小儿丙酸氟替卡松Accuhaler/Diskus吸入器与Turbohaler吸入器的易操作性及临床疗效比较英国研究小组。

J Williams, K A Richards
{"title":"小儿丙酸氟替卡松Accuhaler/Diskus吸入器与Turbohaler吸入器的易操作性及临床疗效比较英国研究小组。","authors":"J Williams,&nbsp;K A Richards","doi":"","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>A total of 323 children aged 4-11 years who were receiving, or had symptoms indicating a clinical requirement for, inhaled corticosteroid at a daily dose of 400 micrograms budesonide (BUD) or beclomethasone dipropionate (BDP), or 200 micrograms fluticasone propionate (FP), were randomised into this multicentre, open-label, parallel group study. Patients received either FP 100 micrograms b.d. administered via the Accuhaler/Diskus inhaler (n = 159) or BUD 200 micrograms b.d. administered via a Turbohaler inhaler (n = 164) for four weeks and recorded daily their morning and evening peak expiratory flow (PEF), asthma symptoms and use of relief medication. Device handling was assessed by a questionnaire, with responses recorded on three- or five-point ordinal scales. The primary efficacy parameter was mean percent predicted morning PEF. The device handling results showed the Accuhaler/Diskus inhaler was rated more favourably than the Turbohaler inhaler in terms of ease of correct inhaler use, ease of telling how many doses were left, ease of knowing whether a dose had been inhaled and overall liking of the device. More patients in the Accuhaler/Diskus group (85%) than in the Turbohaler group (58%) said they would be happy to receive the same device again, while 8% and 25% respectively said they would not be happy to be given it again. In addition, the change from baseline to week 4 of treatment in mean percent predicted morning PEF was greater in the FP Accuhaler/Diskus group, indicating that FP 200 micrograms daily via Accuhaler/Diskus inhaler is at least as clinically effective as BUD 400 micrograms daily via the Turbohaler inhaler.</p>","PeriodicalId":22312,"journal":{"name":"The British journal of clinical practice","volume":"51 3","pages":"147-53"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"1997-04-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Ease of handling and clinical efficacy of fluticasone propionate Accuhaler/Diskus inhaler compared with the Turbohaler inhaler in paediatric patients. UK Study Group.\",\"authors\":\"J Williams,&nbsp;K A Richards\",\"doi\":\"\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>A total of 323 children aged 4-11 years who were receiving, or had symptoms indicating a clinical requirement for, inhaled corticosteroid at a daily dose of 400 micrograms budesonide (BUD) or beclomethasone dipropionate (BDP), or 200 micrograms fluticasone propionate (FP), were randomised into this multicentre, open-label, parallel group study. Patients received either FP 100 micrograms b.d. administered via the Accuhaler/Diskus inhaler (n = 159) or BUD 200 micrograms b.d. administered via a Turbohaler inhaler (n = 164) for four weeks and recorded daily their morning and evening peak expiratory flow (PEF), asthma symptoms and use of relief medication. Device handling was assessed by a questionnaire, with responses recorded on three- or five-point ordinal scales. The primary efficacy parameter was mean percent predicted morning PEF. The device handling results showed the Accuhaler/Diskus inhaler was rated more favourably than the Turbohaler inhaler in terms of ease of correct inhaler use, ease of telling how many doses were left, ease of knowing whether a dose had been inhaled and overall liking of the device. More patients in the Accuhaler/Diskus group (85%) than in the Turbohaler group (58%) said they would be happy to receive the same device again, while 8% and 25% respectively said they would not be happy to be given it again. In addition, the change from baseline to week 4 of treatment in mean percent predicted morning PEF was greater in the FP Accuhaler/Diskus group, indicating that FP 200 micrograms daily via Accuhaler/Diskus inhaler is at least as clinically effective as BUD 400 micrograms daily via the Turbohaler inhaler.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":22312,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"The British journal of clinical practice\",\"volume\":\"51 3\",\"pages\":\"147-53\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"1997-04-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"The British journal of clinical practice\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"The British journal of clinical practice","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

共有323名4-11岁的儿童接受或有症状表明临床需要吸入皮质类固醇,每日剂量为400微克布地奈德(BUD)或二丙酸倍氯米松(BDP),或200微克丙酸氟替卡松(FP),被随机分为多中心、开放标签、平行组研究。患者通过Accuhaler/Diskus吸入器(n = 159)每天服用100微克的FP,或通过Turbohaler吸入器(n = 164)每天服用200微克的BUD,持续四周,并记录每日早晚呼气峰流量(PEF)、哮喘症状和缓解药物的使用情况。设备处理通过一份问卷进行评估,调查结果按3或5分的顺序记录。主要疗效参数为预测早晨PEF的平均百分比。设备处理结果显示,Accuhaler/Diskus吸入器比Turbohaler吸入器在易于正确使用,易于告诉多少剂量剩余,易于知道剂量是否被吸入和设备的整体喜欢方面被评为更有利。Accuhaler/Diskus组(85%)比Turbohaler组(58%)更多的患者表示他们愿意再次接受相同的设备,而分别有8%和25%的患者表示他们不愿意再次接受相同的设备。此外,从基线到治疗第4周,FP Accuhaler/Diskus组预测早晨PEF的平均百分比的变化更大,这表明每天通过Accuhaler/Diskus吸入器治疗200微克FP与每天通过Turbohaler吸入器治疗400微克BUD的临床效果至少相同。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Ease of handling and clinical efficacy of fluticasone propionate Accuhaler/Diskus inhaler compared with the Turbohaler inhaler in paediatric patients. UK Study Group.

A total of 323 children aged 4-11 years who were receiving, or had symptoms indicating a clinical requirement for, inhaled corticosteroid at a daily dose of 400 micrograms budesonide (BUD) or beclomethasone dipropionate (BDP), or 200 micrograms fluticasone propionate (FP), were randomised into this multicentre, open-label, parallel group study. Patients received either FP 100 micrograms b.d. administered via the Accuhaler/Diskus inhaler (n = 159) or BUD 200 micrograms b.d. administered via a Turbohaler inhaler (n = 164) for four weeks and recorded daily their morning and evening peak expiratory flow (PEF), asthma symptoms and use of relief medication. Device handling was assessed by a questionnaire, with responses recorded on three- or five-point ordinal scales. The primary efficacy parameter was mean percent predicted morning PEF. The device handling results showed the Accuhaler/Diskus inhaler was rated more favourably than the Turbohaler inhaler in terms of ease of correct inhaler use, ease of telling how many doses were left, ease of knowing whether a dose had been inhaled and overall liking of the device. More patients in the Accuhaler/Diskus group (85%) than in the Turbohaler group (58%) said they would be happy to receive the same device again, while 8% and 25% respectively said they would not be happy to be given it again. In addition, the change from baseline to week 4 of treatment in mean percent predicted morning PEF was greater in the FP Accuhaler/Diskus group, indicating that FP 200 micrograms daily via Accuhaler/Diskus inhaler is at least as clinically effective as BUD 400 micrograms daily via the Turbohaler inhaler.

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
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
CANCER PREVENTION. COLIC. Diabetes mellitus. Renal artery stenosis. Tirofiban--spinning the data from fact to hype.
×
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