38
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found
      Is Open Access

      Reasons for inadequate asthma control in children: an important contribution from the “French 6 Cities Study”

      editorial
      1 , 1 ,
      Multidisciplinary Respiratory Medicine
      BioMed Central

      Read this article at

      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          Asthma represents the most common chronic illness in children [1] and an important clinical and public health problem. In fact, diagnosing and treating asthma in children still remain a challenge. There is evidence that children with asthmatic symptoms are often undiagnosed and undertreated [2]. Considering the prevalence of childhood asthma and its associated burden, it is mandatory to obtain an optimal control of the disease and improving outcomes for patients [3]. To achieve this goal, guidelines were published with indications about medication use, control of the environment and health education. Unfortunately, evidence exists that guidelines recommendations are often not applied within the clinical practice [4]. Therefore, asthma control, as recommended by guidelines, has been shown to be satisfactory in less than 30% of children [1]. Diagnosis and asthma treatment depend on a complex interplay among morbidity, physician practice and access to health care [2]. Relating to morbidity, the association between asthma control and atopic disease is well known. It has been demonstrated that atopic comorbidities, such as rhinitis and eczema, are related to more severe asthma [5] and that treatment of allergic disease may improve asthma control [1]. Undoubtedly, the clinical status and the severity level of the disease are fundamental aspects relevant to asthma control, even if children who suffer from severe asthma (more frequent exacerbations, sleep disturbances, a high number of school day missed, activity limitations) could not receive a proper diagnosis and treatment, mainly due to social deprivation. In this context the contact with a doctor, through a better knowledge of the disease, could help the child with asthma to self-manage his condition. The problem of perception of symptoms by the patient and the family is strictly related. Patient’s and parent’s ability to recognize asthma symptoms depend on a patient-physician partnership. Some educational programs have been shown as useful in reducing asthma morbidity in children [6]. Interventions should also take into account the environment that is an important factor relevant to asthma pathogenesis and control. It is well known that environmental triggers such as outdoor and indoor allergens, passive smoking and particulate matter can elicit and exacerbate acute attacks in asthmatic children. In particular, passive exposure to parental tobacco smoke is a risk factor for childhood wheeze [2] and is associated with poor asthma control in children [1]. Moreover, it has been demonstrated that proximity to traffic (living near heavily polluted roadways or bus stop) has a negative impact on respiratory health of children, with increased risk of wheezing, medication use and diminished lung function [3,7]. The most recent GINA guidelines underline the physician’s role in asthma management and care, emphasizing that a proper control of the disease depends on doctor’s ability and experience in recognizing symptoms (considering possible differential diagnoses), defining the severity level (also by evaluating the respiratory function, as recommended by international guidelines), prescribing the correct medication and educating the patient and his family [6]. Recent data demonstrate that physicians often ignore guidelines [4] and the importance of using asthma control tools [1]. Finally, significant disparities in health care based on patient’s insurance status, education level, income and race/ethnicity are relevant to asthma under-diagnosis and under-treatment. Some reports from Europe [1] and North America [2] show that over 50% of children with asthmatic symptoms don’t receive treatment according to guidelines [3] and are more likely to be hospitalized or visited in the emergency department [2]. A new study by Annesi-Maesano et al. [8] published in this issue of Multidisciplinary Respiratory Medicine added new evidence to this field of research. Using data from the “French 6 Cities Study” conducted on a sample of 7.798 schoolchildren, aged 9–10 yr, living in metropolitan France, the Authors identified the main risk factors associated with the presence or absence of asthma diagnosis and treatment. In particular, they considered individual, socio-demographic, clinical and environmental factors. Children underwent clinical tests while their parents completed a standardized medical questionnaire. The population-sample studied comprised 903 asthmatic children: 58% had a doctor diagnosis, only of them 67% were treated for their condition. The evaluation of the clinical condition showed some interesting evidences. First, the asthma severity level (evaluated according to GINA guidelines) was one of the main factors that influenced diagnosis and treatment. Most of undiagnosed and untreated children were in GINA level 1. Furthermore, in line with other studies [9], treatment was related to more severe asthma (more frequent exacerbations, sleep disturbances, hospitalizations, a high number of school days missed, activity limitations).Second, according to previous observations [10], diagnosed and treated asthmatic children had more allergic concomitant diseases, such as eczema and rhinitis. Therefore, co-morbidities and asthma severity seem to increase the likelihood of treatment. Relevant to under-treatment of asthma, the Authors also highlighted inconsistencies about the type of treatment used. In fact, most of the treated children used bronchodilators for both attacks prevention and therapy. Unexpectedly, in the sample of children without a doctor diagnosis of asthma, there was someone who took medications (bronchodilators or inhaled corticosteroids) to improve its respiratory symptoms. These observations may suggest both a poor adherence of physicians to guidelines within clinical practice [4], and a non-adherence of patients to the treatment plan. Previous studies reported that even patients with severe asthma do not follow the treatment properly. Therefore, it is necessary to improve physician’s compliance to guidelines within clinical practice through educational interventions that enrich their awareness about diagnostic tools and therapy. Furthermore, it is important to identify subjects non-adherent to treatment. Since the reasons for poor adherence may vary among patients, individualized interventions that improve patient’s compliance to therapy are strongly desirable [11]. In addition, Annesi-Maesano et al. [8] confirmed that a low socio-economic status still represents an important factor in asthma management and care, limiting the access to health care system and consequently the optimal control of the disease. At last, the Authors focused on environmental factors that can affect asthma management, particularly the exposure to passive smoking and urban traffic. They found that undiagnosed children were more exposed to maternal smoking and traffic. Moreover, they found that urban traffic (living near a bus stop) was the only environmental factor treatment-related. Proximity of an asthmatic’s house to a bus stop was an indicator of asthma severity and likelihood of treatment. Confirming existing data [1,3,7], these observations underline the necessity of taking into account the physical and social environment within clinical practice to improve management and care of asthmatic children. In summary, the study by Annesi-Maesano et al. [8] shows that childhood asthma is still under-diagnosed and under-treated in metropolitan France. The Authors, by identifying the clinical, social and environmental characteristics of undiagnosed and/or undertreated children, highlighted the main factors that can be associated with absence of asthma diagnosis and treatment. Since a poor asthma control can have detrimental effects on children’ health, similar studies are warranted to understand what interventions are necessary to achieve a better management of this disease.

          Related collections

          Most cited references7

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: found
          • Article: found
          Is Open Access

          Symptoms and Medication Use in Children with Asthma and Traffic-Related Sources of Fine Particle Pollution

          Background Exposure to ambient fine particles [particulate matter ≤ 2.5 μm diameter (PM2.5)] is a potential factor in the exacerbation of asthma. National air quality particle standards consider total mass, not composition or sources, and may not protect against health impacts related to specific components. Objective We examined associations between daily exposure to fine particle components and sources, and symptoms and medication use in children with asthma. Methods Children with asthma (n = 149) 4–12 years of age were enrolled in a year-long study. We analyzed particle samples for trace elements (X-ray fluorescence) and elemental carbon (light reflectance). Using factor analysis/source apportionment, we identified particle sources (e.g., motor vehicle emissions) and quantified daily contributions. Symptoms and medication use were recorded on study diaries. Repeated measures logistic regression models examined associations between health outcomes and particle exposures as elemental concentrations and source contributions. Results More than half of mean PM2.5 was attributed to traffic-related sources motor vehicles (42%) and road dust (12%). Increased likelihood of symptoms and inhaler use was largest for 3-day averaged exposures to traffic-related sources or their elemental constituents and ranged from a 10% increased likelihood of wheeze for each 5-μg/m3 increase in particles from motor vehicles to a 28% increased likelihood of shortness of breath for increases in road dust. Neither the other sources identified nor PM2.5 alone was associated with increased health outcome risks. Conclusions Linking respiratory health effects to specific particle pollution composition or sources is critical to efforts to protect public health. We associated increased risk of symptoms and inhaler use in children with asthma with exposure to traffic-related fine particles.
            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: not found

            Is rhinitis alone or associated with atopic eczema a risk factor for severe asthma in children?

            The objective of this study was to evaluate the role of rhinitis (R) and atopic eczema (E) on asthma severity among asthmatic (A) schoolchildren identified by the International Study of Asthma and Allergies in Childhood written questionnaire (WQ). WQ was applied to parents of 6-7-yr-old schoolchildren (SC, n=3033), and to adolescents (AD, 13-14 yr old, n=3487), living in Sao Paulo, Brazil. An affirmative response to 'has your child/have you had wheezing/whistling in the last year' identified those with A, and an affirmative response to 'the last 12 months has your child/have you had sneezing/runny/blocked nose when he/she you did not have a cold/flu?' identified those with R. Subjects with an affirmative response to 'has your child/have you had this itchy rash at any time in the past 12 months?' were identified as having E. Subjects who had R associated with A were identified as AR and those with A associated with R and E as ARE. A who had at least two affirmative responses to questions for asthma severity: speech disturbance, more than four acute attacks, sleep disturbance, and wheezing with exercise were defined as having severe asthma. 22.1% AD and 24.3% SC were identified as A; 47.1% of those AD and 42.0% SC had AR and 10.0% of those AD and 12.8% of SC had ARE. Considering ARE, AR and A groups, speech disturbance during an acute episode of asthma was significantly higher among ARE AD (20.0% vs. 11.5% vs. 8.7%, p<0.05), and ARE SC (22.1% vs. 13.9% vs. 10.5%, p<0.05) in comparison with A. Likewise, more than four acute attacks in the last year was significantly higher among ARE AD (24.0% vs. 14.0% vs. 10.5%, p<0.05) and ARE SC (32.6% vs. 19.4% vs. 12.8%, p<0.05) as the frequency of sleep disturbance due to wheezing, for AD (61.3% vs. 42.0% vs. 38.4%, p<0.05) and SC (77.9% vs. 67.3% vs. 58.4%, p<0.001) and for 'wheezing associated with exercise' for AD (72.0% vs. 47.5% vs. 39.9%, p<0.001) and SC (36.8% vs. 31.4% vs. 14.1%, p<0.001). Prevalence of severe asthma was higher among ARE AD (57.3% vs. 31.9% vs. 27.0%, p<0.05) and ARE SC (52.6% vs. 36.9% vs. 22.5%). In patients with A, the presence of R or E are risk factors for severe asthma, and both together (R and E) are a higher risk. Copyright (c) 2005 Blackwell Munksgaard
              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: not found

              The ARGA study with general practitioners: impact of medical education on asthma/rhinitis management.

              To evaluate the impact of a medical education course (MEC) on the behaviour of general practitioners (GPs) to treat asthma and allergic rhinitis (AR). Data on 1820 patients (mean age 41 yrs ± 17 yrs) with asthma or AR were collected by 107 Italian GPs: 50% attended a MEC and 50% didn't (group B). The adherence for AR and asthma treatment was evaluated according to ARIA and GINA guidelines (GL). AR and asthma were diagnosed in 78% and 56% of patients; 34% had concomitant AR and asthma. Regardless of the MEC, the adherence to GL was significantly higher for AR than for asthma treatment (52 versus 19%). Group B GPs were more compliant to ARIA guidelines in the treatment of mild AR, whereas group A were more compliant in the treatment of moderate-severe AR; the adherence didn't differ between the groups for AR patients with comorbid asthma. Adherence to GINA GL for asthma treatment did not differ between GPs of groups A and B, independently from concomitant AR. Though insignificantly, group A were more compliant to GINA GL in the treatment of patients with only severe persistent asthma (63 versus 46%) as group B were for patients with severe persistent asthma and concomitant AR. GPs often tend to treat patients independently from GL. The impact of a single MEC did not improve adherence to GL in treating less severe AR and asthma patients, while there was a trend towards the opposite attitude in more severe AR patients without concomitant asthma. Copyright © 2012 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Journal
                Multidiscip Respir Med
                Multidiscip Respir Med
                Multidisciplinary Respiratory Medicine
                BioMed Central
                1828-695X
                2049-6958
                2012
                8 August 2012
                : 7
                : 1
                : 23
                Affiliations
                [1 ]CNR Institute of Biomedicine and Clinical Immunology, Palermo, Italy
                Article
                2049-6958-7-23
                10.1186/2049-6958-7-23
                3436680
                22958876
                e5ce10c5-1af9-42cd-83a3-62ec2c4aba86
                Copyright ©2012 Ferrante and La Grutta; licensee BioMed Central Ltd.

                This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License ( http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.0), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.

                History
                : 18 July 2012
                : 18 July 2012
                Categories
                Editorial

                Respiratory medicine
                Respiratory medicine

                Comments

                Comment on this article