PubMed Health⌕ Search

Biomedical subjects

M H Frame

Publications and source records attributed to M H Frame.

20 records · Page 2Linked to original sources

The potential value of a 750-ml spacer for the administration of inhaled corticosteroids to children.

An open, cross-over trial was conducted on 25 asthmatic children, aged 6-13 years, who required inhaled steroids. They inhaled Budesonide 200 micrograms twice daily, either directly from the metered dose inhaler or via the pear spacer (PS), for 2 months on each, in randomized order. The effects of the treatment were monitored with diary cards recording peak expiratory flow rates twice daily, symptoms and treatment taken, and with monthly clinical assessments including more sensitive lung function studies (flow-volume loops and single breath nitrogen wash-out tests). There was no specifically PS-related improvement in symptoms or in the majority of tests, but the results showed improvement with time when using either method. The improvement was more distinct in some tests reflecting proximal airway calibre (i.e., PEFR) than in tests thought to reflect predominantly peripheral airway calibre (i.e., F50, RV). The bronchodilator responsiveness, as shown by the increase in lung function tests after a beta-agonist was given, was significantly greater for FVC during the periods when the PS was used, although there was no significant improvement in FEV2 or PEFR. The improvement in tests reflecting proximal airways may have been due to optimization of the inhalation technique, greater understanding of asthma, or better compliance with medication associated with regular attendance for the study. The greater bronchodilator response whilst children were inhaling budesonide by the PS may have been due to increased deposition or better distribution of the steroid but was probably related to a difference between the two groups in initial baseline function tests.

Adolescent↗

A meta-analysis comparing the efficacy of omeprazole with H2-receptor antagonists for acute treatment of duodenal ulcer in Asian patients.

A meta-analysis was performed on pooled data from five large double-blind studies (a total of 1057 patients), which were conducted in Asia to compare the effects of omeprazole with H2-receptor antagonists (H2-RA) in duodenal ulcer. As each study followed the same protocol and data evaluation procedures, a detailed analysis of ulcer healing, symptom relief and influence of prognostic factors across the data was possible. Patients received omeprazole 20 mg om or standard doses of H2-RA for a minimum of 2 and a maximum of 4 weeks, depending on healing (as verified by endoscopy). All efficacy analyses were based on per protocol data. The mean healing rates at 2 weeks were 72% for omeprazole and 42% for H2-RA (difference 30%; 95% CI: 24-36%; P < 0.0001) and at 4 weeks were 96% for omeprazole and 83% for H2-RA (difference 13%; 95% CI: 10-17%; P < 0.0001). In addition to treatment, ulcer size had a significant influence on healing, with large ulcers (diameter > 10 mm) taking longer to heal than small ulcers. There was no significant influence of smoking and alcohol drinking on ulcer healing. Patients on omeprazole experienced significantly less epigastric pain after 2 weeks than those on H2-RA, 79% of them being completely symptom-free on omeprazole compared with 65% on H2-RA. The incidence of adverse events was approximately 5% on each treatment and profiles were similar for each drug. It is concluded that omeprazole, even in the presence of adverse prognostic influences, results in significantly better healing of duodenal ulcer and relief from symptoms than H2-RA.

Adult↗