支气管扩张患者使用雾化高渗盐水和呼气正压装置:来自美国支气管扩张和非结核性肺病研究登记处的分析

IF 2.2 4区 医学 Q3 RESPIRATORY SYSTEM Respiratory Medicine and Research Pub Date : 2024-04-24 DOI:10.1016/j.resmer.2024.101107
Ashwin Basavaraj , Amanda E. Brunton , Radmila Choate , Alan Barker , Kunal Jakharia , Christopher Richards , Colin Swenson , Timothy R. Aksamit , Mark L. Metersky , Bronchiectasis and NTM research registry investigators.
{"title":"支气管扩张患者使用雾化高渗盐水和呼气正压装置:来自美国支气管扩张和非结核性肺病研究登记处的分析","authors":"Ashwin Basavaraj ,&nbsp;Amanda E. Brunton ,&nbsp;Radmila Choate ,&nbsp;Alan Barker ,&nbsp;Kunal Jakharia ,&nbsp;Christopher Richards ,&nbsp;Colin Swenson ,&nbsp;Timothy R. Aksamit ,&nbsp;Mark L. Metersky ,&nbsp;Bronchiectasis and NTM research registry investigators.","doi":"10.1016/j.resmer.2024.101107","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><h3>Background</h3><p>Nebulized Hypertonic saline (HS) and positive expiratory pressure device (PEP) are often used in patients with bronchiectasis. We sought to describe the clinical characteristics in patients using HS and PEP, utilizing a large national database registry.</p></div><div><h3>Methods</h3><p>Data from the US Bronchiectasis and NTM Research Registry were used in this study. Patients with a diagnosis of bronchiectasis were included. Eligible patients were assigned to one of four mutually exclusive groups: HS only, PEP only, HS &amp; PEP, or no airway clearance or mucoactive agent. Descriptive statistics were computed for the overall study population and stratified by the four groups. One-way ANOVA and chi-square tests were used to test the difference in the means in continuous variables and the association between categorical variables (respectively) across the four groups.</p></div><div><h3>Results</h3><p>A total of 2195 patients were included. Of those with bronchiectasis and a productive cough, a greater number of patients utilized HS only vs PEP only (17.5 % vs 9.1 %, <em>p</em> &lt; 0.001). Similar association was found in those with <em>Pseudomonas aeruginosa</em> (22.3 % HS only vs 6.5 % PEP only, <em>p</em> &lt; 0.001). There was a higher number of patients who used HS and PEP therapy in combination vs PEP therapy alone (25.0 % vs 9.1 %, <em>p</em> = 0.002), in those with a productive cough.</p></div><div><h3>Conclusions</h3><p>In patients with bronchiectasis and a productive cough or <em>Pseudomonas aeruginosa</em>, HS is used more often than PEP alone. There is a need for further analysis to compare these two modalities and explore the factors influencing their utilization.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":48479,"journal":{"name":"Respiratory Medicine and Research","volume":"86 ","pages":"Article 101107"},"PeriodicalIF":2.2000,"publicationDate":"2024-04-24","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Nebulized hypertonic saline and positive expiratory pressure device use in patients with bronchiectasis: Analysis from the United States Bronchiectasis and NTM research registry\",\"authors\":\"Ashwin Basavaraj ,&nbsp;Amanda E. Brunton ,&nbsp;Radmila Choate ,&nbsp;Alan Barker ,&nbsp;Kunal Jakharia ,&nbsp;Christopher Richards ,&nbsp;Colin Swenson ,&nbsp;Timothy R. Aksamit ,&nbsp;Mark L. Metersky ,&nbsp;Bronchiectasis and NTM research registry investigators.\",\"doi\":\"10.1016/j.resmer.2024.101107\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div><h3>Background</h3><p>Nebulized Hypertonic saline (HS) and positive expiratory pressure device (PEP) are often used in patients with bronchiectasis. We sought to describe the clinical characteristics in patients using HS and PEP, utilizing a large national database registry.</p></div><div><h3>Methods</h3><p>Data from the US Bronchiectasis and NTM Research Registry were used in this study. Patients with a diagnosis of bronchiectasis were included. Eligible patients were assigned to one of four mutually exclusive groups: HS only, PEP only, HS &amp; PEP, or no airway clearance or mucoactive agent. Descriptive statistics were computed for the overall study population and stratified by the four groups. One-way ANOVA and chi-square tests were used to test the difference in the means in continuous variables and the association between categorical variables (respectively) across the four groups.</p></div><div><h3>Results</h3><p>A total of 2195 patients were included. Of those with bronchiectasis and a productive cough, a greater number of patients utilized HS only vs PEP only (17.5 % vs 9.1 %, <em>p</em> &lt; 0.001). Similar association was found in those with <em>Pseudomonas aeruginosa</em> (22.3 % HS only vs 6.5 % PEP only, <em>p</em> &lt; 0.001). There was a higher number of patients who used HS and PEP therapy in combination vs PEP therapy alone (25.0 % vs 9.1 %, <em>p</em> = 0.002), in those with a productive cough.</p></div><div><h3>Conclusions</h3><p>In patients with bronchiectasis and a productive cough or <em>Pseudomonas aeruginosa</em>, HS is used more often than PEP alone. There is a need for further analysis to compare these two modalities and explore the factors influencing their utilization.</p></div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":48479,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Respiratory Medicine and Research\",\"volume\":\"86 \",\"pages\":\"Article 101107\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.2000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-04-24\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Respiratory Medicine and Research\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2590041224000230\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"RESPIRATORY SYSTEM\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Respiratory Medicine and Research","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2590041224000230","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"RESPIRATORY SYSTEM","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

背景高渗盐水(HS)和呼气正压装置(PEP)常用于支气管扩张症患者。我们试图利用大型国家数据库登记来描述使用 HS 和 PEP 患者的临床特征。研究纳入了确诊为支气管扩张症的患者。符合条件的患者被分配到四个互斥组中的一组:仅 HS 组、仅 PEP 组、HS & 组、PEP 组或无气道清除或粘液活性剂组。我们计算了整个研究人群的描述性统计数字,并按四个组别进行了分层。单因素方差分析和卡方检验分别用于检验连续变量均值的差异和四组分类变量之间的关联。在支气管扩张并伴有有痰咳嗽的患者中,仅使用 HS 与仅使用 PEP 相比,使用 HS 的患者人数更多(17.5% vs 9.1%,p < 0.001)。在铜绿假单胞菌患者中也发现了类似的关联(仅使用 HS 的患者占 22.3%,仅使用 PEP 的患者占 6.5%,p < 0.001)。结论 在支气管扩张伴有有痰咳嗽或铜绿假单胞菌的患者中,联合使用 HS 和 PEP 治疗的人数高于单独使用 PEP 治疗的人数(25.0 % vs 9.1 %,p = 0.002)。有必要进一步分析比较这两种方法,并探讨影响其使用的因素。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Nebulized hypertonic saline and positive expiratory pressure device use in patients with bronchiectasis: Analysis from the United States Bronchiectasis and NTM research registry

Background

Nebulized Hypertonic saline (HS) and positive expiratory pressure device (PEP) are often used in patients with bronchiectasis. We sought to describe the clinical characteristics in patients using HS and PEP, utilizing a large national database registry.

Methods

Data from the US Bronchiectasis and NTM Research Registry were used in this study. Patients with a diagnosis of bronchiectasis were included. Eligible patients were assigned to one of four mutually exclusive groups: HS only, PEP only, HS & PEP, or no airway clearance or mucoactive agent. Descriptive statistics were computed for the overall study population and stratified by the four groups. One-way ANOVA and chi-square tests were used to test the difference in the means in continuous variables and the association between categorical variables (respectively) across the four groups.

Results

A total of 2195 patients were included. Of those with bronchiectasis and a productive cough, a greater number of patients utilized HS only vs PEP only (17.5 % vs 9.1 %, p < 0.001). Similar association was found in those with Pseudomonas aeruginosa (22.3 % HS only vs 6.5 % PEP only, p < 0.001). There was a higher number of patients who used HS and PEP therapy in combination vs PEP therapy alone (25.0 % vs 9.1 %, p = 0.002), in those with a productive cough.

Conclusions

In patients with bronchiectasis and a productive cough or Pseudomonas aeruginosa, HS is used more often than PEP alone. There is a need for further analysis to compare these two modalities and explore the factors influencing their utilization.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Respiratory Medicine and Research
Respiratory Medicine and Research RESPIRATORY SYSTEM-
CiteScore
2.70
自引率
0.00%
发文量
82
审稿时长
50 days
期刊最新文献
Efficacy of convalescent plasma for the treatment of COVID-19 in lung transplant recipients: A multicenter French study. Prognosis of incidental lung cancer in lung transplant candidates. Evaluation of efficacy and safety of rituximab in patients with progressive interstitial lung disease (ILD) with inflammatory component (EvER-ILD2): A multicentre double-blind placebo-controlled randomized trial. Pleural ultrasound for pneumothorax diagnosis after computerised tomography-guided biopsy Physical activity and idiopathic pulmonary fibrosis: A prospective cohort study in UK Biobank and Mendelian randomization analyses
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1