Comparison of an expert system with other clinical scores for the evaluation of severity of asthma.

"Asthmaexpert" was produced at the special request of several clinicians in order to obtain a better understanding of the medical decisions taken by clinical experts in the management of asthmatic patients. In order to assess the severity of asthma, a new score called Artificial Intelligence score (AI score), produced by Asthmaexpert, was compared with three other scores (Aas, Hargreave and Brooks). One hundred patients were enrolled prospectively in the study during their first consultation in the out-patient clinic. Distribution of severity level according to the different scores was studied, and the reliability between AI and other scores was evaluated by Kappa and MacNemar tests. Correlations with functional parameters were performed. The AI score assessed higher levels of severity than the other scores (Kappa = 18, 28 and 10% for Aas, Hargreave and Brooks, respectively) with significant MacNemar test in all cases. There was a significant correlation between AI score and forced expiratory volume in one second (FEV1) (r = 0.73). These data indicate that the AI score is a severity score which defines higher levels of severity than the chosen scores. Correlations for functional parameters are good. This score appears easy to use for the first consultation of an asthmatic patient.

Evaluation of atopy through an expert system: description of the database.

BACKGROUND: In order to understand the medical decisions taken during the initial visit of a new asthmatic patient, a group of experts designed an expert system which provides conclusions about severity, precipitating factors and treatment. Rules for atopy and the assessment of allergic factors have been discussed and implemented in the expert system. Conclusions about severity have been yet validated using an appropriate methodology. OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to investigate a sample of 471 patients according to conclusions regarding atopy. METHODS: A total of 471 cases report forms (CRF) was filled in for adult asthmatic outpatients, seen for the first time in our clinic without emergency situations. Data of each CRF were used by the expert system to draw conclusions. The expert system discerns three patterns for atopy, yes, possible or no. The variables known to reflect different features according to the classification of asthma as atopic or not have been studied. The variables used in the rules for atopy, obviously linked to the conclusion, were not compared. For many medical problems no unique objective solution exists and this is why a group of patients with possible atopy was introduced. RESULTS: Patients with atopy had less severe asthma (P = 0.01), a better FEV1 value (P = 0.0007) and showed their first symptoms of asthma earlier (P = 0.00001) than patients without atopy. CONCLUSIONS: The characteristics of the group studied here are consistent with the literature. This could be considered as an indirect validation of the expert system. Moreover, patients with possible atopy show intermediate findings for these variables and it is possible to suggest a 'dose-effect' relationship.

Assessment of the severity of asthma by an expert system. Description and evaluation.

Asthmaexpert, an expert system (ES), was produced at the special request of several clinicians in order to better understand the medical decisions made clinical experts in managing an asthmatic patient. We describe and evaluate this knowledge base, focusing mainly on assessment of the severity of asthma. After compiling data from a patient, Asthmaexpert assesses the severity of the disease and identifies the trigger factors involved, suggests any further investigations that may be required, and offers a treatment strategy. Implemented with Nexpert and Hypercard, it runs on a MacIntosh personal computer. The validation stage involved eight clinical experts who provided 20 case report forms (CRF) with their conclusions about management of asthma. The CRF were then programmed into the ES, which provided its own conclusions about the same subjects. Afterward, all the experts evaluated the conclusions given by ES or by their colleagues in a double-blind manner. One hundred twenty-seven CRF were available. The reliability of the experts' opinions was good, with a substantial consensus between them when assessing severity scores (kappa = 0.27 to 0.54). There was no difference in concordance of opinions on severity scores either between the experts who designed the system and ES or between the other experts and ES (weighted kappa = 0.72 and 0.69, respectively). Experts judged that the severity scores given by ES were as good as those proposed by their colleagues, and that the overall conclusions given by ES were as good as or better than those given by their colleagues. The conclusions drawn by ES were given a good rating.(ABSTRACT TRUNCATED AT 250 WORDS)

[Maintenance treatment of asthma]. / Traitement de fond de l'asthme.

Taking charge of asthmatic patients can only be conceived in the long term. The objective of treatment is to obtain a quality of life that is as close as possible to the norm. Pretherapeutic evaluation is of paramount importance to assert the diagnosis, taking into account the multiple facets of asthma. It is widely agreed that the therapeutic pressure depends on the severity of the disease. The triggering factors may vary with time; it is essential to assess their responsibility and treat them. Asthma is a complex syndrome with multiple factors. To improve the therapeutic compliance needed for a good result time must be spent informing and teaching each patient.

Inhibitory effect of cetirizine on the bronchial eosinophil recruitment induced by allergen inhalation challenge in allergic patients with asthma.

In patients with asthma there is a recruitment of eosinophils in bronchoalveolar lavage fluid (BALF) after the late asthmatic reaction (LAR). Cetirizine is a selective H1 antagonist that inhibits the eosinophil recruitment induced by allergen in the skin. The aim of this study was to evaluate whether cetirizine was able to inhibit the LAR-induced inflammatory reaction. Twelve allergic asymptomatic subjects with asthma (aged 18 to 58 years) without any treatment were enrolled in the study; FEV1 was greater than 83% predicted in each case. An allergen inhalation-challenge test was performed to assess the presence of an LAR. In a double-blind, randomized, placebo-controlled study, the patients were treated for 8 days with either cetirizine, 15 mg twice a day (six patients, group 1), or placebo (six patients, group 2). On day 8, a second allergen inhalation-challenge test with the same allergen was performed, and BAL was realized 24 hours later; as usual 250 ml of saline was instilled by 50 ml aliquots, and the first recovery was analyzed separately. In each case, the LAR observed after treatment was similar to the first one. In placebo-treated patients, an increased number of cells, mainly eosinophils, was observed in the first recovery of BALF compared with the number in subsequent recoveries. These numbers were significantly higher than numbers observed in cetirizine-treated patients. Cetirizine did not modify significantly the allergen inhalation-challenge test, but it inhibited the recruitment of inflammatory cells, mainly eosinophils.