Biomedical subjects

E A Barley

Publications and source records attributed to E A Barley.

4 recordsLinked to original sources

PubMed2000

Family therapy for asthma in children.

BACKGROUND: Psychosocial and emotional factors are important in childhood asthma. Nevertheless, drug therapy alone continues to be the main treatment. Treatment programmes that include behavioural or psychological interventions have been developed to improve disturbed family relations in the families of children with severe asthma. These approaches have been extended to examine the efficacy of family therapy to treat childhood asthma in a wider group of patients. This review systematically examines these studies. OBJECTIVES: Recognition that asthma can be associated with emotional disturbances has led to the investigation of the role of family therapy in reducing the symptoms and impact of asthma in children. The objective of this review was to assess the effects of family therapy as an adjunct to medication for the treatment of asthma in children. SEARCH STRATEGY: We searched the Cochrane Airways Group trials register, Psychlit and Psychinfo. SELECTION CRITERIA: Randomised trials comparing children undergoing systematic therapy focusing on the family in conjunction with asthma medication, with children taking asthma medication only. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: One reviewer applied the study inclusion criteria. MAIN RESULTS: Two trials with a total of 55 children were included. It was not possible to combine the findings of these two studies because of differences in outcome measures used. In one study, gas volume, peak expiratory flow rate and daytime wheeze showed improvement in family therapy patients compared to controls. In the other study, there was an improvement in overall clinical assessment and number of functionally impaired days in the patients receiving family therapy. There was no difference in forced expiratory volume or medication use in both studies. REVIEWER'S CONCLUSIONS: There is some indication that family therapy may be a useful adjunct to medication for children with asthma. This conclusion is limited by small study sizes and lack of standardisation in the choice of outcome measures.

Adult↗

PubMed2000

Caffeine for asthma.

BACKGROUND: Caffeine has a variety of pharmacological effects. It is chemically related to the drug theophylline which is used to treat asthma. Accordingly, interest has been expressed in its potential role as an asthma treatment. A number of studies have explored the effects of caffeine in asthma, this is the first review to systematically examine and summarise the evidence. OBJECTIVES: Caffeine is a weak bronchodilator and it also reduces respiratory muscle fatigue. It has been suggested that caffeine may reduce asthma symptoms. The objective of this review was to assess the effects of caffeine on lung function and identify whether there is a need to control for caffeine consumption prior to lung function testing. SEARCH STRATEGY: We searched the Cochrane Airways Group trials register and the reference lists of articles. We also contacted study authors. SELECTION CRITERIA: Randomised trials of oral caffeine compared to placebo in adults with asthma. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Trial quality assessment and data extraction were done independently by two reviewers. MAIN RESULTS: Six trials involving a total of 55 people were included. The studies were all of cross-over design and of high quality. In comparison with placebo, caffeine appears to improve lung function for up to two hours after consumption. Forced expiratory volume in one minute showed a small improvement up to two hours after caffeine use (standardised mean difference -0.73, 95% confidence interval -1.20 to -0.25). Mid-expiratory flow rates also showed a small improvement with caffeine and this was sustained up to four hours. REVIEWER'S CONCLUSIONS: Caffeine appears to improve airways function modestly in people with asthma for up to four hours. People may need to avoid caffeine for at least four hours prior to lung function testing.

Adult↗

PubMed1999

A comparison of global questions versus health status questionnaires as measures of the severity and impact of asthma.

This study compared estimates of the severity and impact of asthma recorded using global questions of the type used in diary cards with health status measurements obtained using comprehensive questionnaires. Seventy-four outpatients with asthma, aged 17-76 yrs (mean 48 yrs) participated. Mean+/-SD forced expiratory volume in one second (FEV1) was 72+/-26% predicted. Patients recorded morning and evening peak expiratory flow rate (PEFR) and scaled their responses to the questions: "How has your asthma been today?" (asthma severity) and "How much effect has your asthma had on your life today?" (asthma impact) for 2 weeks. They then completed Juniper's Asthma Quality of Life Questionnaire (AQLQ) and the St George's Respiratory Questionnaire (SGRQ). Diary card scores for asthma impact were less severe than for asthma severity (p<0.0001). Both correlated with AQLQ and SGRQ total scores (r>0.7; p<0.0001). Some patients responded 'none' for asthma severity (n=10) or asthma impact (n=13) on all 14 days of recording. For these patients, FEV1 was <80% predicted, morning PEFR was <90% predicted and their AQLQ and SGRQ scores indicated significant health impairment. Diary card scores for asthma severity and impact were correlated with health status, but these global questions were insensitive in mild disease. Responses to these questions were influenced by their wording, so the number of symptom-free days calculated from diary cards will depend on the questions used. Standardization is required before symptom-free days can be used as a reliable measure of treatment efficacy.

Adolescent↗

PubMed1998

Asthma health status measurement in clinical practice: validity of a new short and simple instrument.

Health status (Quality of Life) questionnaires for use in asthma are generally too long or complex for routine use. A new short and simple measure of health status in asthma has been developed for this purpose. There are two versions, one containing 30 items (AQ30) and the other 20 items (AQ20). This study examined their cross-sectional and longitudinal properties and compared them with those of two established measures--the St. George's Respiratory Questionnaire (SGRQ) and the Asthma Quality of Life Questionnaire (AQLQ). Ninety asthmatic patients (mean age 46 years) participated. Mean post-bronchodilator forced expiratory volume in one second (FEV1) was 73 +/- 25 (SD)% predicted at baseline. Questionnaire data were collected twice, 12 weeks apart. Diary records of peak expiratory flow rate (PEFR) and daily asthma were kept for 14 days. The new questionnaires each took 3 min or less to complete. At baseline they correlated well with the SGRQ and AQLQ and showed the same pattern of correlations with clinical measures of asthma. Change scores for the new questionnaires correlated with those for the established measures. There was no advantage of the AQ30 over the AQ20. The AQ20 provides a simple method for obtaining valid health status estimates of asthmatics in routine clinical practice and has properties similar to more complex research instruments.

Adolescent↗