Search

Objectives Implementation of guidelines into clinical practice is challenging and complex. This study aims to (1) identify the training needs and capacity requirements, and (2) explore the impact on healthcare utilisation and asthma-related quality of life of implementing both spirometry and fraction of exhaled nitric oxide in diagnosis of asthma among children in the UK primary care. Methods Ten UK general practitioner practices and a total of 612 children (5-16 years) with diagnosed or suspected asthma were invited to participate in this prospective observational study. The total times that the trainer and trainee clinical staff spent on developing the training package, providing and receiving, and performing and interpreting the two tests as part of routine child asthma review were collected, and costs were calculated. We compared healthcare utilisation and asthma-related and general health-related quality of life data between the 6 months before and after the asthma review guided by objective tests. Results The average training cost for the 27 primary care clinical members was £1395. The average cost to implement and deliver the test-guided asthma review among the 612 included children was £22. In the 6 months following the tests-guided asthma review, both unplanned primary care attendance, and hospital admissions were reduced, and the asthma-related health status increased significantly. Conclusion This study provides robust cost estimates of the resources needed to implement the National Institute for Health and Care Excellence asthma guideline. It also demonstrates the potential to save healthcare costs and improve health status among asthmatic children by implementing this guideline. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Spirometry and fraction of exhaled nitric oxide (FeNO) are commonly used in specialist centres to monitor children with asthma. The National Institute for Health and Care Excellence recommends spirometry for asthma monitoring from 5 years in all healthcare settings. There is little spirometry and FeNO data in children managed for asthma in UK primary care to support their use.Objectives: To study the prevalence of abnormal spirometry and FeNO in children with asthma managed in primary care and to explore their relationship with asthma control and unplanned healthcare attendances (UHA).Methods: Prospective observational cohort study in children aged 5-16 years with suspected or doctor-diagnosed asthma attending an asthma review in UK general practice. Spirometry, FeNO, asthma control test (ACT) scores and number of UHAs were studied.Results: Of 612 children from 10 general practices, 23.5% had abnormal spirometry, 36.0% had raised FeNO ≥35 parts per billion and 41.8% reported poor control. Fifty-four per cent of children reporting good asthma control had abnormal spirometry and/or raised FeNO. At follow-up, the mean number of UHAs fell from 0.31/child in the 6 months preceding review to 0.20/child over the 6 months following review (p=0.0004). Median ACT scores improved from 20 to 22 (p=0.032), and children's ACT from 21 to 23 (p<0.0001).Conclusions: Abnormal lung function and FeNO are common in children attending for asthma review in primary care and relate poorly to symptom scores. A symptoms-based approach to asthma monitoring without objective testing is likely to miss children at high risk of future severe asthma attacks. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Children and young people (CYP) with asthma in the UK are at higher risk of poor outcomes compared with other high-income European countries due to factors including poor access to high-quality asthma reviews, diagnostic testing and inconsistent postattack reviews. The Leicester Integrated Care Board funded the first UK pilot asthma hub for CYP, to investigate the feasibility and effectiveness of hubs, in providing postattack reviews along with providing asthma education, the opportunity to carry out diagnostic lung function tests and optimise treatment., Methods: Clinical pilot study including CYP aged 4-17 years referred to the hub with uncontrolled asthma or postattack from November 2021 to April 2022. CYP received a structured clinical assessment including National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE) first-line diagnostic investigations for asthma including spirometry, bronchodilator reversibility (BDR) and fraction of exhaled nitric oxide (FeNO)., Results: Of 312 CYP referred (mean age 8.6±3.2 years; 42% women), 266 (85.3%) attended their appointment. Median time from referral to review was 2 days (IQR 1-3). Three CYP (1.1%) were severely unwell at review and required further hospital treatment. In the 231 CYP who completed first-line tests, asthma was confirmed for 73 (31.6%) based on NICE diagnostic criteria for CYP. Twenty-two per cent of children with normal baseline spirometry had ≥12% BDR., Conclusion: Paediatric asthma hubs are a feasible model of care to deliver CYP postasthma attack reviews and identify high-risk patients requiring further treatment. Spirometry, BDR and FeNO testing allowed diagnostic confirmation in a significant proportion of CYP., Competing Interests: Competing interests: EAG: none relating to this manuscript. Unrelated to this manuscript, consultancy work for Boehringer Ingelheim with money paid to the institution (University of Leicester). Investigator led research grants from Circassia Group, Gilead Sciences, Chiesi Limited and Propeller Health. Research collaboration with AstraZeneca, Helicon Health and Adherium (NZ) Limited. Speaker fees Circassia Group and Sanofi. MIA: Children’s and Young people clinical lead at Leicester, Leicestershire and Rutland Integrated Care Board. National Webinar for Proveca Limited., (© Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2024. No commercial re-use. See rights and permissions. Published by BMJ.)

Background: Diagnosing asthma in children represents an important clinical challenge. There is no single gold-standard test to confirm the diagnosis. Consequently, over- and under-diagnosis of asthma is frequent in children., Methods: A task force supported by the European Respiratory Society has developed these evidence-based clinical practice guidelines for the diagnosis of asthma in children aged 5-16 years using nine Population, Intervention, Comparator and Outcome (PICO) questions. The task force conducted systematic literature searches for all PICO questions and screened the outputs from these, including relevant full-text articles. All task force members approved the final decision for inclusion of research papers. The task force assessed the quality of the evidence using the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) approach., Results: The task force then developed a diagnostic algorithm based on the critical appraisal of the PICO questions, preferences expressed by lay members and test availability. Proposed cut-offs were determined based on the best available evidence. The task force formulated recommendations using the GRADE Evidence to Decision framework., Conclusion: Based on the critical appraisal of the evidence and the Evidence to Decision framework, the task force recommends spirometry, bronchodilator reversibility testing and exhaled nitric oxide fraction as first-line diagnostic tests in children under investigation for asthma. The task force recommends against diagnosing asthma in children based on clinical history alone or following a single abnormal objective test. Finally, this guideline also proposes a set of research priorities to improve asthma diagnosis in children in the future., Competing Interests: Conflict of interest: E.A. Gaillard reports consultancy work for Boehringer Ingelheim with money paid to the University of Leicester; investigator led research grants from Circassia, Gilead and Chiesi Ltd; research collaboration with Medimmune. Conflict of interest: C.E. Kuehni has nothing to disclose. Conflict of interest: S. Turner has nothing to disclose. Conflict of interest: M. Goutaki has nothing to disclose. Conflict of interest: K.A. Holden has nothing to disclose. Conflict of interest: C.C.M. de Jong has nothing to disclose. Conflict of interest: C. Lex reports other (lecture fee paid to institution) from Novartis, outside the submitted work. Conflict of interest: D.K.H. Lo has nothing to disclose. Conflict of interest: J.S. Lucas reports grants and non-financial support (provision of equipment) from Circassia, outside the submitted work. Conflict of interest: F. Midulla has nothing to disclose. Conflict of interest: R. Mozun has nothing to disclose. Conflict of interest: G. Piacentini has nothing to disclose. Conflict of interest: D. Rigau acts as ERS methodologist. Conflict of interest: B. Rottier has nothing to disclose. Conflict of interest: M. Thomas reports personal fees from GSK, Boehringer Ingelheim and Chiesi, outside the submitted work. Conflict of interest: T. Tonia acts as ERS Methodologist. Conflict of interest: J. Usemann reports personal fees from Vertex, outside the submitted work. Conflict of interest: O. Yilmaz reports non-financial support for meeting attendance from Abdi Ibrahim, other (lecture fees) from Novartis, outside the submitted work. Conflict of interest: A. Zacharasiewicz has nothing to disclose. Conflict of interest: A. Moeller has nothing to disclose., (Copyright ©The authors 2021. For reproduction rights and permissions contact permissions@ersnet.org.)

Asthma is a heterogeneous disease, characterised by different phenotypes and endotypes. Precision medicine in asthma refers to the implementation of a targeted therapy for each individual child, based on the identification of treatable traits, including environmental, immunological and genetic factors. Severe asthma in children is associated with increased hospitalisation rates, a lower quality of life, increased healthcare costs and an increased mortality. In the era of new molecular biologics treatments, it is essential to improve deep phenotyping of children with severe asthma in order to deliver the most effective treatment to each individual child. In this review, we discuss the personalised approach to the assessment and management of severe asthma. We explore the indications and use of the currently licensed biologics, as well as the potential of other emerging treatments., Competing Interests: Dr Erol A Gaillard reports consultancy work for Boehringer Ingelheim with money paid to the institution (University of Leicester), investigator led research grants from Chiesi, Gilead,and Circassia, and non-financial support from Medimmune, outside the submitted work. The authors reported no other potential conflicts of interest for this work., (© 2021 Ramphul et al.)

In many healthcare settings asthma in children is a clinical diagnosis based on parental reported symptoms. These include intermittent episodes of wheezing, breathlessness and periodic nocturnal dry cough. Increased symptoms often coincide with colds. Confirming a diagnosis of asthma in children can be difficult and recent reports highlight that misdiagnosis, including over- and under-diagnosis of asthma are common. Recent UK National Institute of Health and Care Excellence guidelines recommend diagnostic algorithms for children from five years and adults to support a clinical suspicion of asthma. Spirometry, bronchodilator reversibility and fractional exhaled nitric oxide testing are the first line tests to diagnose asthma in children. The introduction of these tests across all healthcare settings has the potential to reduce misdiagnosis, improve asthma management and reduce healthcare spending for asthma., (Copyright © 2019 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.)

Background: Cystic fibrosis is an inherited recessive disorder of chloride transport that is characterised by recurrent and persistent pulmonary infections from resistant organisms that result in lung function deterioration and early mortality in sufferers.Meticillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA) has emerged as, not only an important infection in long-term hospitalised patients, but also as a potentially harmful pathogen in cystic fibrosis, and has been increasing steadily in prevalence internationally. Chronic pulmonary infection with MRSA is thought to confer cystic fibrosis patients with a worse overall clinical outcome and, in particular, result in an increased rate of decline in lung function. Clear guidance for the eradication of MRSA in cystic fibrosis, supported by robust evidence from good quality trials, is urgently needed., Objectives: To evaluate the effectiveness of treatment regimens designed to eradicate MRSA and to determine whether the eradication of MRSA confers better clinical and microbiological outcomes for people with cystic fibrosis., Search Methods: Randomised and quasi-randomised controlled trials were identified by searching the Cochrane Cystic Fibrosis and Genetic Disorders Group's Cystic Fibrosis Trials Register, PUBMED, MEDLINE, Embase, handsearching article reference lists and through contact with local and international experts in the field.Date of the last search of the Group's Cystic Fibrosis Trials Register: 04 September 2014., Selection Criteria: Randomised or quasi-randomised controlled trials comparing any combinations of topical, inhaled, oral or intravenous antimicrobials with the primary aim of eradicating MRSA compared with placebo, standard treatment or no treatment., Data Collection and Analysis: The authors independently assessed all search results for eligibility. No eligible trials were identified for inclusion., Main Results: No current published eligible trials were identified, although three ongoing clinical trials are likely to be eligible for inclusion in future updates of this review., Authors' Conclusions: We did not identify any randomised trials which would allow us to make any evidence-based recommendations. Although the results of several non-randomised studies would suggest that, once isolated, the eradication of MRSA is possible; whether this has a significant impact on clinical outcome is still unclear. Further research is required to guide clinical decision making in the management of MRSA infection in cystic fibrosis.

Background: Cystic fibrosis is an inherited recessive disorder of chloride transport that is characterised by recurrent and persistent pulmonary infections from resistant organisms that result in lung function deterioration and early mortality in sufferers.Methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA) has emerged as, not only an important infection in long-term hospitalised patients, but also as a potentially harmful pathogen in cystic fibrosis, and has been increasing steadily in prevalence internationally. Chronic pulmonary infection with MRSA is thought to confer cystic fibrosis patients with a worse overall clinical outcome and, in particular, result in an increased rate of decline in lung function. Clear guidance for the eradication of MRSA in cystic fibrosis, supported by robust evidence from good quality trials, is urgently needed., Objectives: To evaluate the effectiveness of treatment regimens designed to eradicate MRSA and to determine whether the eradication of MRSA confers better clinical and microbiological outcomes for people with cystic fibrosis., Search Methods: Randomised and quasi-randomised controlled trials were identified by searching the Cochrane Cystic Fibrosis and Genetic Disorders Group's Cystic Fibrosis Trials Register, MEDLINE, EMBASE, handsearching article reference lists and through contact with local and international experts in the field.Date of the last search of the Group's Cystic Fibrosis Trials Register: 24 January 2013., Selection Criteria: Randomised or quasi-randomised controlled trials comparing any combinations of topical, inhaled, oral or intravenous antimicrobials with the primary aim of eradicating MRSA compared with placebo, standard treatment or no treatment., Data Collection and Analysis: The authors independently assessed all search results for eligibility. No eligible trials were identified., Main Results: No current published eligible trials were identified, although two ongoing clinical trials are likely to be eligible for inclusion in future updates of this review., Authors' Conclusions: We did not identify any randomised trials which would allow us to make any evidence-based recommendations. Although the results of several non-randomised studies would suggest that, once isolated, the eradication of MRSA is possible; whether this has a significant impact on clinical outcome is still unclear. Further research is required to guide clinical decision making in the management of MRSA infection in cystic fibrosis.