Suppr超能文献

室内过敏原减少对哮喘管理的效果:系统评价。

Effectiveness of indoor allergen reduction in asthma management: A systematic review.

机构信息

Center for Evidence-based Practice, University of Pennsylvania Health System, Philadelphia, Pa.

ECRI Institute Plymouth Meeting, Plymouth Meeting, Pa.

出版信息

J Allergy Clin Immunol. 2018 May;141(5):1854-1869. doi: 10.1016/j.jaci.2018.02.001. Epub 2018 Feb 13.

Abstract

BACKGROUND

This review will inform updated National Asthma Education and Prevention Program clinical practice guidelines.

OBJECTIVE

We sought to evaluate the effectiveness of allergen reduction interventions on asthma outcomes.

METHODS

We systematically searched the "gray literature" and 5 bibliographic databases. Eligible studies included systematic reviews, randomized controlled trials, and nonrandomized interventional studies. Risk of bias was assessed by using the Cochrane Risk of Bias instrument and the Newcastle-Ottawa scale. The evidence base was assessed by using the approach of the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality's Evidence-based Practice Center program.

RESULTS

Fifty-nine randomized and 8 nonrandomized trials addressed 8 interventions: acaricide, air purification, carpet removal, high-efficiency particulate air filtration (HEPA) vacuums, mattress covers, mold removal, pest control, and pet removal. Thirty-seven studies evaluated single-component interventions, and 30 studies assessed multicomponent interventions. Heterogeneity precluded meta-analysis. For most interventions and outcomes, the evidence base was inconclusive or showed no effect. No interventions were associated with improvement in validated asthma control measures or pulmonary physiology. Exacerbations were diminished in multicomponent studies that included HEPA vacuums or pest control (moderate strength of evidence [SOE] for both). Quality of life improved in studies of air purifiers (SOE: low) and in multicomponent studies that included HEPA vacuums (SOE: moderate) or pest control (SOE: low).

CONCLUSIONS

Single interventions were generally not associated with improvement in asthma measures, with most strategies showing inconclusive results or no effect. Multicomponent interventions improved various outcomes, but no combination of specific interventions appears to be more effective. The evidence was often inconclusive because of a lack of studies. Further research is needed comparing the effect of indoor allergen reduction interventions on validated asthma measures, with sufficient population sizes to detect clinically meaningful differences.

摘要

背景

本综述将为更新的国家哮喘教育和预防计划临床实践指南提供信息。

目的

我们旨在评估过敏原减少干预措施对哮喘结局的有效性。

方法

我们系统地搜索了“灰色文献”和 5 个文献数据库。合格的研究包括系统评价、随机对照试验和非随机干预性研究。使用 Cochrane 风险偏倚工具和纽卡斯尔-渥太华量表评估风险偏倚。使用医疗保健研究和质量机构的循证实践中心计划的方法评估证据基础。

结果

59 项随机和 8 项非随机试验涉及 8 种干预措施:杀螨剂、空气净化、地毯去除、高效微粒空气过滤 (HEPA) 吸尘器、床垫罩、除霉、虫害控制和宠物去除。37 项研究评估了单一成分的干预措施,30 项研究评估了多成分的干预措施。由于异质性,无法进行荟萃分析。对于大多数干预措施和结果,证据基础不确定或没有效果。没有干预措施与验证的哮喘控制措施或肺生理改善相关。包含 HEPA 吸尘器或虫害控制的多成分研究中,哮喘加重减少(两者的证据强度为中度)。空气净化器研究(证据强度:低)和包含 HEPA 吸尘器(证据强度:中度)或虫害控制(证据强度:低)的多成分研究中,生活质量得到改善。

结论

单一干预措施通常与哮喘措施的改善无关,大多数策略的结果不确定或没有效果。多成分干预措施改善了各种结果,但没有特定干预措施的组合似乎更有效。由于研究数量不足,证据往往不确定。需要进一步研究比较室内过敏原减少干预对验证的哮喘措施的影响,需要有足够的研究人群来检测有临床意义的差异。

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验