PubMed Health⌕ Search

Biomedical subjects

Aziz Sheikh

Publications and source records attributed to Aziz Sheikh.

8 recordsLinked to original sources

House dust mite barrier bedding for childhood asthma: randomised placebo controlled trial in primary care [ISRCTN63308372].

BACKGROUND: The house dust mite is the most important environmental allergen implicated in the aetiology of childhood asthma in the UK. Dust mite barrier bedding is relatively inexpensive, convenient to use, and of proven effectiveness in reducing mattress house dust mite load, but no studies have evaluated its clinical effectiveness in the control of childhood asthma when dispensed in primary care. We therefore aimed to evaluate the effectiveness of house dust mite barrier bedding in children with asthma treated in primary care. METHODS: Pragmatic, randomised, double-blind, placebo controlled trial conducted in eight family practices in England. Forty-seven children aged 5 to 14 years with confirmed house dust mite sensitive asthma were randomised to receive six months treatment with either house dust mite barrier or placebo bedding. Peak expiratory flow was the main outcome measure of interest; secondary outcome measures included asthma symptom scores and asthma medication usage. RESULTS: No difference was noted in mean monthly peak expiratory flow, asthma symptom score, medication usage or asthma consultations, between children who received active bedding and those who received placebo bedding. CONCLUSIONS: Treating house dust mite sensitive asthmatic children in primary care with house dust mite barrier bedding for six months failed to improve peak expiratory flow. Results strongly suggest that the intervention made no impact upon other clinical features of asthma.

Adolescent↗

Rhinitis.

Explore the source record for details and available documents.

Administration, Intranasal↗

Randomised controlled trials in primary care: scope and application.

There is now widespread acknowledgement of the absence of a sound evidence base underpinning many of the decisions made in primary care. Randomised controlled trials represent the methodology of choicefor determining efficacy and effectiveness of interventions, yet researchers working in primary care have been reluctant to use intervention studies, favouring observational study designs. Unfamiliarity with the different trial designs now available, and the relative advantages and disadvantages conferred by each, may be one factor contributing to this paradox. In this paper, we consider the principal trial designs available to primary care researchers, discussing the contexts in which a particular design may prove most useful. This information will, we hope, also prove useful to primary care clinicians attempting to interpret trial findings.

Bias↗

Safer medicines management in primary care.

Errors in the medicines management process represent an important source of iatrogenic harm in primary care. Most errors result from underlying systems-based problems that are amenable to intervention and potentially preventable. In this paper, we seek to identify the frequency of medication-related morbidity in primary care, understand the underlying systemic reasons that increase risk of medication-related errors and iatrogenic harm, and suggest strategies for improving the safety of medicines management.

Drug Interactions↗