• 主题
高级搜索  >
历史搜索 清空历史
首页> 外文期刊>Asthma research and practice. >Continuous versus intermittent short-acting β2-agonists nebulization as first-line therapy in hospitalized children with severe asthma exacerbation: a propensity score matching analysis
【24h】

Continuous versus intermittent short-acting β2-agonists nebulization as first-line therapy in hospitalized children with severe asthma exacerbation: a propensity score matching analysis

机译：连续与间歇性短作用β2-激动剂雾化作为患有严重哮喘的住院儿童的一线疗法，伴有严重哮喘加剧：倾向得分匹配分析

获取原文
           
页面导航
  • 摘要
  • 著录项
  • 相似文献
  • 相关主题

摘要

Background:Short-acting β2-agonist (SABA) nebulization is commonly prescribed for children hospitalized with severe asthma exacerbation. Either intermittent or continuous delivery has been considered safe and efficient. The comparative efficacy of these two modalities is inconclusive. We aimed to compare these two modalities as the first-line treatments.Methods:An efficacy research with a retrospective cohort study design was conducted. Hospital records of children with severe asthma exacerbation admitted to Hat Yai Hospital between 2015 and 2017 were retrospectively collected. Children initially treated with continuous salbutamol 10?mg per hour or intermittent salbutamol 2.5?mg per dose over 1-4?h nebulization were matched one-to-one using the propensity score. Competing risk and risk difference regression was applied to evaluate the proportion of children who succeeded and failed the initial treatment. Restricted mean survival time regression was used to compare the length of stay (LOS) between the two groups.Results:One-hundred and eighty-nine children were included. Of these children, 112 were matched for analysis (56 with continuous and 56 with intermittent nebulization). Children with continuous nebulization experienced a higher proportion of success in nebulization treatment (adjusted difference: 39.5, 95% CI 22.7, 56.3, p??0.001), with a faster rate of success (adjusted SHR: 2.70, 95% CI 1.73, 4.22, p??0.001). There was a tendency that LOS was also shorter (adjusted mean difference?-?9.9?h, 95% CI -24.2, 4.4, p?=?0.176).Conclusion:Continuous SABA nebulization was more efficient than intermittent nebulization in the treatment of children with severe asthma exacerbation.? The Author(s) 2020.
机译：背景：短作用β2-激动剂（SABA）雾化通常为患有严重哮喘恶化的儿童进行鼻子化。无论是间歇性还是连续交付都被认为是安全和有效的。这两种方式的比较疗效不确定。我们旨在将这两种方式与一线治疗进行比较。方法：对回顾性队列研究设计进行了疗效研究。回顾性收集了2015年至2017年间患有严重哮喘恶化的儿童患儿的医院记录。最初用连续的Salbutamol 10〜1小时或间歇性沙丁醇酰胺的儿童每小时或间歇性Sal丁醇胺醇2.5μmg，每剂量超过1-4〜4〜4的爆发。使用倾向得分匹配一对一。竞争风险和风险差异回归被应用于评估成功和初始治疗失败的儿童的比例。受限制的平均生存时间回归用于比较两组之间的住宿时间（LOS）。结果：包括一百八十九个儿童。在这些儿童中，112种符合分析（56，连续和56例，间歇性雾化）。具有连续雾化的儿童在雾化处理中的成功比例较高（调整差异：39.5,95％CI 22.7,56.3，P？0.001），成功率更快（调整的SHR：2.70,95％CI 1.73， 4.22，p？<？0.001）。倾向于洛斯也更短（调整平均差异？ - ？9.9？H，95％CI -24.2,4.4，P？0.176）。结论：连续Saba雾化比在治疗中的间歇性雾化更有效严重哮喘恶化的儿童。作者2020年。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
获取原文

客服邮箱：kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备：11010802029741号 ICP备案号：京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有

  • 客服微信

  • 服务号