Assessment of Controversial Pediatric Asthma Management Options Using GRADE

Author:

Boluyt Nicole1,Rottier Bart L.2,de Jongste Johan C.3,Riemsma Rob4,Vrijlandt Elianne J.L.E.2,Brand Paul L.P.5

Affiliation:

1. Department of Pediatrics, Emma Children’s Hospital, Academic Medical Center, Amsterdam, Netherlands;

2. Department of Pediatrics, Beatrix Children’s Hospital, University Medical Center Groningen, Groningen, Netherlands;

3. Department of Pediatrics, Sophia Children’s Hospital, Erasmus University Medical Center, Rotterdam, Netherlands;

4. Kleijnen Systematic Reviews Ltd., Escrick Bussiness Park, York, United Kingdom;

5. Department of Pediatrics, Princess Amalia Children’s Clinic, Isala Klinieken, Zwolle, Netherlands

Abstract

OBJECTIVES: To develop explicit and transparent recommendations on controversial asthma management issues in children and to illustrate the usefulness of the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) approach in rating the quality of evidence and strength of recommendations. METHODS: Health care questions were formulated for 3 controversies in clinical practice: what is the most effective treatment in asthma not under control with standard-dose inhaled corticosteroids (ICS; step 3), the use of leukotriene receptor antagonist for viral wheeze, and the role of extra fine particle aerosols. GRADE was used to rate the quality of evidence and strength of recommendations after performing systematic literature searches. We provide evidence profiles and considerations about benefit and harm, preferences and values, and resource use, all of which played a role in formulating final recommendations. RESULTS: By applying GRADE and focusing on outcomes that are important to patients and explicit other considerations, our recommendations differ from those in other international guidelines. We prefer to double the dose of ICS instead of adding a long-acting β-agonist in step 3; ICS instead of leukotriene receptor antagonist are the first choice in preschool wheeze, and extra fine particle ICS formulations are not first-line treatment in children with asthma. Recommendations are weak and based on low-quality evidence for critical outcomes. CONCLUSIONS: We provide systematically and transparently developed recommendations about controversial asthma management options. Using GRADE for guideline development may change recommendations, enhance guideline implementation, and define remaining research gaps.

Publisher

American Academy of Pediatrics (AAP)

Subject

Pediatrics, Perinatology, and Child Health

Reference60 articles.

1. Global strategy for asthma management and prevention (revised 2008): Global Initiative for Asthma (GINA). Available at: www.ginasthma.com. Accessed August 2011

2. British guidelines on the management of asthma. 2011. Available at: www.brit-thoracic.org.uk. Accessed August 2011

3. Guidelines for the diagnosis and management of asthma. National Asthma Education and Prevention Program. 2007. Available at: www.nhlbi.nih.gov/guidelines/asthma/asthsumm.pdf. Accessed August 2011

4. Grading quality of evidence and strength of recommendations.;Atkins;BMJ,2004

5. Systems for grading the quality of evidence and the strength of recommendations I: critical appraisal of existing approaches The GRADE Working Group.;Atkins;BMC Health Serv Res,2004

Cited by 13 articles. 订阅此论文施引文献 订阅此论文施引文献,注册后可以免费订阅5篇论文的施引文献,订阅后可以查看论文全部施引文献

1. Management of Preschool Wheezing: Guideline from the Emilia-Romagna Asthma (ERA) Study Group;Journal of Clinical Medicine;2022-08-15

2. Research with children and youth;Paediatric Nursing in Australia and New Zealand;2022-01-31

3. Contexts of nursing care;Paediatric Nursing in Australia and New Zealand;2022-01-31

4. Preschool wheezing and asthma in children: A systematic review of guidelines and quality appraisal with the AGREE II instrument;Pediatric Allergy and Immunology;2020-10-05

5. Monoclonal Antibodies for Asthma Management;Asthma Diagnosis and Management - Approach Based on Phenotype and Endotype;2018-07-04

同舟云学术

1.学者识别学者识别

2.学术分析学术分析

3.人才评估人才评估

"同舟云学术"是以全球学者为主线,采集、加工和组织学术论文而形成的新型学术文献查询和分析系统,可以对全球学者进行文献检索和人才价值评估。用户可以通过关注某些学科领域的顶尖人物而持续追踪该领域的学科进展和研究前沿。经过近期的数据扩容,当前同舟云学术共收录了国内外主流学术期刊6万余种,收集的期刊论文及会议论文总量共计约1.5亿篇,并以每天添加12000余篇中外论文的速度递增。我们也可以为用户提供个性化、定制化的学者数据。欢迎来电咨询!咨询电话:010-8811{复制后删除}0370

www.globalauthorid.com

TOP

Copyright © 2019-2024 北京同舟云网络信息技术有限公司
京公网安备11010802033243号  京ICP备18003416号-3