Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Mostrar: 20 | 50 | 100
Resultados 1 - 3 de 3
Filtrar
Mais filtros










Base de dados
Intervalo de ano de publicação
1.
Lancet Respir Med ; 11(7): 591-601, 2023 07.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-36963417

RESUMO

BACKGROUND: The clinical value of using digital tools to assess adherence and lung function in uncontrolled asthma is not known. We aimed to compare treatment decisions guided by digitally acquired data on adherence, inhaler technique, and peak flow with existing methods. METHODS: A 32-week prospective, multicentre, single-blinded, parallel, randomly controlled trial was done in ten severe asthma clinics across Ireland, Northern Ireland, and England. Participants were 18 years or older, had uncontrolled asthma, asthma control test (ACT) score of 19 or less, despite treatment with high-dose inhaled corticosteroids, and had at least one severe exacerbation in the past year despite high-dose inhaled corticosteroids. Patients were randomly assigned in a 1:1 ratio to the active group or the control group, by means of a computer-generated randomisation sequence of permuted blocks of varying sizes (2, 4, and 6) stratified by fractional exhaled nitric oxide (FeNO) concentration and recruitment site. In the control group, participants were masked to their adherence and errors in inhaler technique data. A statistician masked to study allocation did the statistical analysis. After a 1-week run-in period, both groups attended three nurse-led education visits over 8 weeks (day 7, week 4, and week 8) and three physician-led treatment adjustment visits at weeks 8, 20, and 32. In the active group, treatment adjustments during the physician visits were informed by digital data on inhaler adherence, twice daily digital peak expiratory flow (ePEF), patient-reported asthma control, and exacerbation history. Treatment was adjusted in the control group on the basis of pharmacy refill rates (a measure of adherence), asthma control by ACT questionnaire, and history of exacerbations and visual management of inhaler technique. Both groups used a digitally enabled Inhaler Compliance Assessment (INCA) and PEF. The primary outcomes were asthma medication burden measured as proportion of patients who required a net increase in treatment at the end of 32 weeks and adherence rate measured in the last 12 weeks by area under the curve in the intention-to-treat population. The safety analyses included all patients who consented for the trial. The trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT02307669 and is complete. FINDINGS: Between Oct 25, 2015, and Jan 26, 2020, of 425 patients assessed for eligibility, 220 consented to participate in the study, 213 were randomly assigned (n=108 in the active group; n=105 in the control group) and 200 completed the study (n=102 in the active group; n=98 in the control group). In the intention-to-treat analysis at week 32, 14 (14%) active and 31 (32%) control patients had a net increase in treatment compared with baseline (odds ratio [OR] 0·31 [95% CI 0·15-0·64], p=0·0015) and 11 (11%) active and 21 (21%) controls required add-on biological therapy (0·42 [0·19-0·95], p=0·038) adjusted for study site, age, sex, and baseline FeNO. Three (16%) of 19 active and 11 (44%) of 25 control patients increased their medication from fluticasone propionate 500 µg daily to 1000 µg daily (500 µg twice a day; adjusted OR 0·23 [0·06-0·87], p=0·026). 26 (31%) of 83 active and 13 (18%) of 73 controls reduced their medication from fluticasone propionate 1000 µg once daily to 500 µg once daily (adjusted OR 2·43 [1·13-5·20], p=0·022. Week 20-32 actual mean adherence was 64·9% (SD 23·5) in the active group and 55·5% (26·8) in the control group (between-group difference 11·1% [95% CI 4·4-17·9], p=0·0012). A total of 29 serious adverse events were recorded (16 [55%] in the active group, and 13 [45%] in the control group), 11 of which were confirmed as respiratory. None of the adverse events reported were causally linked to the study intervention, to the use of salmeterol-fluticasone inhalers, or the use of the digital PEF or INCA. INTERPRETATION: Evidence-based care informed by digital data led to a modest improvement in medication adherence and a significantly lower treatment burden. FUNDING: Health Research Board of Ireland, Medical Research Council, INTEREG Europe, and an investigator-initiated project grant from GlaxoSmithKline.


Assuntos
Antiasmáticos , Asma , Humanos , Broncodilatadores/uso terapêutico , Estudos Prospectivos , Resultado do Tratamento , Método Duplo-Cego , Asma/tratamento farmacológico , Fluticasona/uso terapêutico , Nebulizadores e Vaporizadores , Corticosteroides/uso terapêutico , Adesão à Medicação , Pulmão , Antiasmáticos/uso terapêutico
2.
J Allergy Clin Immunol Pract ; 10(10): 2614-2623, 2022 10.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-35697207

RESUMO

BACKGROUND: Exposure to any form of glucocorticoid preparation is associated with a risk of adrenal insufficiency (AI). OBJECTIVE: To establish the contribution of oral corticosteroid (OCS) and inhaled corticosteroid (ICS) exposure to the risk of AI in a cohort of patients (n = 80) with severe, uncontrolled asthma. METHODS: We compiled individualized cumulative OCS and ICS exposure data using a combination of health care records and electronic inhaler monitoring using an Inhaler Compliance Assessment device and estimated the risk of AI for each participant using a morning serum cortisol concentration. RESULTS: The predicted prevalence of AI based on morning cortisol concentrations was 25% (20 of 80). Participants on maintenance OCS therapy had the highest risk of AI at 60% (6 of 10) compared with 17% (11 of 65) in those with no recent OCS exposure. Morning serum cortisol correlated negatively with both OCS exposure (mg/kg prednisolone) (r = -0.4; P < .0002) and ICS exposure (mg/kg fluticasone propionate) (r = -0.26; P = .019). Logistic regression of risk of AI against the number of standard treatment courses of OCS demonstrated a positive relationship although this did not reach statistical significance (odds ratio, 1.41; 95% CI, 0.97-2.05; P = .073). Logistic regression analysis, categorizing patients as high-risk AI (cortisol <130 nmol/L) or not (cortisol >130 nmol/L), showed that cumulative ICS exposure remained a significant predictor of AI, even when exposure to OCS was controlled for (odds ratio, 2.17 per 1 mg/kg increase in cumulative fluticasone propionate exposure; 95% CI, 1.06-4.42; P = .033). CONCLUSIONS: Our data suggest that AI is common among patients with asthma and highlights that the risk of AI is associated with both high-dose ICS therapy and intermittent treatment courses of OCS.


Assuntos
Insuficiência Adrenal , Antiasmáticos , Asma , Administração por Inalação , Corticosteroides/uso terapêutico , Insuficiência Adrenal/induzido quimicamente , Insuficiência Adrenal/tratamento farmacológico , Insuficiência Adrenal/epidemiologia , Antiasmáticos/efeitos adversos , Asma/induzido quimicamente , Asma/tratamento farmacológico , Asma/epidemiologia , Fluticasona/uso terapêutico , Glucocorticoides/efeitos adversos , Humanos , Hidrocortisona/uso terapêutico , Prednisolona/uso terapêutico
3.
Front Med Technol ; 3: 604475, 2021.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-35047901

RESUMO

Poor adherence to treatment is a common reason why patients with chronic disease have worse outcomes than might be expected. Poor treatment adherence is of particular concern among people with airways disease because, apart from not taking treatment as prescribed, inhaled medication can also be administered incorrectly. Recently, a number of technological advances that accurately document when an inhaled treatment has been used and, in certain instances, how it was used have been developed. There is good evidence from a number of research groups that these devices, either by patient reminders or physician feedback, promote adherence to inhaled treatments. What is less certain is how, in a real-world setting, these devices change outcomes. In this perspective article, the role of electronic devices in quantifying treatment use and addressing poor treatment adherence and their potential role in clinical practice outside of clinical validation trials are described.

SELEÇÃO DE REFERÊNCIAS
DETALHE DA PESQUISA
...