The Cochrane Library and safety of systemic corticosteroids for acute respiratory conditions in children: an overview of reviews

Clinical utility of overviews on adverse events of pharmacological interventions

BACKGROUND

Overviews (i.e., systematic reviews of systematic reviews, meta-reviews, umbrella reviews) are a relatively new type of evidence synthesis. Among others, one reason to conduct an overview is to investigate adverse events (AEs) associated with a healthcare intervention. Overviews aim to provide easily accessible information for healthcare decision-makers including clinicians. We aimed to evaluate the clinical utility of overviews investigating AEs.

METHODS

We used a sample of 27 overviews exclusively investigating drug-related adverse events published until 2021 identified in a prior project. We defined clinical utility as the extent to which overviews are perceived to be useful in clinical practice. Each included overview was assigned to one of seven pharmacological experts with expertise on the topic of the overview. The clinical utility and value of these overviews were determined using a self-developed assessment tool. This included four open-ended questions and a ranking of three clinical utility statements completed by clinicians. We calculated frequencies for the ranked clinical utility statements and coded the answers to the open-ended questions using an inductive approach.

RESULTS

The overall agreement with the provided statements was high. According to the assessments, 67% of the included overviews generated new knowledge. In 93% of the assessments, the overviews were found to add value to the existing literature. The overviews were rated as more useful than the individual included systematic reviews (SRs) in 85% of the assessments. The answers to the open-ended questions revealed two key aspects of clinical utility in the included overviews. Firstly, it was considered useful that they provide a summary of available evidence (e.g., along with additional assessments, or across different populations, or in different settings that have not been evaluated together in the included SRs). Secondly, it was found useful if overviews conducted a new meta-analysis to answer specific research questions that had not been answered previously.

CONCLUSIONS

Overviews on drug-related AEs are considered valuable for clinical practice by clinicians. They can make available evidence on AEs more accessible and provide a comprehensive view of available evidence. As the role of overviews evolves, investigations such as this can identify areas of value.

UPDATE - 2022 Italian guidelines on the management of bronchiolitis in infants

Bronchiolitis is an acute respiratory illness that is the leading cause of hospitalization in young children. This document aims to update the consensus document published in 2014 to provide guidance on the current best practices for managing bronchiolitis in infants. The document addresses care in both hospitals and primary care. The diagnosis of bronchiolitis is based on the clinical history and physical examination. The mainstays of management are largely supportive, consisting of fluid management and respiratory support. Evidence suggests no benefit with the use of salbutamol, glucocorticosteroids and antibiotics with potential risk of harm. Because of the lack of effective treatment, the reduction of morbidity must rely on preventive measures. De-implementation of non-evidence-based interventions is a major goal, and educational interventions for clinicians should be carried out to promote high-value care of infants with bronchiolitis. Well-prepared implementation strategies to standardize care and improve the quality of care are needed to promote adherence to guidelines and discourage non-evidence-based attitudes. In parallel, parents' education will help reduce patient pressure and contribute to inappropriate prescriptions. Infants with pre-existing risk factors (i.e., prematurity, bronchopulmonary dysplasia, congenital heart diseases, immunodeficiency, neuromuscular diseases, cystic fibrosis, Down syndrome) present a significant risk of severe bronchiolitis and should be carefully assessed. This revised document, based on international and national scientific evidence, reinforces the current recommendations and integrates the recent advances for optimal care and prevention of acute bronchiolitis.

A review found heterogeneous approaches and insufficient reporting in overviews on adverse events

OBJECTIVES

To investigate reporting and methodological characteristics of overviews on adverse (drug-associated) events (AEs) of pharmacological interventions.

STUDY DESIGN AND SETTING

We searched MEDLINE, Embase, Epistemonikos, and the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews from inception to May 17, 2021 for overviews exclusively investigating AEs of pharmacological interventions. We extracted general, reporting, and methodological characteristics and analyzed data descriptively.

RESULTS

We included 27 overviews, 70% of which were published in 2016 or later. The most common nomenclature in the title was "overview" (56%), followed by "umbrella review" (26%). The median number of included systematic reviews (SRs) in each overview was 15 (interquartile range 7-34). Study selection methods were reported in 52%, methods for data extraction in 67%, and methods for critical appraisal in 63% of overviews. An assessment of methodological quality of included SRs was performed in 70% of overviews. Only 22% of overviews reported strategies for dealing with overlapping SRs. An assessment of the certainty of the evidence was performed in 33% of overviews.

CONCLUSION

To ensure methodological rigor, authors of overviews on AEs should follow available guidance for the conduct and reporting of overviews.

Which outcomes should be used in future bronchiolitis trials? Developing a bronchiolitis core outcome set using a systematic review, Delphi survey and a consensus workshop

OBJECTIVES

The objective of this study was to develop a core outcome set (COS) for use in future clinical trials in bronchiolitis. We wanted to find out which outcomes are important to healthcare professionals (HCPs) and to parents and which outcomes should be prioritised for use in future clinical trials.

DESIGN AND SETTING

The study used a systematic review, workshops and interviews, a Delphi survey and a final consensus workshop.

RESULTS

Thirteen parents and 45 HCPs took part in 5 workshops; 15 other parents were also separately interviewed. Fifty-six items were identified from the systematic review, workshops and interviews. Rounds one and two of the Delphi survey involved 299 and 194 participants, respectively. Sixteen outcomes met the criteria for inclusion within the COS. The consensus meeting was attended by 10 participants, with representation from all three stakeholder groups. Nine outcomes were added, totalling 25 outcomes to be included in the COS.

CONCLUSION

We have developed the first parent and HCP consensus on a COS for bronchiolitis in a hospital setting. The use of this COS will ensure outcomes in future bronchiolitis trials are important and relevant, and will enable the trial results to be compared and combined.

TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER

ISRCTN75766048.

Variation in Dexamethasone Dosing and Use Outcomes for Inpatient Croup

OBJECTIVES

Evaluate the association between dexamethasone dosing and outcomes for children hospitalized with croup.

METHODS

This study was nested within a multisite prospective cohort study of children aged 6 months to 6 years admitted to 1 of 5 US children's hospitals between July 2014 and June /2016. Multivariable linear and logistic mixed-effects regression models were used to examine the association between the number of dexamethasone doses (1 vs >1) and outcomes (length of stay [LOS], cost, and 30-day same-cause reuse). All multivariable analyses included a site-specific random effect to account for clustering within hospital and were adjusted for age, sex, race and ethnicity, presenting severity, medical complexity, insurance, caregiver education, and hospital. In cost analyses, we controlled for LOS.

RESULTS

Among 234 children hospitalized with croup, patient characteristics did not differ by number of doses. The proportion receiving >1 dose varied by hospital (range 27.9%-57.1%). In adjusted analyses, >1 dose was not associated with same-cause reuse (odds ratio 0.87 [95% confidence interval (CI): 0.26 to 2.95]) but was associated with 45% longer LOS (relative risk = 1.45 [95% CI: 1.30 to 1.62]). When we controlled for LOS, >1 dose was not associated with differential cost ($-31.2 [95% CI $-424.4 to $362.0]). Eighty-two (35%) children received dexamethasone before presentation.

CONCLUSIONS

We found significant interhospital variation in dexamethasone dosing and LOS. When we controlled for severity on presentation, >1 dexamethasone dose was associated with longer LOS but not reuse. Although incomplete adjustment for severity is one possible explanation, some providers may routinely keep children hospitalized to administer multiple dexamethasone doses.

Early administration of steroids in the ambulance setting: Protocol for a type I hybrid effectiveness-implementation trial with a stepped wedge design

BACKGROUND

Pediatric asthma exacerbations are a frequent reason for emergency care. Early administration of oral systemic corticosteroids (OCS) in the emergency department (ED) decreases hospitalization rates and ED length-of-stay (LOS). However, it is unknown whether even earlier OCS administration by emergency medical services (EMS) in the prehospital setting further improves outcomes.

PURPOSE

To describe the background and methods of a type 1 hybrid effectiveness-implementation trial of EMS-administered OCS for pediatric asthma patients incorporating a stepped wedge design and the RE-AIM framework.

METHODS

The study employs a non-randomized stepped wedge design where multiple EMS agencies adopt OCS as a treatment for pediatric asthma exacerbations at varying times. This design accommodates ethical considerations of studying pediatric subjects in the prehospital setting where informed consent is not feasible. We will compare hospitalization rates, ED LOS, and short-term healthcare costs between pediatric asthma patients who do and do not receive OCS from EMS. Using geographic information systems (GIS), we will measure how differences in outcomes scale with increasing EMS transport time. We will use the RE-AIM framework to guide a mixed methods analysis of barriers and enablers to EMS administration of OCS for pediatric asthma patients, including quantitative measures of adoption and uptake and qualitative EMS provider focus group data.

CONCLUSION

This trial will determine if earlier EMS administration of OCS to pediatric asthma patients decreases hospitalizations, ED LOS, and short-term healthcare costs, and if those outcomes scale with longer EMS transport times. We will identify barriers and enablers to implementing EMS-administered OCS for pediatric asthma patients.

Methylprednisolone Concentrations in Breast Milk and Serum of Patients with Multiple Sclerosis Treated with IV Pulse Methylprednisolone

BACKGROUND

It is commonly known that women with multiple sclerosis (MS) have an increased risk for relapses during the post-partum period. High-dose IV methylprednisolone is the first-line treatment for acute relapses. Methylprednisolone is administered to lactating women although there is insufficient data as to the levels of concentration in breast milk and serum, and the calculated steroid exposure to infants.

OBJECTIVES

The study aimed to measure the transfer of methylprednisolone into breast milk and the correlation of milk and serum methylprednisolone concentrations in breastfeeding MS patients during and after infusion therapy.

METHODS

IV methylprednisolone pulse therapy was given to 12 lactating MS patients. Breast milk and maternal serum samples were obtained; before infusion, 30 minutes into the infusion, at the end of infusion and at the 1^st, 2^nd, 4^th, 8^th, 12^th and 24^th hours subsequently.

RESULTS

The highest level of methylprednisolone concentration in breast milk (2.09 μg/ml) and serum (6.09 μg/ml) was detected at the end of the infusion. According to the measurements recorded at the 1^st, 2^nd, 4^th, 8^th, 12^th, and 24^th hours after infusion, the concentrations showed a gradual decrease both breast milk and serum. The milk and serum methylprednisolone concentrations were below detection limits just before infusion and at the 24^th hour after infusion. A highly significant correlation was found between breast milk and maternal serum levels. The absolute infant dose was calculated to be 69.50 μg/kg/day and the relative infant dose (RID) was 0.50%.

CONCLUSION

Results have shown that the transfer of methylprednisolone into breast milk seems to be low. Although, concentration levels may not seem to pose a threat to the infant, mothers can choose to wait 2 to 4 hours to further limit the level of exposure.

How can we minimise the use of regular oral corticosteroids in asthma?

Options to achieve oral corticosteroid (OCS)-sparing have been triggering increasing interest since the 1970s because of the side-effects of OCSs, and this has now become achievable with biologics. The Société de Pneumologie de Langue Française workshop on OCSs aimed to conduct a comprehensive review of the basics for OCS use in asthma and issue key research questions. Pharmacology and definition of regular use were reviewed by the first working group (WG1). WG2 examined whether regular OCS use is associated with T2 endotype. WG3 reported on the specificities of the paediatric area. Key “research statement proposals” were suggested by WG4. It was found that the benefits of regular OCS use in asthma outside episodes of exacerbations are poorly supported by the existing evidence. However, complete OCS elimination couldn’t be achieved in any available studies for all patients and the panel felt that it was too early to conclude that regular OCS use could be declared criminal. Repeated or prolonged need for OCS beyond 1 g·year⁻¹ should indicate the need for referral to secondary/tertiary care. A strategic sequential plan aiming at reducing overall exposure to OCS in severe asthma was then held as a conclusion of the workshop.

A yearly cumulative OCS dose above 1 g should be considered unacceptable in severe asthma and should make the case for referralhttp://bit.ly/34GAYLX

Prednisolone Versus Dexamethasone for Croup: a Randomized Controlled Trial

OBJECTIVES

The use of either prednisolone or low-dose dexamethasone in the treatment of childhood croup lacks a rigorous evidence base despite widespread use. In this study, we compare dexamethasone at 0.6 mg/kg with both low-dose dexamethasone at 0.15 mg/kg and prednisolone at 1 mg/kg.

METHODS

Prospective, double-blind, noninferiority randomized controlled trial based in 1 tertiary pediatric emergency department and 1 urban district emergency department in Perth, Western Australia. Inclusions were age >6 months, maximum weight 20 kg, contactable by telephone, and English-speaking caregivers. Exclusion criteria were known prednisolone or dexamethasone allergy, immunosuppressive disease or treatment, steroid therapy or enrollment in the study within the previous 14 days, and a high clinical suspicion of an alternative diagnosis. A total of 1252 participants were enrolled and randomly assigned to receive dexamethasone (0.6 mg/kg; n = 410), low-dose dexamethasone (0.15 mg/kg; n = 410), or prednisolone (1 mg/kg; n = 411). Primary outcome measures included Westley Croup Score 1-hour after treatment and unscheduled medical re-attendance during the 7 days after treatment.

RESULTS

Mean Westley Croup Score at baseline was 1.4 for dexamethasone, 1.5 for low-dose dexamethasone, and 1.5 for prednisolone. Adjusted difference in scores at 1 hour, compared with dexamethasone, was 0.03 (95% confidence interval -0.09 to 0.15) for low-dose dexamethasone and 0.05 (95% confidence interval -0.07 to 0.17) for prednisolone. Re-attendance rates were 17.8% for dexamethasone, 19.5% for low-dose dexamethasone, and 21.7% for prednisolone (not significant [P = .59 and .19]).

CONCLUSIONS

Noninferiority was demonstrated for both low-dose dexamethasone and prednisolone. The type of oral steroid seems to have no clinically significant impact on efficacy, both acutely and during the week after treatment.

Guideline on management of the acute asthma attack in children by Italian Society of Pediatrics

BACKGROUND

Acute asthma attack is a frequent condition in children. It is one of the most common reasons for emergency department (ED) visit and hospitalization. Appropriate care is fundamental, considering both the high prevalence of asthma in children, and its life-threatening risks. Italian Society of Pediatrics recently issued a guideline on the management of acute asthma attack in children over age 2, in ambulatory and emergency department settings.

METHODS

The Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation (GRADE) methodology was adopted. A literature search was performed using the Cochrane Library and Medline/PubMed databases, retrieving studies in English or Italian and including children over age 2 year.

RESULTS

Inhaled ß2 agonists are the first line drugs for acute asthma attack in children. Ipratropium bromide should be added in moderate/severe attacks. Early use of systemic steroids is associated with reduced risk of ED visits and hospitalization. High doses of inhaled steroids should not replace systemic steroids. Aminophylline use should be avoided in mild/moderate attacks. Weak evidence supports its use in life-threatening attacks. Epinephrine should not be used in the treatment of acute asthma for its lower cost / benefit ratio, compared to β2 agonists. Intravenous magnesium solphate could be used in children with severe attacks and/or forced expiratory volume1 (FEV1) lower than 60% predicted, unresponsive to initial inhaled therapy. Heliox could be administered in life-threatening attacks. Leukotriene receptor antagonists are not recommended.

CONCLUSIONS

This Guideline is expected to be a useful resource in managing acute asthma attacks in children over age 2.

Clinical Practice Guideline: Hoarseness (Dysphonia) (Update)

Objective

This guideline provides evidence-based recommendations on treating patients who present with dysphonia, which is characterized by altered vocal quality, pitch, loudness, or vocal effort that impairs communication and/or quality of life. Dysphonia affects nearly one-third of the population at some point in its life. This guideline applies to all age groups evaluated in a setting where dysphonia would be identified or managed. It is intended for all clinicians who are likely to diagnose and treat patients with dysphonia.

Purpose

The primary purpose of this guideline is to improve the quality of care for patients with dysphonia, based on current best evidence. Expert consensus to fill evidence gaps, when used, is explicitly stated and supported with a detailed evidence profile for transparency. Specific objectives of the guideline are to reduce inappropriate variations in care, produce optimal health outcomes, and minimize harm. For this guideline update, the American Academy of Otolaryngology—Head and Neck Surgery Foundation selected a panel representing the fields of advanced practice nursing, bronchoesophagology, consumer advocacy, family medicine, geriatric medicine, internal medicine, laryngology, neurology, otolaryngology–head and neck surgery, pediatrics, professional voice, pulmonology, and speech-language pathology.

Action Statements

The guideline update group made strong recommendations for the following key action statements (KASs): (1) Clinicians should assess the patient with dysphonia by history and physical examination to identify factors where expedited laryngeal evaluation is indicated. These include, but are not limited to, recent surgical procedures involving the head, neck, or chest; recent endotracheal intubation; presence of concomitant neck mass; respiratory distress or stridor; history of tobacco abuse; and whether the patient is a professional voice user. (2) Clinicians should advocate voice therapy for patients with dysphonia from a cause amenable to voice therapy. The guideline update group made recommendations for the following KASs: (1) Clinicians should identify dysphonia in a patient with altered voice quality, pitch, loudness, or vocal effort that impairs communication or reduces quality of life (QOL). (2) Clinicians should assess the patient with dysphonia by history and physical examination for underlying causes of dysphonia and factors that modify management. (3) Clinicians should perform laryngoscopy, or refer to a clinician who can perform laryngoscopy, when dysphonia fails to resolve or improve within 4 weeks or irrespective of duration if a serious underlying cause is suspected. (4) Clinicians should perform diagnostic laryngoscopy, or refer to a clinician who can perform diagnostic laryngoscopy, before prescribing voice therapy and document/communicate the results to the speech-language pathologist (SLP). (5) Clinicians should advocate for surgery as a therapeutic option for patients with dysphonia with conditions amenable to surgical intervention, such as suspected malignancy, symptomatic benign vocal fold lesions that do not respond to conservative management, or glottic insufficiency. (6) Clinicians should offer, or refer to a clinician who can offer, botulinum toxin injections for the treatment of dysphonia caused by spasmodic dysphonia and other types of laryngeal dystonia. (7) Clinicians should inform patients with dysphonia about control/preventive measures. (8) Clinicians should document resolution, improvement or worsened symptoms of dysphonia, or change in QOL of patients with dysphonia after treatment or observation. The guideline update group made a strong recommendation against 1 action: (1) Clinicians should not routinely prescribe antibiotics to treat dysphonia. The guideline update group made recommendations against other actions: (1) Clinicians should not obtain computed tomography (CT) or magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) for patients with a primary voice complaint prior to visualization of the larynx. (2) Clinicians should not prescribe antireflux medications to treat isolated dysphonia, based on symptoms alone attributed to suspected gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD) or laryngopharyngeal reflux (LPR), without visualization of the larynx. (3) Clinicians should not routinely prescribe corticosteroids for patients with dysphonia prior to visualization of the larynx. The policy level for the following recommendation about laryngoscopy at any time was an option: (1) Clinicians may perform diagnostic laryngoscopy at any time in a patient with dysphonia.

Disclaimer

This clinical practice guideline is not intended as an exhaustive source of guidance for managing dysphonia (hoarseness). Rather, it is designed to assist clinicians by providing an evidence-based framework for decision-making strategies. The guideline is not intended to replace clinical judgment or establish a protocol for all individuals with this condition, and it may not provide the only appropriate approach to diagnosing and managing this problem. Differences from Prior Guideline (1) Incorporation of new evidence profiles to include the role of patient preferences, confidence in the evidence, differences of opinion, quality improvement opportunities, and any exclusion to which the action statement does not apply (2) Inclusion of 3 new guidelines, 16 new systematic reviews, and 4 new randomized controlled trials (3) Inclusion of a consumer advocate on the guideline update group (4) Changes to 9 KASs from the original guideline (5) New KAS 3 (escalation of care) and KAS 13 (outcomes) (6) Addition of an algorithm outlining KASs for patients with dysphonia

Epiglottitis, Acute Laryngitis, and Croup

Epiglottitis, acute laryngitis, and croup (acute laryngotracheobronchitis) are infections of the upper airway, affecting the epiglottis, larynx, and larynx and trachea, respectively. Epiglottitis is a bacterial infection, while viruses cause nearly all cases of acute laryngitis and croup. Acute laryngitis in adults is usually self-limited. Epiglottitis, which used to be prevalent in children under age 5, is now seen more often in adults than in children. This decline in childhood epiglottitis is due to the Haemophilus influenzae type b (Hib) vaccine. Streptococci, including Streptococcus pneumoniae, are now important causes of epiglottitis. Croup is a viral infection, usually due to parainfluenza virus, that primarily affects children ages 6 months to 3 years old. Epiglottitis and croup can cause life-threatening loss of the airway, and misdiagnosis or mismanagement can result in fatalities. This chapter reviews the clinical features and treatment of these three upper respiratory tract infections.

Corticosteroids for treatment of sore throat: systematic review and meta-analysis of randomised trials

Objective To estimate the benefits and harms of using corticosteroids as an adjunct treatment for sore throat.Design Systematic review and meta-analysis of randomised control trials.Data sources Medline, Embase, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), trial registries up to May 2017, reference lists of eligible trials, related reviews.Study selection Randomised controlled trials of the addition of corticosteroids to standard clinical care for patients aged 5 or older in emergency department and primary care settings with clinical signs of acute tonsillitis, pharyngitis, or the clinical syndrome of sore throat. Trials were included irrespective of language or publication status.Review methods Reviewers identified studies, extracted data, and assessed the quality of the evidence, independently and in duplicate. A parallel guideline committee (BMJ Rapid Recommendation) provided input on the design and interpretation of the systematic review, including the selection of outcomes important to patients. Random effects model was used for meta-analyses. Quality of evidence was assessed with the GRADE approach.Results 10 eligible trials enrolled 1426 individuals. Patients who received single low dose corticosteroids (the most common intervention was oral dexamethasone with a maximum dose of 10 mg) were twice as likely to experience pain relief after 24 hours (relative risk 2.2, 95% confidence interval 1.2 to 4.3; risk difference 12.4%; moderate quality evidence) and 1.5 times more likely to have no pain at 48 hours (1.5, 1.3 to 1.8; risk difference 18.3%; high quality). The mean time to onset of pain relief in patients treated with corticosteroids was 4.8 hours earlier (95% confidence interval -1.9 to -7.8; moderate quality) and the mean time to complete resolution of pain was 11.1 hours earlier (-0.4 to -21.8; low quality) than in those treated with placebo. The absolute pain reduction at 24 hours (visual analogue scale 0-10) was greater in patients treated with corticosteroids (mean difference 1.3, 95% confidence interval 0.7 to 1.9; moderate quality). Nine of the 10 trials sought information regarding adverse events. Six studies reported no adverse effects, and three studies reported few adverse events, which were mostly complications related to disease, with a similar incidence in both groups.Conclusion Single low dose corticosteroids can provide pain relief in patients with sore throat, with no increase in serious adverse effects. Included trials did not assess the potential risks of larger cumulative doses in patients with recurrent episodes of acute sore throat.Systematic review registration PROSPERO CRD42017067808.

Safety of IV pulse methylprednisolone therapy during breastfeeding in patients with multiple sclerosis

BACKGROUND

Women with multiple sclerosis (MS) experience an increased risk of relapse in the postpartum period. High-dose methylprednisolone is the first-line treatment for acute relapses.

OBJECTIVES

To determine the transfer of methylprednisolone into human milk in breastfeeding MS patients.

METHODS

Methylprednisolone therapy was given for postpartum relapse to nine patients for three consecutive days, and seven patients received a daily infusion once a month. Breast milk samples were obtained before infusion and 1, 2, 4, 8, and 12 hours after completion of infusion.

RESULTS

Methylprednisolone concentrations in milk were below detection limits immediately before infusion. C_max was measured at 1, 2, 4, 8, and 12 hours after infusion and levels of 2.100, 1.659, 0.680, 0.174, and 0.102 µg/mL were determined, respectively. The absolute infant dose was 98.98 µg/kg/day, and the relative infant dose (RID) was 0.71% of the weight-adjusted maternal dose.

CONCLUSION

The level of methylprednisolone transfer into breast milk is very low. The RID for methylprednisolone was lower than the generally accepted value. As methylprednisolone therapy is of short duration, infant exposure would be very low should a mother choose to breastfeed 1 hour after infusion. Waiting 2-4 hours after infusion will limit infant exposure still further.

Management of acute respiratory diseases in the pediatric population: the role of oral corticosteroids

Respiratory diseases account for about 25% of all pediatric consultations, and 10% of these are for asthma. The other main pediatric respiratory diseases, in terms of incidence, are bronchiolitis, acute bronchitis and respiratory infections. Oral corticosteroids, in particular prednisolone, are often used to treat acute respiratory diseases given their anti-inflammatory effects. However, the efficacy of treatment with oral corticosteroids differs among the various types of pediatric respiratory diseases. Notably, also the adverse effects of corticosteroid treatment can differ depending on dosage, duration of treatment and type of corticosteroid administered — a case in point being growth retardation in long-course treatment. A large body of data has accumulated on this topic. In this article, we have reviewed the data and guidelines related to the role of oral corticosteroids in the treatment and management of pediatric bronchiolitis, wheezing, asthma and croup in the attempt to provide guidance for physicians. Also included is a section on the management of acute respiratory failure in children.

Patient- and parent-initiated oral steroids for asthma exacerbations

BACKGROUND

Asthma is a chronic inflammatory disease of the airways affecting an estimated 334 million people worldwide. During severe exacerbations, patients may need to attend a medical centre or hospital emergency department for treatment with systemic corticosteroids, which can be administered intravenously or orally. Some people with asthma are prescribed oral corticosteroids (OCS) for self-administration (i.e. patient-initiated) or to administer to their child with asthma (i.e. parent-initiated), in the event of an exacerbation. This approach to treatment is becoming increasingly common.

OBJECTIVES

To evaluate the effectiveness and safety of patient- or parent-initiated oral steroids for adults and children with asthma exacerbations.

SEARCH METHODS

We identified trials from Cochrane Airways' Specialised Register (CASR) and also conducted a search of the US National Institutes of Health Ongoing Trials Register ClinicalTrials.gov (www.clinicaltrials.gov) and the World Health Organization International Clinical Trials Registry Platform (apps.who.int/trialsearch). We searched CASR from its inception to 18 May 2016 and trial registries from their inception to 24 August 2016; we imposed no restriction on language of publication.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We looked for randomised controlled trials (RCTs), reported as full-text, those published as abstract only, and unpublished data; we excluded cross-over trials.We looked for studies where adults (aged 18 years or older) or children of school age (aged 5 years or older) with asthma were randomised to receive: (a) any patient-/parent-initiated OCS or (b) placebo, normal care, alternative active treatment, or an identical personalised asthma action plan without the patient- or parent-initiated OCS component.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently screened the search results to identify any studies that met the prespecified inclusion criteria.The prespecified primary outcomes were hospital admissions for asthma, asthma symptoms at follow-up and serious adverse events.

MAIN RESULTS

Despite comprehensive searches of electronic databases and clinical trial registries, we did not identify any studies meeting the inclusion criteria for this review. Five potentially relevant studies were excluded for two reasons: the intervention did not meet the inclusion criteria for this review (three studies) and studies had a cross-over design (two studies). Two of the excluded studies asked the relevant clinical question. However, these studies were excluded due to their cross-over design, as per the protocol. We contacted the authors of the cross-over trials who were unable to provide data for the first treatment period (i.e. prior to cross-over).

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

There is currently no evidence from randomised trials (non-cross-over design) to inform the use of patient- or parent-initiated oral corticosteroids in people with asthma.

An evaluation of harvest plots to display results of meta-analyses in overviews of reviews: a cross-sectional study

BACKGROUND

Harvest plots are used to graphically display evidence from complex and diverse studies or results. Overviews of reviews bring together evidence from two or more systematic reviews. Our objective was to determine the feasibility of using harvest plots to depict complex results of overviews of reviews.

METHODS

We conducted a survey of 279 members of Cochrane Child Health to determine their preferences for graphical display of data, and their understanding of data presented in the form of harvest plots. Preferences were rated on a scale of 0-100 (100 most preferred) and tabulated using descriptive statistics. Knowledge and accuracy were assessed by tabulating the number of correctly answered questions for harvest plots and traditional data summary tables; t-tests were used to compare responses between formats.

RESULTS

53 individuals from 7 countries completed the survey (19%): 60% were females; the majority had an MD (38%), PhD (47%), or equivalent. Respondents had published a median of 3 systematic reviews (inter-quartile range 1 to 8). There were few differences between harvest plots and tables in terms of being: well-suited to summarize and display results from meta-analysis (52 vs. 56); easy to understand (53 vs. 51); and, intuitive (49 vs. 44). Harvest plots were considered more aesthetically pleasing (56 vs. 44, p = 0.03). 40% felt the harvest plots could be used in conjunction with tables to display results from meta-analyses; additionally, 45% felt the harvest plots could be used with some improvement. There was no statistically significant difference in percentage of knowledge questions answered correctly for harvest plots compared with tables. When considering both types of data display, 21% of knowledge questions were answered incorrectly.

CONCLUSIONS

Neither harvest plots nor standard summary tables were ranked highly in terms of being easy to understand or intuitive, reflecting that neither format is ideal to summarize the results of meta-analyses in overviews of reviews. Responses to knowledge questions showed some misinterpretation of results of meta-analyses. Reviewers should ensure that messages are clearly articulated and summarized in the text to avoid misinterpretation.