急诊医生对哮喘加重时支气管扩张剂使用的偏好:一项横断面研究。

IF 1.7 4区 医学 Q3 ALLERGY
Journal of Asthma Pub Date : 2025-02-01 Epub Date: 2024-09-13 DOI:10.1080/02770903.2024.2400605
Abdullah K Almutairi, Faisal A AlGhamdi, Dana Althawadi, Mohammad A Alkhofi, Abdullah A Yousef
{"title":"急诊医生对哮喘加重时支气管扩张剂使用的偏好:一项横断面研究。","authors":"Abdullah K Almutairi, Faisal A AlGhamdi, Dana Althawadi, Mohammad A Alkhofi, Abdullah A Yousef","doi":"10.1080/02770903.2024.2400605","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>Asthma is a chronic respiratory disorder characterized by airway inflammation and narrowing often leading to acute exacerbations that necessitate a visit to the emergency department (ED). While life threatening cases usually require bronchodilator delivery by nebulizers, mild to moderate acute asthma exacerbations can be treated by bronchodilators delivered either by metered dose inhalers (MDI). Numerous studies have attempted to compare between the two modalities and have drawn similar conclusions in that both are comparable in efficacy with minimal differences. What is evident, however, is that physicians remain inclined to favor nebulizers in the majority of acute asthma exacerbations.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>In this questionnaire-based study, a survey was distributed to physicians who treat asthma exacerbations to examine demographics, knowledge, beliefs, and current practice in regard to bronchodilator therapy.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The majority (90.8%) of physicians prefer short-acting beta agonists <i>via</i> nebulizer, with 9.2% favoring MDI + spacer. Participants include consultants, residents, and specialists across various emergency disciplines. While 90.1% find MDI + spacer equally effective as nebulizers, advantages cited include cost-effectiveness (49.6%), shorter ED stays (63.4%), quicker administration (67.9%), and ease of use (58.8%). Challenges include availability (66.4%) and ineffectiveness in younger patients (45%). Despite this, 65.6% are willing to switch to MDI for initial asthma management in the ED, while 34.4% are resistant.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Concerns about availability and effectiveness in younger patients remain barriers. However, a significant number are willing to adopt MDIs with spacers, indicating potential for broader use with better availability and training.</p>","PeriodicalId":15076,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Asthma","volume":" ","pages":"312-318"},"PeriodicalIF":1.7000,"publicationDate":"2025-02-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Emergency physicians' preferences in bronchodilator delivery for asthma exacerbations: a cross-sectional study.\",\"authors\":\"Abdullah K Almutairi, Faisal A AlGhamdi, Dana Althawadi, Mohammad A Alkhofi, Abdullah A Yousef\",\"doi\":\"10.1080/02770903.2024.2400605\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>Asthma is a chronic respiratory disorder characterized by airway inflammation and narrowing often leading to acute exacerbations that necessitate a visit to the emergency department (ED). While life threatening cases usually require bronchodilator delivery by nebulizers, mild to moderate acute asthma exacerbations can be treated by bronchodilators delivered either by metered dose inhalers (MDI). Numerous studies have attempted to compare between the two modalities and have drawn similar conclusions in that both are comparable in efficacy with minimal differences. What is evident, however, is that physicians remain inclined to favor nebulizers in the majority of acute asthma exacerbations.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>In this questionnaire-based study, a survey was distributed to physicians who treat asthma exacerbations to examine demographics, knowledge, beliefs, and current practice in regard to bronchodilator therapy.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The majority (90.8%) of physicians prefer short-acting beta agonists <i>via</i> nebulizer, with 9.2% favoring MDI + spacer. Participants include consultants, residents, and specialists across various emergency disciplines. While 90.1% find MDI + spacer equally effective as nebulizers, advantages cited include cost-effectiveness (49.6%), shorter ED stays (63.4%), quicker administration (67.9%), and ease of use (58.8%). Challenges include availability (66.4%) and ineffectiveness in younger patients (45%). Despite this, 65.6% are willing to switch to MDI for initial asthma management in the ED, while 34.4% are resistant.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Concerns about availability and effectiveness in younger patients remain barriers. However, a significant number are willing to adopt MDIs with spacers, indicating potential for broader use with better availability and training.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":15076,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Asthma\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"312-318\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.7000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-02-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Asthma\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1080/02770903.2024.2400605\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2024/9/13 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"Epub\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"ALLERGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Asthma","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/02770903.2024.2400605","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/9/13 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"ALLERGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

哮喘是一种慢性呼吸系统疾病,其特点是气道炎症和狭窄,经常导致急性加重,因此必须到急诊科(ED)就诊。哮喘严重时会危及生命,轻度至中度哮喘可通过雾化器或计量吸入器(MDI)使用支气管扩张剂来治疗。许多研究都试图对这两种方法进行比较,并得出了相似的结论,即两种方法的疗效相当,差异很小。但显而易见的是,在大多数哮喘急性加重的情况下,医生仍然倾向于使用雾化器。在这项以问卷调查为基础的研究中,我们向治疗哮喘加重的医生发放了一份调查问卷,以了解他们对支气管扩张剂治疗的人口统计学、知识、信念和当前做法。结果发现,大多数医生(90.8%)倾向于通过雾化器使用短效β受体激动剂,9.2%的医生倾向于使用 MDI + spacer。参与者包括顾问、住院医师和各急诊学科的专家。90.1%的人认为 MDI + 喷雾器与雾化器同样有效,其优点包括成本效益高(49.6%)、急诊室停留时间短(63.4%)、给药快(67.9%)和使用方便(58.8%)。面临的挑战包括可用性(66.4%)和对年轻患者无效(45%)。尽管如此,65.6% 的患者愿意在急诊室改用计量吸入器进行初始哮喘治疗,34.4% 的患者表示抗拒。年轻患者对计量吸入器的可用性和有效性的担忧仍然是障碍。不过,有相当多的患者愿意采用带间隔器的计量吸入器,这表明如果有更好的供应和培训,计量吸入器有可能得到更广泛的使用。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Emergency physicians' preferences in bronchodilator delivery for asthma exacerbations: a cross-sectional study.

Objective: Asthma is a chronic respiratory disorder characterized by airway inflammation and narrowing often leading to acute exacerbations that necessitate a visit to the emergency department (ED). While life threatening cases usually require bronchodilator delivery by nebulizers, mild to moderate acute asthma exacerbations can be treated by bronchodilators delivered either by metered dose inhalers (MDI). Numerous studies have attempted to compare between the two modalities and have drawn similar conclusions in that both are comparable in efficacy with minimal differences. What is evident, however, is that physicians remain inclined to favor nebulizers in the majority of acute asthma exacerbations.

Methods: In this questionnaire-based study, a survey was distributed to physicians who treat asthma exacerbations to examine demographics, knowledge, beliefs, and current practice in regard to bronchodilator therapy.

Results: The majority (90.8%) of physicians prefer short-acting beta agonists via nebulizer, with 9.2% favoring MDI + spacer. Participants include consultants, residents, and specialists across various emergency disciplines. While 90.1% find MDI + spacer equally effective as nebulizers, advantages cited include cost-effectiveness (49.6%), shorter ED stays (63.4%), quicker administration (67.9%), and ease of use (58.8%). Challenges include availability (66.4%) and ineffectiveness in younger patients (45%). Despite this, 65.6% are willing to switch to MDI for initial asthma management in the ED, while 34.4% are resistant.

Conclusion: Concerns about availability and effectiveness in younger patients remain barriers. However, a significant number are willing to adopt MDIs with spacers, indicating potential for broader use with better availability and training.

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
Journal of Asthma
Journal of Asthma 医学-过敏
CiteScore
4.00
自引率
5.30%
发文量
158
审稿时长
3-8 weeks
期刊介绍: Providing an authoritative open forum on asthma and related conditions, Journal of Asthma publishes clinical research around such topics as asthma management, critical and long-term care, preventative measures, environmental counselling, and patient education.
×
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
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
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 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信