbations over 6 months (from 2 [interquartile range, 0-4] to 0 [interquartile range, 0-2], P < .001).
In patients referred with difficult asthma from respiratory specialists, a structured approach coupled with targeted comorbidity interventions improved control of key comorbidities and enhanced asthma outcomes.
系统评价被提倡用于治疗难治性哮喘,但如何最好地提供这种治疗尚不清楚,且结局数据也很有限。
我们描述了我们机构对难治性哮喘管理的结构化方法,并报告了这种方法的结局。
从呼吸专科医生处转诊至我们诊所的 82 例连续的难治性哮喘患者在 3 个关键领域接受评估:诊断确认、合并症检测和炎症表型。然后,我们优化了治疗,包括相关合并症干预。门诊方案由合并症问卷、电子诊所模板和标准化小组讨论支持。在 6 个月时评估哮喘结局。
68 例患者完成了随访。3 例患者的哮喘诊断被推翻,其余 65 例患者被纳入研究分析。吸入性或口服皮质类固醇激素并未整体升级。患者存在中位数为 3 种合并症,中位数为 3 种合并症干预措施。经诊断患有慢性鼻-鼻窦炎和呼吸功能障碍的患者的疾病控制得到改善(22 项 Sino-Nasal Outcome Test 评分从 47 ± 20 降至 37 ± 22,P =.017;Nijmegen 评分从 32 ± 6 降至 25 ± 9,P =.003)。哮喘控制测试评分(从 14 ± 5 增至 16 ± 6,P <.001)、哮喘生活质量问卷评分(从 4.29 ± 1.4 增至 4.65 ± 1.5,P =.073)以及 6 个月内的哮喘加重频率(从 2 [四分位间距,0-4]降至 0 [四分位间距,0-2],P <.001)总体均有所改善。
在由呼吸专科医生转诊而来的难治性哮喘患者中,采用结构化方法并辅以针对性的合并症干预措施,可改善关键合并症的控制,并改善哮喘结局。