Oral montelukast in acute asthma exacerbations: a randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: Although leukotriene receptor antagonists have an established role in the management of patients with chronic asthma, their efficacy in an acute asthma exacerbation is not fully known. METHODS: 87 adults with acute asthma requiring hospitalisation were randomly assigned to receive either montelukast 10 mg or placebo on admission and every evening thereafter for 4 weeks (when they were reviewed as outpatients). All patients were admitted under the care of a consultant chest physician and received full care for acute asthma according to the British Thoracic Society guidelines. The primary end point was the difference in peak expiratory flow (PEF) between active and placebo treatment the morning following admission. RESULTS: Primary end point data were analysed for 73 patients. At study entry, patients who received montelukast (n=37) had a mean (±SD) PEF of 227.6 (±56.9) l/min (47.6% predicted) and those who received placebo (n=36) had a PEF of 240.3 (±99.8) l/min (49.6% predicted). The morning after admission, patients who received montelukast achieved a PEF of 389.6 (±109.7) l/min (81.4% predicted) compared with 332.3 (±124.9) l/min (69.8% predicted) for placebo (p=0.046). The mean difference between treatment groups was 57.4 l/min (95% CI of 1.15 to 113.6 l/min or 1.95-21.2% predicted). CONCLUSION: In acute asthma exacerbations the additional administration of oral montelukast results in a significantly higher PEF the morning after admission than that achievable with current standard treatment. Clinical trial number NCT01011452.

Clinician-assessed poor compliance identifies adults with severe asthma who are at risk of adverse outcomes.

Our aim was to determine whether clinician-identified poor compliance is useful in identifying, from among adults with severe asthma, patients with characteristics likely to put them at risk of adverse outcomes. Patients with severe asthma (previous hospital admissions and/or prescribed step 4-5 treatment according to British Thoracic Society guidelines) considered by clinicians to be either compliant (C, N = 41) or poorly compliant (PC, N = 92) with aspects of their recommended management (attendance at appointments, taking medication, and monitoring asthma) provided data on symptoms, health service use, medication, self-management practices, physical and psychological comorbidities, and sociodemographic/socioeconomic characteristics. Cross-sectional univariate analyses were used to examine whether the groups differed with respect to self-reported indicators of asthma morbidity and self-management. Logistic regressions were additionally used to explore psychosocial factors independently associated with patients being identified as PC. Compared with C patients, PC patients had significantly poorer self-reported asthma control in terms of medication use, symptoms, time off work, asthma-specific quality of life, primary care visits, emergency attendances, and hospital admissions. This was coupled with poorer self-management practices. Patients identified as PC also had higher levels of physical and psychological comorbidities, were younger, and faced more difficult social and economic circumstances. We identified significant psychological (anxiety) and social (younger age, not working, number of benefits, adverse family circumstances) factors independently associated with patients being identified as PC. Among adults with severe asthma, clinician-assessed poor compliance was useful in distinguishing between two groups that differed significantly in terms of asthma morbidity indicators, self-management practices, and psychosocial characteristics, which have been previously shown to be associated with hospital admissions, near-fatal attacks, and fatal asthma. We conclude that clinician-assessed poor compliance is a useful marker for identifying patients at risk of these adverse outcomes.