Annotated Bibliography on Acute Asthma Management Sample
Introduction
Severe acute asthma is a clinical emergency that can easily be managed by various clinical therapies. However, if poorly managed, it can invariably lead to death by cardiorespiratory collapse. Typically, therapeutic management of severe asthma targets to increase air passage through bronchodilators dilation and oxygen supplementation. Ultimately, these therapies should stabilize the patient.
The available treatment options for children with severe acute asthma refractory to SAMA/LAMA combination are limited because the remaining ones are either not safe or are expensive. Nonetheless, the patients must the treated and therefore alternatives such as IV steroids with or without heliox are often used as the most feasible options. Against this backdrop, there are various pieces of research evidence that have confirmed the role of IV methylprednisolone as well as that of heliox in improving severe asthma. However, evidence on the latter is a bit controversial due to its side effects and availability. The current study seeks to unravel the available evidence on the use of IV methylprednisolone or a combination of IV methylprednisolone and heliox in the treatment of severe acute asthma in children between the age of 5-15 years old.
The study takes the form of an annotated bibliography; evaluating the quality of evidence in 8 peer reviewed journal articles. The review will summarize the content of each journal article in terms of its purpose, findings and implications of those findings to the management of severe acute asthma. It is worth noting that all the journal articles have been published within the past five years.
Article 1
Henderson, M. B., Schunk, J. E., Henderson, J. L., Larsen, G. Y., Wilkes, J., & Bratton, S. L.
(2018). An assessment of asthma therapy in the pediatric ICU. Hospital pediatrics, 8(6), 361-367. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1542/hpeds.2017-0003
Henderson et al. (2017) argue that asthma is one of the most common chronic respiratory condition in children affecting millions of children and continues to be a common cause of Intensive Care Unit (ICU) admission. Bearing this in mind, the authors conducted a study on asthma therapy in pediatric ICU, describing asthma management, evaluating practice evaluation, and describing the resource use during asthma management at the pediatric ICU.
Being a retrospective study single-center cohort study, it involved 262 children of age 2 to 18 years in pediatric ICU treated with asthma from 2008 to 201;1 with data collected through intermountain Healthcare Enterprise Data Warehouse. Majority of the participants only received only the first tier of recommended therapy (inhaled short-acting b-agonists, pre-hopsitalization inhaled ipratropium bromide, systemic corticosteroids and oxygen), while 70% of them did not receive any further respiratory support beyond non-breather mask or nasal cannula mask including inhaled nitric oxide, IV b-agonists, intravenous (IV) magnesium sulfate, inhaled heliox. While heliox were rarely used before or after pediatric ICU, no adverse event was reported on its use.
The study results indicated that most of the patients with severe asthma were treated with only the minimum interventions (i.e. first-tier medication, none-breather or nasal canular mask). These treatments minimized the pediatric ICU length of stay and thus reduced expenses involved in asthma care. these findings confirm that heliox can be used as a treatment therapy for asthma in pediatric ICU with no side effects. Its methodology was effective, and the resultant evidence can be useful in comparing the use of heliox versus the use of a combination of heliox and IV methylprednisolone.
However, the fact that this study was a single-hospital cohort study limits the generalization of its findings. Furthermore, the generalization of the study finding is also limited by the fact that it did not consider specific factors such as patient ethnicity, which was not a representative of the US population.
Article 2
Doymaz, S., Ahmed, Y. E., Francois, D., Pinto, R., Gist, R., Steinberg, M., & Giambruno, C.
(2020). Methylprednisolone, dexamethasone or hydrocortisone for acute severe pediatric asthma: does it matter?. Journal of Asthma, 1-10. https://doi.org/10.1080/02770903.2020.1870130
The study by Doymaz et al. (2020) was inspired by the statistics that asthma is a chronic
childhood illness that affects at least 6 million children and by 2017, it was responsible for 863 per every 100,000 deaths in the United States. Furthermore, the authors were motivated by the fact that whereas various intravenous IV corticosteroids are available of the treatment of acute severe asthma, the choice of IV corticosteroids largely depends on physician’s preferences or institution. Against this background, the researchers conducted a study to compare the efficacy of IV methylprednisolone, dexamethasone and hydrocortisone during pediatric ICU admission.
The study took the form of a randomized clinical trial that enrolled patients of 1-12 years old requiring continuous beta-2 agonist treatment.
The randomization was done in three groups: IV Dexamethasone group, IV Hydrocortisone and IV Methylprednisolone. The researchers measured primary outcomes based on durations of beta-2 agonist continuous nebulization treatment. On the other hand, the secondary outcomes were measured by pediatric asthma severity score, maximum dose of beta-2 agonist treatment, need for mechanic ventilation and pediatric ICU and hospital length of stay.
The study findings indicated no difference in efficacy of dexamethasone, hydrocortisone and IV methylprednisolone when used in appropriate doses to treat pediatric asthma. This was demonstrated by a no difference in the various outcome measurements such as B2 agonist maximum dose, pediatric asthma severity score, pediatric ICU length of stay and need for mechanic ventilation. While the generalization of these study findings is affected by the small sample cohort, it produces useful evidence to support the use of IV methylprednisolone in the management of pediatric severe asthma.
Article 3
Fishe, J. N., Gautam, S., Hendry, P., Blake, K. V., & Hendeles, L. (2019a). Emergency medical services administration of systemic corticosteroids for pediatric asthma: A statewide study of emergency department outcomes. Academic Emergency Medicine, 26(5), 549-551. https://doi.org/10.1111/acem.13660
Systemic corticosteroids have always been administered to children with asthma admitted in the emergency department with the aim of reducing their length of stay. However, as per Fishe et al. (2019a), there is a paucity of research examining the improvement effect of corticosteroids on patient outcomes. In response, the researchers conducted a state-wide study to investigate the emergency department outcomes upon the use of corticosteroids on paediatric asthma.
The retrospective observational cohort study relied on patients whose records remained in Florida’s EMS Tracking and Reporting System with information on emergency department’s outcome of patients between 2011 – 2016. The inclusion criteria were children of age 2-18 admitted in the emergency department with respiratory distress, whose acute asthma exacerbation was indicated by their receipt of albuterol. The study found that the administration of IV methylprednisolone was associated with decreased odds of emergency department discharge. Fishe et al. (2019a) attributed these results to a few reasons. For instance, IV methylprednisolone was only reserved for patients with more severe asthma.
The findings of this study are especially useful in understanding not only the effects of IV methylprednisolone as an emergency department intervention for severe asthma in children, but also the role of severity as a factor to consider when using IV methylprednisolone on pediatric asthma. Nonetheless, this study had several methodological limitations that must be pointed out. For instance, the study only focused on one state and this affects its generalizability to other areas of the United States. Furthermore, only on third of the patients had identifiable emergency department outcomes. More importantly, the researchers did not have any prior knowledge of any medications the patients had taken before their arrival at the emergency departments, affecting validity of the study.
Article 4
Fishe, J. N., Palmer, E., Finlay, E., Smotherman, C., Gautam, S., Hendry, P., & Hendeles, L.
(2019). A statewide study of the epidemiology of emergency medical services’ management of pediatric asthma. Pediatric Emergency Care. doi: 10.1097/PEC.0000000000001743
Fishe et al. (2019b) argued that at least ten percent of all pediatric emergency department patients use emergency medical services for transport and prehospital management. While studies show that the most frequently used medication was albuterol, there is a paucity of research evidence on pediatric emergency medical services experiences with respiratory distress or asthma. Therefore, the researchers set out to investigate the relevant clinical, geographic, demographic and characteristics of pediatric asthma treated in the emergency medical services in a state with the fourth-largest pediatric population to examine the current emergency medical services treatment practices.
The retrospective observational cohort study relied on patients whose records remained in Florida’s EMS Tracking and Reporting System with information on emergency department’s outcome of patients between 2011 – 2016. The inclusion criteria were children of age 2-18 admitted in the emergency department with respiratory distress, whose acute asthma exacerbation was indicated by their receipt of albuterol. The study found that in practice, IV methylprednisolone is reserved for the small percent of patients with generally more severe asthma. However, they are more liberally administered in the emergency department because they are of benefit to those with moderate and severe asthma exacerbations.
These findings are important to the study of IV methylprednisolone as a treatment therapy for pediatric asthma in the emergency department because it explores the general practice and how IV methylprednisolone is used. However, it has several methodological limitations that limits its generalizability. For instance, the study only focused on one state and this affects its generalizability to other areas of the United States. Furthermore, the EMS Tracking and Reporting System does not distinguish ground versus air transport, and therefore some emergency medical service users might have been omitted.