Improving the treatment of nocturnal asthma: use of an office questionnaire to identify nocturnal asthma symptoms.

Nocturnal asthma is a major problem in many asthma patients and it is important to recognize and treat it. We previously reported the incidence of nocturnal asthma in our practice (1); the current study was done to try to improve upon the incidence of nocturnal asthma in our patients. After our previous survey, which indicated a 67% incidence of nocturnal asthma in our practice, we instituted a previsit questionnaire regarding nocturnal asthma to be filled out by all follow-up asthma patients in our office. After a period of time, we mailed a nocturnal asthma questionnaire to all asthma patients to see if the intervention had improved our incidence of nocturnal asthma. This questionnaire was identical to the one used in our prior study and was mailed to 2019 patients. We had 602 responders, 560 of whom had asthma. A total of 328 of these patients (59%) had nocturnal asthma. This was similar to the results of our previous survey, and our initial conclusion was that the new in-office questionnaire that we instituted had not improved the situation. Then we discovered that the in-office questionnaire had inadvertently been distributed only to the patients of one or our physicians (Dr. A). His patients were then compared with those of the other two doctors (Drs. B and C), and it was found that Dr. A's patients had fewer nocturnal symptoms than did the patients of the other doctors. The percent of asthmatics with nocturnal asthma 4-7 nights per week (more than half the nights in a week) for Dr. A was 16%, for Dr. B 47%, and for Dr. C 39%. The use of a short office questinnaire for asthma patients before they see the doctor for follow-up visits leads to greater recognition and better treatment of nocturnal asthma.

Nocturnal asthma symptoms may be more prevalent than we think.

We evaluated the prevalence of nocturnal asthma in our subspecialty allergy clinic to see whether it was significantly different than the prevalence in a previous study (3). A questionnaire was sent to 1258 patients, and there were 325 responses. Of the 325, 304 patients had asthma. A total of 204 (67%) of these had nocturnal symptoms of asthma. Eleven percent of the total population awakened every night, 16% awakened three to six nights per week, 20% one or two nights per week, 20% one night per month, and 33% not at all. We discovered that patients had a rather nonchalant view of their asthma and frequently did not report nocturnal symptoms to their doctors. We conclude that even in a specialty allergy and asthma practice, nocturnal asthma symptoms may be more prevalent than suspected. The reason for this is unclear but may be related to a problem with patient perception and possibly to a lack of diligence in physician history taking.

The effect of repeat action albuterol sulfate (Proventil Repetabs) in nocturnal symptoms of asthma.

At four medical centers, 98 patients with stable asthma, histories of nighttime awakening at least three times weekly and nighttime declines of pulmonary function of at least 15%, who were not taking oral adrenergic agonists, were randomly treated with either oral repeat-action albuterol sulfate (Proventil Repetabs), 4 mg in the morning and 4-16 mg at bedtime, or a placebo for 2 weeks. All patients were required to have nocturnal symptoms of asthma, with prior use of bronchodilators other than oral adrenergic agonists to be eligible for the study. The patients maintained a diary of asthma symptom scores and recorded peak flow rates at home at bedtime and in the morning. They had spirometry (FEV1, FVC, and PEFR) after a 1-week baseline stabilization period, and after 1 and 2 weeks of double-blind oral therapy as noted above. Efficacy was evaluated by changes in the bedtime and morning peak flow rates, changes in the number of nighttime awakenings, results of office spirometry testing, and by physician and patient global evaluations of response to therapy. Of the 98 patients in the study, 47 received oral albuterol, and 51 received placebo. The patients on albuterol had a statistically significant reduction in the number of nighttime awakenings (p less than or equal to 0.01), as compared with the patients on placebo; this included both the average number of awakenings per week (p = 0.04), and the mean number of nights with awakenings per week (p = 0.04).(ABSTRACT TRUNCATED AT 250 WORDS)

SCH 434: a new antihistamine/decongestant for seasonal allergic rhinitis.

In a double-blind, multicenter study, we compared the effects of SCH 434 (Claritin-D; Schering Corp., Kenilworth, N.J.), a new sustained-release, combination antihistamine/decongestant medication, with the effects of its individual components and placebo in 435 patients with seasonal allergic rhinitis. SCH 434 contains 5 mg of loratadine, a nonsedating antihistamine, and 120 mg of pseudoephedrine as the decongestant component. Administered twice daily in this study, SCH 434 effected a 50% decrease in total symptom scores at day 4 and was significantly (p less than or equal to 0.03) more effective than the components alone or the placebo. Loratadine or pseudoephedrine alone, with 43% and 33% decline in symptom scores, respectively, also was more effective than placebo (p less than 0.05). As expected, pseudoephedrine alone was more effective than loratadine (p less than 0.01) in relieving nasal stuffiness; SCH 434 was more effective (p less than or equal to 0.01) than placebo and loratadine in relieving nasal stuffiness. All treatments were safe and well tolerated, although insomnia and dry mouth were noted in a significant number of patients who received either SCH 434 or pseudoephedrine. No serious side effects were noted. The incidence of sedation did not differ significantly among the four treatment groups. We conclude that SCH 434 is a safe and effective treatment for symptoms of seasonal allergic rhinitis. The combination drug (SCH 434) was better than its components for some, but not all, symptoms.

Use of ipratropium bromide in asthma. Results of a multi-clinic study.

A multi-center, double-blind, 90-day study compared an ipratropium bromide metered-dose inhaler (40 microgram four times a day) with a metaproterenol metered-dose inhaler (1,500 micrograms four times a day) in 164 patients with asthma; of the 144 patients who completed the study, 71 received ipratropium and 73 received metaproterenol. Our results suggest that both drugs were equally effective bronchodilators. Although the shape of the pulmonary function response curves suggested that ipratropium has different bronchodilator kinetics than metaproterenol (in that it has a slower onset of action and a more prolonged duration), comparison of the areas under the curves for the two drugs showed that there was no statistical difference between ipratropium or metaproterenol. The only significant side effects noted with ipratropium were cough and exacerbation of symptoms; no anticholinergic side effects were noted.

Bitolterol mesylate aerosol in adults with steroid-dependent asthma: a comparison with isoproterenol hydrochloride aerosol.

A double-blind randomized study of 29 patients was conducted to evaluate the efficacy, safety, and possible subsensitivity of bitolterol mesylate aerosol and isoproterenol hydrochloride aerosol in the treatment of patients with moderate to severe steroid-dependent asthma. Patients received two sprays, three times a day, of either bitolterol or isoproterenol for 3 months. There were four 8-hour office visits at approximately 30-day intervals to assess pulmonary function. On days when pulmonary functions were evaluated, electrocardiogram and laboratory analysis were performed to help assess safety. Both medications gave bronchodilatation within five minutes. Bitolterol had a maximum effect within 60 minutes while isoproterenol was within 15 minutes. The magnitude of peak effect was consistently greater for bitolterol, but not statistically different from isoproterenol. The mean FEV1 (forced expiratory volume in one second) remained at least 15% or greater above baseline for four to eight hours postmedication for bitolterol on the four monthly pulmonary function test days, compared with one to two hours postmedication for isoproterenol. Both medications were well tolerated, with no significant changes in pulse rate, blood pressure, or respiratory rate. Adverse reactions were mild to moderate in nature and were typical sympathomimetic effects. There were no clinically significant laboratory changes or electrocardiographic findings. During the 3-month study, there was no evidence of subsensitivity. Bitolterol mesylate aerosol was shown to be an effective bronchodilator with a prolonged duration of action in steroid-dependent asthma.

A group comparative study of the safety and efficacy of nedocromil sodium (Tilade) in reversible airways disease: a preliminary report.

Nedocromil sodium in a dose of 4 mg b.i.d. or q.i.d. by inhalation was used to treat asthmatic patients in a double-blind, placebo-controlled, randomized, parallel study. 80 patients (39 active drug and 41 placebo) received q.i.d. dosage and 87 patients (45 active drug and 42 placebo) received b.i.d. dosage. The patients selected were not on oral or inhaled steroids but required oral sustained-release theophylline with or without an inhaled beta-agonist aerosol. There was a significant reduction in daytime asthma symptoms (p = 0.04) and asthma severity (p less than 0.01) 6 weeks after the onset of therapy in the nedocromil sodium q.i.d. treated group as compared with placebo. In the nedocromil sodium b.i.d. treated group, the following variables showed statistically significant improvements compared with placebo: daytime and night-time asthma (p = 0.002 in both instances), wheezing assessed by auscultation (p = 0.03) and overall asthma severity (p less than 0.01). All these variables showed improvements within 2 weeks of the onset of therapy and became statistically significant at 6 weeks. Side-effects were minor and occurred only in a small number of patients. It can be concluded from this study that nedocromil sodium is a safe and effective drug in the management of asthma.

Procaterol metered-dose inhaler in adults with asthma.

Procaterol hydrochloride is a new sympathomimetic amine which is highly selective for beta-2 receptors. The drug has been previously studied in the oral dosage form and has been found to be an effective bronchodilator with a prolonged duration of action. The present study evaluated the procaterol metered-dose inhaler (in comparison to placebo) in 30 adult patients with asthma during a 2-week treatment period. The drug was shown to be an effective bronchodilator with a prolonged duration of action.