Institute of Social and Preventive Medicine, University of Bern, Bern, Switzerland.
Institute of Social and Preventive Medicine, University of Bern, Bern, Switzerland; Graduate School for Health Sciences, University of Bern, Bern, Switzerland.
J Allergy Clin Immunol Pract. 2022 Apr;10(4):1038-1046.e8. doi: 10.1016/j.jaip.2021.10.026. Epub 2021 Oct 22.
Asthma treatment should be modified according to symptom control and future risk, but there are scarce data on what drives treatment adjustments in routine tertiary care.
We studied factors that drive asthma treatment adjustment in pediatric outpatient clinics.
We performed a cross-sectional analysis of the Swiss Paediatric Airway Cohort, a clinical cohort of 0- to 16-year-old children seen by pediatric pulmonologists. We collected information on diagnosis, treatment, lung function, and FeNO from hospital records; and on symptoms, sociodemographic, and environmental factors from a parental questionnaire. We used reported symptoms to classify asthma control and categorized treatment according to the 2020 Global Initiative for Asthma guidelines. We used multivariable logistic regression to study factors associated with treatment adjustment (step-up or down vs no change).
We included 551 children diagnosed with asthma (mean age, 10 years; 37% female). At the clinical visit, most children were prescribed Global Initiative for Asthma step 3 (35%). Compared with previsit treatment, 252 children remained on the same step (47%), 227 were stepped up (42%), and 58 were stepped down (11%). Female sex (adjusted odds ratio [aOR] = 1.61; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.05-2.47), poor asthma control (aOR = 3.08; 95% CI, 1.72-5.54), and lower FEV Z-score (aOR = 0.70; 95% CI, 0.56-0.86 per one Z-score increase) were independently associated with treatment step-up, and low FeNO (aOR = 2.34; 95% CI, 1.23-4.45) was associated with treatment step-down, with marked heterogeneity between clinics.
In this tertiary care real-life study, we identified main drivers for asthma treatment adjustment. These findings may help improve both asthma management guidelines and clinical practice.
哮喘的治疗应根据症状控制和未来风险进行调整,但关于常规三级保健中驱动治疗调整的因素的数据很少。
我们研究了小儿门诊中驱动哮喘治疗调整的因素。
我们对瑞士小儿气道队列进行了横断面分析,该队列是由儿科肺科医生诊治的 0 至 16 岁儿童的临床队列。我们从医院记录中收集了诊断、治疗、肺功能和呼出气一氧化氮(FeNO)的信息;从家长问卷中收集了症状、社会人口学和环境因素的信息。我们使用报告的症状来分类哮喘控制,并根据 2020 年全球哮喘倡议指南对治疗进行分类。我们使用多变量逻辑回归来研究与治疗调整(升级或降级与无变化)相关的因素。
我们纳入了 551 名被诊断为哮喘的儿童(平均年龄为 10 岁,37%为女性)。在临床就诊时,大多数儿童接受了全球哮喘倡议第 3 步(35%)的治疗。与就诊前的治疗相比,252 名儿童仍接受相同的治疗(47%),227 名儿童升级(42%),58 名儿童降级(11%)。女性(调整后的优势比[aOR] = 1.61;95%置信区间[CI],1.05-2.47)、哮喘控制不佳(aOR = 3.08;95%CI,1.72-5.54)和较低的 FEV Z 评分(aOR = 0.70;95%CI,每增加一个 Z 评分增加 0.56-0.86)与治疗升级独立相关,而低 FeNO(aOR = 2.34;95%CI,1.23-4.45)与治疗降级相关,不同诊所之间存在明显的异质性。
在这项三级保健真实世界研究中,我们确定了哮喘治疗调整的主要驱动因素。这些发现可能有助于改善哮喘管理指南和临床实践。