Factors Associated With Severe Uncontrolled Asthma and the Perception of Control by Physicians and Patients

IntroductionDespite current treatments, more than half of patients with asthma are not controlled. The objective was to evaluate the correlation between control perceived by patients and physicians, compared with control evaluated according to criteria of the Spanish Guidelines for Asthma Management (GEMA), and to investigate the factors associated with that control.MethodsMulticenter, cross-sectional, observational study including 343 patients with severe persistent asthma according to GEMA criteria seen in the Department of Pulmonology and Allergology. The correlation between asthma control perceived by the patient, the physician and according to clinical judgment based on the GEMA criteria was calculated, and a multivariate analysis was used to determine variables related to the perception of asthma control.ResultsAccording to GEMA criteria, only 10.2% of patients were well controlled, 27.7% had partial control and 62.1% were poorly controlled. Both the physicians and the patients overestimated control: 75.8% and 59.3% of patients had controlled asthma according to the patient and the physician, respectively, and were not controlled according to GEMA (P<.0001). Patients with uncontrolled asthma according GEMA had higher body mass index (P=.006) and physical inactivity (P=.016). Factors associated with a perceived lack of control by both physicians and patients were: nocturnal awakenings (≥1 day/week), frequent use of rescue medication (≥5 days/week) and significant limitation in activities. Discrepant factors between physicians and patients were dyspnea and emergency room visits (patients only), FEV1≤80% and a poorer understanding of the disease by the patient (physicians only).ConclusionsOnly 10% of patients with severe asthma evaluated in this study are controlled according to GEMA criteria. Patients and physicians overestimate control and the overestimation by patients is greater. Physical inactivity and obesity are associated with a lack of control according to GEMA.     

Whole-Grain Intake in Middle School Students Achieves Dietary Guidelines for Americans and MyPlate Recommendations when Provided as Commercially Available Foods: A Randomized Trial

In accordance with the 2010 Dietary Guidelines for Americans, at least half of total grain intake should be whole grains. Adolescents are currently not consuming the recommended daily intake of whole grains. Research is needed to determine whether whole grains are acceptable to adolescents and whether changing their food environment to include whole-grain foods will improve intake. The aim of this study was to determine the effect of providing refined-grain or whole-grain foods to adolescents, with encouragement to eat three different grain-based foods per day, on total grain and whole-grain intakes. Middle school students (n=83; aged 11 to 15 years) were randomly assigned to either refined-grain or whole-grain foods for 6 weeks. Participants and their families were provided with weekly grains (eg, bread, pasta, and cereals), and participants were provided grain snacks at school. Intake of grains in ounce equivalents (oz eq) was determined through eight baseline and intervention targeted 24-hour diet recalls. Participants consumed 1.1±1.3 oz eq (mean±standard deviation) of whole grains at baseline, out of 5.3±2.4 oz eq of total grains. During intervention, whole-grain intake increased in the whole-grain group (0.9±1.0 to 3.9±1.8 oz eq/day), whereas those in the refined-grain group reduced whole-grain intake (1.3±1.6 to 0.3±0.3 oz eq/day; P<0.002, group by time period interaction). Total grain intake achieved was 6.4±2.1 oz eq/day and did not differ across intervention groups. Providing adolescents with whole-grain foods in their school and home environments was an effective means of achieving recommendations.     

Delivery of Enteral Nutrition after the Introduction of Practice Guidelines and Participation of Dietitians in Pediatric Critical Care Clinical Teams

Provision of optimal nutrition is often difficult to achieve in the critically ill child, but can improve with better nutritional support practices. This study evaluated the joint impact of the introduction of enteral feeding practice guidelines and participation of dietitians in daily ward rounds on enteral nutrition (EN) intake and practices in children in intensive care. Nutritional intake and EN practices were audited before (period A) and after (period B) the introduction of enteral feeding practice guidelines and participation of dietitians in daily ward rounds in a pediatric intensive care unit. Information was collected on a daily basis and nutritional intake was compared with predefined targets and the United Kingdom dietary reference values. There were 65 patients and 477 nutritional support days in period A and 65 patients and 410 nutritional support days in period B. Basal metabolic rate (BMR) energy requirements were achieved in a larger proportion of nutritional support days in period B (BMR achieved [% nutritional support days]; period A: 27% vs period B: 48.9%; P<0.001). In patients admitted for nonsurgical reasons, median energy, protein, and micronutrient intake improved significantly. In the same group, the percentage of daily fluid intake delivered as EN increased post implementation (period A: median=66.8%; interquartile range=40.9 vs period B: median=79.6%; interquartile range=35.2; P<0.001). No significant changes were seen in patients admitted for corrective heart surgery. Implementation of better EN support practice can improve nutritional intake in some patients in critical care, but can have limited benefit for children admitted for corrective heart surgery.     

Current approaches and questions yet to be resolved for the prophylaxis of post-endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography pancreatitis

Prophylaxis is important for post-endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) pancreatitis (PEP), which is the most common and serious complication of ERCP. Although the current guidelines include independent patient- and procedure-related risk factors for PEP and available PEP prophylactic measures, the synergistic effect of these risk factors on PEP should also be considered, given that patients often harbor multiple risk factors. Furthermore, a combination of prophylactic measures is often selected in clinical practice. However, established methods estimating the synergistic effect of independent risk factors on PEP incidence are lacking, and evidence on the impact of combining prophylactic measures on PEP should be discussed. Selection of appropriate candidate patients for ERCP is also important to reduce the incidence of PEP associated with unnecessary ERCP. ERCP indications in patients with asymptomatic common bile duct stones (CBDSs) and in those with suspected CBDSs with no imaging-based evidence of stones are controversial. Further studies are warranted to predict the synergistic effect of independent risk factors on PEP, determine the best prophylactic PEP measures, and identify appropriate candidates for ERCP in patients with asymptomatic CBDSs and those with suspected CBDSs.     

Implementing deprescribing guidelines into frontline practice: Barriers and facilitators

A Bruyère Evidence-Based Deprescribing Guideline Symposium was held in March 2018; one component focused on implementing deprescribing guidelines into practice. An interactive discussion activity allowed the 107 participants to share experiences and ideas concerning the barriers and facilitators that arise when moving deprescribing guidelines into frontline practice. Participants identified 8 broad challenges and problem areas. These included challenges and barriers that arise in the daily practices of pharmacists and prescribers and in other health care settings, and those related to existing policies, processes, and financial structures. They also identified 10 factors that facilitated implementation efforts, including: educating patients, caregivers, health care providers (HCPs) and staff; improving collaboration across practice disciplines; expanding the evidence for deprescribing; and fostering organizational cultures of deprescribing. The results indicate that participants are committed to deprescribing and are moving forward with efforts to bring about change. Participants recognize that the implementation of deprescribing is best conceived of as a comprehensive systems change, and that patients and the public need to be involved in deprescribing processes and activities.     

Deprescribing: Future directions for research

A World Café workshop was held at the Bruyère Evidence-Based Deprescribing Guidelines Symposium in March 2018 with 30 participants (researchers, clinicians, policy makers, stakeholders). This workshop explored priorities for future work in the field of deprescribing and deprescribing guidelines through group discussion. The discussions were guided by the following questions: (1) What are deprescribing research priorities (to inform guideline development), (2) What outcome measures are important for developing deprescribing guidelines, and (3) How do we evaluate the implementation and effectiveness of deprescribing guidelines? Discussion from all 3 questions identified 6 main priority areas: (1) conducting high-quality and long-term clinical trials that measure patient-important outcomes, (2) focusing on patient involvement and perspectives, (3) investigating the pharmacoeconomics of deprescribing interventions, (4) understanding deprescribing interventions in different populations, (5) generating evidence on clinical management during deprescribing (e.g. managing adverse drug withdrawal effects, subsequent re-prescribing), and (6) implementing interventions in clinical practice. These topics represent what a group of experienced researchers, clinicians, and stakeholders in the field collectively felt was important to consider for design and implementation of future deprescribing studies. The aim is for these findings to stimulate future discussions and be considered by granting agencies, policy makers, deprescribing research networks, and individual researchers planning future deprescribing studies.     

Guidelines for the use of human immunoglobulin therapy in patients with primary immunodeficiencies in Latin America

Antibodies are an essential component of the adaptative immune response and hold long-term memory of the immunological experiences throughout life. Antibody defects represent approximately half of the well-known primary immunodeficiencies requiring immunoglobulin replacement therapy. In this article, the authors review the current indications and therapeutic protocols in the Latin American environment. Immunoglobulin replacement therapy has been a safe procedure that induces dramatic positive changes in the clinical outcome of patients who carry antibody defects.