Performance of a novel clinical score, the Pediatric Asthma Severity Score (PASS), in the evaluation of acute asthma.

OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the reliability, validity, and responsiveness of a new clinical asthma score, the Pediatric Asthma Severity Score (PASS), in children aged 1 through 18 years in an acute clinical setting. METHODS: This was a prospective cohort study of children treated for acute asthma at two urban pediatric emergency departments (EDs). A total of 852 patients were enrolled at one site and 369 at the second site. Clinical findings were assessed at the start of the ED visit, after one hour of treatment, and at the time of disposition. Peak expiratory flow rate (PEFR) (for patients aged 6 years and older) and pulse oximetry were also measured. RESULTS: Composite scores including three, four, or five clinical findings were evaluated, and the three-item score (wheezing, prolonged expiration, and work of breathing) was selected as the PASS. Interobserver reliability for the PASS was good to excellent (kappa = 0.72 to 0.83). There was a significant correlation between PASS and PEFR (r = 0.27 to 0.37) and pulse oximetry (r = 0.29 to 0.41) at various time points. The PASS was able to discriminate between those patients who did and did not require hospitalization, with area under the receiver operating characteristic curve of 0.82. Finally, the PASS was shown to be responsive, with a 48% relative increase in score from start to end of treatment and an overall effect size of 0.62, indicating a moderate to large effect. CONCLUSIONS: This clinical score, the PASS, based on three clinical findings, is a reliable and valid measure of asthma severity in children and shows both discriminative and responsive properties. The PASS may be a useful tool to assess acute asthma severity for clinical and research purposes.

Construct validity and responsiveness of the Child Health Questionnaire in children with acute asthma.

OBJECTIVE: To examine the validity and responsiveness of the Child Health Questionnaire (CHQ-PF28) in the context of acute exacerbation of asthma in children. DESIGN AND METHODS: This was a prospective cohort study of children age 5 years and older treated for acute asthma at two urban pediatric emergency departments (EDs). At 14 days after the visit, all patients were contacted by telephone and the CHQ-PF28 (modified to have a 2-week recall period) was administered. Poor 14-day outcome was defined as one or more of the following: child or parent missed at least 5 days of school/day care/work; child still having asthma symptoms above baseline at 14 days; or unscheduled care within 7 days after the ED visit. RESULTS: A total of 732 subjects (median age, 9 years) were enrolled; 622 (85%) had successful follow-up at day 14. At the 14-day follow-up, 254 (43%) were classified as having a poor outcome. The mean physical subscale score of the CHQ-PF28 was 48.2 among those with a good outcome, vs 35.9 among the poor outcome group (difference = 12.3; 95% confidence interval, 10.2 to 14.3). For the psychosocial subscale the average difference between groups was 6.9 (95% confidence interval, 5.1 to 8.7). Among the 146 patients at one site who also had a CHQ score obtained at the initial visit, there was a significant improvement in mean physical subscale score among those with good, but not poor, outcome. However, the relative responsiveness was moderate, with an effect size of only 0.37. CONCLUSIONS: Both the physical and psychosocial subscales of the CHQ-PF28 administered 14 days after an ED visit for acute exacerbation of asthma are correlated with poor short-term functional outcome, but scores are only moderately responsive to acute changes in functional status.

Comparability of acute asthma severity assessments by parents and respiratory therapists.

OBJECTIVE: To compare the assessments of parents and respiratory therapists (RTs) of acute asthma severity in children discharged after emergency department (ED) treatment. DESIGN: Prospective cohort study. SETTING: Home care visit within 24 hours of discharge from an urban children's hospital ED. PARTICIPANTS: Children aged 2 to 17 years discharged to home after treatment in the ED (at least 1 inhaled bronchodilator treatment administered) were randomly selected to have a home care visit. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Registered RTs went to the child's home and asked the parent questions about his or her perception of the child's symptoms. The RT performed a clinical assessment including pulse oximetry. RESULTS: Ninety children were selected for home care, and 51 patients (57%) successfully completed the home care visit; 48 (53%) underwent a complete assessment by both raters. There were no differences in demographic features or ED clinical variables between those successfully contacted and those not reached. Of those evaluated, 43 parents (84%) reported their child's asthma was improved, and the rest reported no change. Parents underestimated the degree of wheezing or work of breathing relative to the RT in 3 of 48 patients (6%), but only 1 of these was considered substantial (>1 point discrepancy). Findings were overestimated in 14 (29%) of 48 cases, but only 5 (10%) were substantial. CONCLUSIONS: Parents and RTs provide comparable assessments of acute asthma severity in children within 24 hours of discharge from the ED. Clinically important discrepancies are uncommon, and underestimation of severity by parents is rare.