-
European Journal of Pediatrics Apr 2021The Pediatric Acute Lung Injury Consensus Conference (PALICC) published pediatric-specific guidelines for the definition, management, and research in pediatric acute... (Observational Study)
Observational Study
The Pediatric Acute Lung Injury Consensus Conference (PALICC) published pediatric-specific guidelines for the definition, management, and research in pediatric acute respiratory distress syndrome (PARDS). Acute viral bronchiolitis (AVB) remains one of the leading causes of admission to PICU. Respiratory syncytial virus (RSV) is the most common cause of AVB. We aimed to evaluate the incidence of PARDS in AVB and identify the risk of RSV as a trigger pathogen for PARDS. This study is a retrospective single-center observational cohort study including children < 2 years of age admitted to the pediatric intensive care unit at St Mary's Hospital, London, and presented with AVB in 3 years (2016-2018). Clinical and demographic data was collected; PALICC criteria were applied to define PARDS. Data was expressed as median (IQR range); non-parametric tests were used. In this study, 144 infants with acute viral bronchiolitis were admitted to PICU in the study period. Thirty-nine infants fulfilled criteria of PARDS with RSV as the most common virus identified. Bacterial infection was identified as a risk factor for development of PARDS in infants with AVB.Conclusion: AVB is an important cause of PARDS in infants. RSV is associated with a higher risk of PARDS in AVB. Bacterial co-infection is a significant risk factor for development of PARDS in AVB. What is Known: • Bronchiolitis is a common cause of respiratory failure in children under 2 years. • ARDS is a common cause of PICU admission. What is New: • Evaluation of bronchiolitis as a cause of PARDS according to the PALLIC criteria. • Evaluation of different viruses' outcome in PARDS especially RSV as a commonest cause of AVB.
Topics: Bronchiolitis; Bronchiolitis, Viral; Child; Humans; Infant; London; Respiratory Distress Syndrome; Respiratory Syncytial Virus Infections; Retrospective Studies
PubMed: 33161501
DOI: 10.1007/s00431-020-03852-9 -
BMJ Clinical Evidence Jul 2008Acute bronchitis, with transient inflammation of the trachea and major bronchi, affects over 40/1000 adults a year in the UK. The causes are usually considered to be... (Review)
Review
INTRODUCTION
Acute bronchitis, with transient inflammation of the trachea and major bronchi, affects over 40/1000 adults a year in the UK. The causes are usually considered to be infective, but only around half of people have identifiable pathogens. The role of smoking or of environmental tobacco smoke inhalation in predisposing to acute bronchitis is unclear. A third of people may have longer-term symptoms or recurrence.
METHODS AND OUTCOMES
We conducted a systematic review and aimed to answer the following clinical question: What are the effects of treatments for acute bronchitis in people without chronic respiratory disease? We searched: Medline, Embase, The Cochrane Library, and other important databases up to September 2007 (BMJ Clinical Evidence reviews are updated periodically; please check our website for the most up-to-date version of this review). We included harms alerts from relevant organisations such as the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) and the UK Medicines and Healthcare products Regulatory Agency (MHRA).
RESULTS
We found 19 systematic reviews, RCTs, or observational studies that met our inclusion criteria. We performed a GRADE evaluation of the quality of evidence for interventions.
CONCLUSIONS
In this systematic review we present information relating to the effectiveness and safety of the following interventions: antibiotics (amoxicillin [with or without clavulanic acid], cephalosporins, or macrolides), antihistamines, antitussives, beta(2) agonists (inhaled or oral), cephalosporins, expectorants, and analgesics.
Topics: Acute Disease; Administration, Oral; Amoxicillin; Anti-Bacterial Agents; Antitussive Agents; Bronchitis; Cephalosporins; Humans
PubMed: 19445737
DOI: No ID Found -
The Cochrane Database of Systematic... Jun 2017The benefits and risks of antibiotics for acute bronchitis remain unclear despite it being one of the most common illnesses seen in primary care. (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
BACKGROUND
The benefits and risks of antibiotics for acute bronchitis remain unclear despite it being one of the most common illnesses seen in primary care.
OBJECTIVES
To assess the effects of antibiotics in improving outcomes and to assess adverse effects of antibiotic therapy for people with a clinical diagnosis of acute bronchitis.
SEARCH METHODS
We searched CENTRAL 2016, Issue 11 (accessed 13 January 2017), MEDLINE (1966 to January week 1, 2017), Embase (1974 to 13 January 2017), and LILACS (1982 to 13 January 2017). We searched the World Health Organization International Clinical Trials Registry Platform (WHO ICTRP) and ClinicalTrials.gov on 5 April 2017.
SELECTION CRITERIA
Randomised controlled trials comparing any antibiotic therapy with placebo or no treatment in acute bronchitis or acute productive cough, in people without underlying pulmonary disease.
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS
At least two review authors extracted data and assessed trial quality.
MAIN RESULTS
We did not identify any new trials for inclusion in this 2017 update. We included 17 trials with 5099 participants in the primary analysis. The quality of trials was generally good. At follow-up there was no difference in participants described as being clinically improved between the antibiotic and placebo groups (11 studies with 3841 participants, risk ratio (RR) 1.07, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.99 to 1.15). Participants given antibiotics were less likely to have a cough (4 studies with 275 participants, RR 0.64, 95% CI 0.49 to 0.85; number needed to treat for an additional beneficial outcome (NNTB) 6) and a night cough (4 studies with 538 participants, RR 0.67, 95% CI 0.54 to 0.83; NNTB 7). Participants given antibiotics had a shorter mean cough duration (7 studies with 2776 participants, mean difference (MD) -0.46 days, 95% CI -0.87 to -0.04). The differences in presence of a productive cough at follow-up and MD of productive cough did not reach statistical significance.Antibiotic-treated participants were more likely to be improved according to clinician's global assessment (6 studies with 891 participants, RR 0.61, 95% CI 0.48 to 0.79; NNTB 11) and were less likely to have an abnormal lung exam (5 studies with 613 participants, RR 0.54, 95% CI 0.41 to 0.70; NNTB 6). Antibiotic-treated participants also had a reduction in days feeling ill (5 studies with 809 participants, MD -0.64 days, 95% CI -1.16 to -0.13) and days with impaired activity (6 studies with 767 participants, MD -0.49 days, 95% CI -0.94 to -0.04). The differences in proportions with activity limitations at follow-up did not reach statistical significance. There was a significant trend towards an increase in adverse effects in the antibiotic group (12 studies with 3496 participants, RR 1.20, 95% CI 1.05 to 1.36; NNT for an additional harmful outcome 24).
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS
There is limited evidence of clinical benefit to support the use of antibiotics in acute bronchitis. Antibiotics may have a modest beneficial effect in some patients such as frail, elderly people with multimorbidity who may not have been included in trials to date. However, the magnitude of this benefit needs to be considered in the broader context of potential side effects, medicalisation for a self limiting condition, increased resistance to respiratory pathogens, and cost of antibiotic treatment.
Topics: Acute Disease; Anti-Bacterial Agents; Bronchitis; Cough; Humans; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic
PubMed: 28626858
DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD000245.pub4 -
Canadian Family Physician Medecin de... Feb 2008
Topics: Acute Disease; Adult; Anti-Bacterial Agents; Antitussive Agents; Bronchitis; Humans; Prognosis
PubMed: 18272643
DOI: No ID Found -
Annals of Internal Medicine Mar 2016Acute respiratory tract infection (ARTI) is the most common reason for antibiotic prescription in adults. Antibiotics are often inappropriately prescribed for patients...
Appropriate Antibiotic Use for Acute Respiratory Tract Infection in Adults: Advice for High-Value Care From the American College of Physicians and the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.
BACKGROUND
Acute respiratory tract infection (ARTI) is the most common reason for antibiotic prescription in adults. Antibiotics are often inappropriately prescribed for patients with ARTI. This article presents best practices for antibiotic use in healthy adults (those without chronic lung disease or immunocompromising conditions) presenting with ARTI.
METHODS
A narrative literature review of evidence about appropriate antibiotic use for ARTI in adults was conducted. The most recent clinical guidelines from professional societies were complemented by meta-analyses, systematic reviews, and randomized clinical trials. To identify evidence-based articles, the Cochrane Library, PubMed, MEDLINE, and EMBASE were searched through September 2015 using the following Medical Subject Headings terms: "acute bronchitis," "respiratory tract infection," "pharyngitis," "rhinosinusitis," and "the common cold."
HIGH-VALUE CARE ADVICE 1
Clinicians should not perform testing or initiate antibiotic therapy in patients with bronchitis unless pneumonia is suspected.
HIGH-VALUE CARE ADVICE 2
Clinicians should test patients with symptoms suggestive of group A streptococcal pharyngitis (for example, persistent fevers, anterior cervical adenitis, and tonsillopharyngeal exudates or other appropriate combination of symptoms) by rapid antigen detection test and/or culture for group A Streptococcus. Clinicians should treat patients with antibiotics only if they have confirmed streptococcal pharyngitis.
HIGH-VALUE CARE ADVICE 3
Clinicians should reserve antibiotic treatment for acute rhinosinusitis for patients with persistent symptoms for more than 10 days, onset of severe symptoms or signs of high fever (>39 °C) and purulent nasal discharge or facial pain lasting for at least 3 consecutive days, or onset of worsening symptoms following a typical viral illness that lasted 5 days that was initially improving (double sickening).
HIGH-VALUE CARE ADVICE 4
Clinicians should not prescribe antibiotics for patients with the common cold.
Topics: Acute Disease; Adult; Anti-Bacterial Agents; Bronchitis; Common Cold; Evidence-Based Medicine; Humans; Inappropriate Prescribing; Pharyngitis; Pneumonia, Bacterial; Respiratory Tract Infections; Rhinitis; Sinusitis; Streptococcal Infections; Streptococcus pyogenes; United States
PubMed: 26785402
DOI: 10.7326/M15-1840 -
The Cochrane Database of Systematic... Mar 2014The benefits and risks of antibiotics for acute bronchitis remain unclear despite it being one of the most common illnesses seen in primary care. (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
BACKGROUND
The benefits and risks of antibiotics for acute bronchitis remain unclear despite it being one of the most common illnesses seen in primary care.
OBJECTIVES
To assess the effects of antibiotics in improving outcomes and assess adverse effects of antibiotic therapy for patients with a clinical diagnosis of acute bronchitis.
SEARCH METHODS
We searched CENTRAL 2013, Issue 12, MEDLINE (1966 to January week 1, 2014), EMBASE (1974 to January 2014) and LILACS (1982 to January 2014).
SELECTION CRITERIA
Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) comparing any antibiotic therapy with placebo or no treatment in acute bronchitis or acute productive cough, in patients without underlying pulmonary disease.
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS
At least two review authors extracted data and assessed trial quality.
MAIN RESULTS
Seventeen trials with 3936 participants were included in the primary analysis. The quality of trials was generally good. There was limited evidence to support the use of antibiotics in acute bronchitis. At follow-up, there was no difference in participants described as being clinically improved between antibiotic and placebo groups (11 studies with 3841 participants, risk ratio (RR) 1.07, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.99 to 1.15; number needed to treat for an additional beneficial outcome (NNTB) 22. Participants given antibiotics were less likely to have a cough (four studies with 275 participants, RR 0.64, 95% CI 0.49 to 0.85; NNTB 6); have a night cough (four studies with 538 participants, RR 0.67, 95% CI 0.54 to 0.83; NNTB 7) and a shorter mean cough duration (seven studies with 2776 participants, mean difference (MD) -0.46 days, 95% CI -0.87 to -0.04). The differences in presence of a productive cough at follow-up and MD of productive cough did not reach statistical significance.Antibiotic-treated patients were more likely to be unimproved according to clinician's global assessment (six studies with 891 participants, RR 0.61, 95% CI 0.48 to 0.79; NNTB 25); have an abnormal lung exam (five studies with 613 participants, RR 0.54, 95% CI 0.41 to 0.70; NNTB 6); have a reduction in days feeling ill (five studies with 809 participants, MD -0.64 days, 95% CI -1.16 to -0.13) and a reduction in days with limited activity (six studies with 767 participants MD -0.49 days, 95% CI -0.94 to -0.04). The differences in proportions with activity limitations at follow-up did not reach statistical significance. There was a significant trend towards an increase in adverse effects in the antibiotic group (12 studies with 3496 participants) (RR 1.20, 95% CI 1.05 to 1.36; NNT for an additional adverse effect 5).
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS
There is limited evidence to support the use of antibiotics in acute bronchitis. Antibiotics may have a modest beneficial effect in some patients such as frail, elderly people with multimorbidity who may not have been included in trials to date. However, the magnitude of this benefit needs to be considered in the broader context of potential side effects, medicalisation for a self-limiting condition, increased resistance to respiratory pathogens and cost of antibiotic treatment.
Topics: Acute Disease; Anti-Bacterial Agents; Bronchitis; Cough; Humans; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic
PubMed: 24585130
DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD000245.pub3 -
Respiratory Care Mar 2021No studies have investigated the use and safety of high-frequency chest wall compression (HFCWC) for non-hospitalized infants with acute viral bronchiolitis (AVB). The... (Randomized Controlled Trial)
Randomized Controlled Trial
BACKGROUND
No studies have investigated the use and safety of high-frequency chest wall compression (HFCWC) for non-hospitalized infants with acute viral bronchiolitis (AVB). The aim of the present study was to evaluate the immediate effects and safety of HFCWC as compared to airway clearance techniques in children with AVB.
METHODS
In this randomized clinical trial in non-hospitalized infants (0-12 months old) with mild to moderate AVB, children were randomized into 2 groups: airway clearance techniques (20 min of prolonged slow expiration and provoked cough) or HFCWC (15 min). A single session was performed and children were evaluated at baseline and at 10 min and 20 min after treatments. Outcomes measures were the Wang severity score, [Formula: see text], sputum wet-weight, and the presence of adverse events.
RESULTS
A total of 91 infant subjects, mean age 7.9 ± 2.6 months, were included. Significant ( = .004) between-group differences were found in the Wang score, which was 0.28 points lower in the airway clearance techniques group. There was a greater increase of infants classified as normal and a greater decrease of those classified as mild according to the Wang score when airway clearance techniques were used compared to the use of HFCWC ( = .009). The sputum wet-weight was lower in subjects treated with the airway clearance techniques ( < .001). Although [Formula: see text]improved in both groups, no differences were found between them. There was also no difference for adverse events, and the majority of children did not present any adverse events after 20 min.
CONCLUSIONS
The use of HFCWC induced similar clinical effects as airway clearance techniques and was safe for non-hospitalized infants with AVB. Both techniques reduced respiratory symptoms and acutely improved [Formula: see text]. (ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT03835936.).
Topics: Bronchiolitis; Bronchiolitis, Viral; Chest Wall Oscillation; Child; Child, Preschool; Humans; Infant; Infant, Newborn; Respiratory Therapy; Sputum
PubMed: 33144386
DOI: 10.4187/respcare.08177 -
American Family Physician Mar 1998Acute bronchitis is a lower respiratory tract infection that causes reversible bronchial inflammation. In up to 95 percent of cases, the cause, is viral. While... (Review)
Review
Acute bronchitis is a lower respiratory tract infection that causes reversible bronchial inflammation. In up to 95 percent of cases, the cause, is viral. While antibiotics are often prescribed for patients with acute bronchitis, little evidence shows that these agents provide significant symptomatic relief or shorten the course of the illness. In a few small studies, bronchodilators such as albuterol have been found to relieve some symptoms of acute bronchitis. Increased attention is being given to the role of Chlamydia species in acute bronchitis and adult-onset asthma. Studies in progress may help to clarify the importance of these organisms in acute bronchitis and to determine whether early treatment can prevent or ameliorate asthma.
Topics: Acute Disease; Asthma; Bronchitis; Bronchodilator Agents; Diagnosis, Differential; Humans; Patient Education as Topic; Teaching Materials
PubMed: 9531910
DOI: No ID Found -
Journal of Evidence-based Medicine Dec 2021Chinese medicine (CM) has significant clinical effects in the treatment of trachea-bronchitis. It is of important clinical significance to formulate guidelines for the...
Chinese medicine (CM) has significant clinical effects in the treatment of trachea-bronchitis. It is of important clinical significance to formulate guidelines for the diagnosis and treatment of tracheal-bronchitis based on the characteristics of TCM syndrome differentiation. The Respiratory Disease Branch of China Association of Chinese Medicine and Respiratory Disease Branch of China Medical Association of Minorities have organized and established a multidisciplinary working group, based on the World Health Organization Handbook for Guideline Development and the Guideline Development Handbook for Diagnosis and Therapy of Integrative Medicine to develop this guideline. It has been developed through technical links such as clinical problem investigation, evidence collection and evaluation, Delphi method, and expert consensus meetings. Based on the current best evidence, CM intervention costs and expert experience, 25 recommendations were established to standardize the etiology and pathogenesis of tracheal-bronchitis, syndrome differentiation and treatment, prevention, and care, etc., which can be used by respiratory physicians at all levels of TCM medical institutions.
Topics: Acute Disease; Bronchitis; Humans; Integrative Medicine; Medicine, Chinese Traditional; Trachea
PubMed: 34936217
DOI: 10.1111/jebm.12460 -
The Lancet. Infectious Diseases Jan 2023Seasonal epidemics of respiratory syncytial virus (RSV) cause a clinically significant burden of disease among young children. Non-pharmaceutical interventions targeted... (Observational Study)
Observational Study
Epidemiology of respiratory syncytial virus in children younger than 5 years in England during the COVID-19 pandemic, measured by laboratory, clinical, and syndromic surveillance: a retrospective observational study.
BACKGROUND
Seasonal epidemics of respiratory syncytial virus (RSV) cause a clinically significant burden of disease among young children. Non-pharmaceutical interventions targeted at SARS-CoV-2 have affected the activity of other respiratory pathogens. We describe changes in the epidemiology of RSV among children younger than 5 years in England since 2020.
METHODS
Surveillance data on RSV infections, comprising laboratory-confirmed cases, proportion of positive tests, hospital admissions for RSV-attributable illness, and syndromic indicators for RSV-associated disease (emergency department attendances for acute bronchitis or bronchiolitis, non-emergency health advice telephone service [NHS 111] calls for cough, general practitioner [GP] in-hours consultations for respiratory tract infections, and GP out-of-hours contacts for acute bronchitis or bronchiolitis) were analysed from Dec 29, 2014 to March 13, 2022, for children younger than 5 years. Data were extracted from national laboratory, clinical, and syndromic surveillance systems. Time-series analyses using generalised linear models were used to estimate the effect of non-pharmaceutical interventions targeting SARS-CoV-2 on RSV indicators, with absolute and relative changes calculated by comparing observed and predicted values.
FINDINGS
RSV-associated activity was reduced for all RSV indicators during winter 2020-21 in England, with 10 280 (relative change -99·5% [95% prediction interval -100·0 to -99·1]) fewer laboratory-confirmed cases, 22·2 (-99·6%) percentage points lower test positivity, 92 530 (-80·8% [-80·9 to -80·8]) fewer hospital admissions, 96 672 (-73·7% [-73·7 to -73·7]) fewer NHS 111 calls, 2924 (-88·8% [-90·4 to -87·2]) fewer out-of-hours GP contacts, 91 304 (-89·9% [-90·0 to -89·9]) in-hours GP consultations, and 27 486 (-85·3% [-85·4 to -85·2]) fewer emergency department attendances for children younger than 5 years compared with predicted values based on winter seasons before the COVID-19 pandemic. An unprecedented summer surge of RSV activity occurred in 2021, including 11 255 (1258·3% [1178·3 to 1345·8]) extra laboratory-confirmed cases, 11·6 percentage points (527·3%) higher test positivity, 7604 (10·7% [10·7 to 10·8]) additional hospital admissions, 84 425 (124·8% [124·7 to 124·9]) more calls to NHS 111, 409 (39·0% [36·6 to 41·8]) more out-of-hours GP contacts, and 9789 (84·9% [84·5 to 85·4]) more emergency department attendances compared with the predicted values, although there were 21 805 (-34·1% [-34·1 to -34·0]) fewer in-hours GP consultations than expected. Most indicators were also lower than expected in winter 2021-22, although to a lesser extent than in winter 2020-21.
INTERPRETATION
The extraordinary absence of RSV during winter 2020-21 probably resulted in a cohort of young children without natural immunity to RSV, thereby raising the potential for increased RSV incidence, out-of-season activity, and health-service pressures when measures to restrict SARS-CoV-2 transmission were relaxed.
FUNDING
None.
Topics: Humans; Child; Infant; Child, Preschool; COVID-19; Sentinel Surveillance; Pandemics; Laboratories, Clinical; SARS-CoV-2; Respiratory Syncytial Virus, Human; Respiratory Syncytial Virus Infections; England; Bronchiolitis; Bronchitis; Seasons
PubMed: 36063828
DOI: 10.1016/S1473-3099(22)00525-4