Dataset Information

Steroids and bronchodilators for acute bronchiolitis in the first two years of life: systematic review and meta-analysis.

ABSTRACT:

Objective

To evaluate and compare the efficacy and safety of bronchodilators and steroids, alone or combined, for the acute management of bronchiolitis in children aged less than 2 years.

Design

Systematic review and meta-analysis.

Data sources

Medline, Embase, Central, Scopus, PubMed, LILACS, IranMedEx, conference proceedings, and trial registers. Inclusion criteria Randomised controlled trials of children aged 24 months or less with a first episode of bronchiolitis with wheezing comparing any bronchodilator or steroid, alone or combined, with placebo or another intervention (other bronchodilator, other steroid, standard care).

Review methods

Two reviewers assessed studies for inclusion and risk of bias and extracted data. Primary outcomes were selected by clinicians a priori based on clinical relevance: rate of admission for outpatients (day 1 and up to day 7) and length of stay for inpatients. Direct meta-analyses were carried out using random effects models. A mixed treatment comparison using a Bayesian network model was used to compare all interventions simultaneously.

Results

48 trials (4897 patients, 13 comparisons) were included. Risk of bias was low in 17% (n = 8), unclear in 52% (n = 25), and high in 31% (n = 15). Only adrenaline (epinephrine) reduced admissions on day 1 (compared with placebo: pooled risk ratio 0.67, 95% confidence interval 0.50 to 0.89; number needed to treat 15, 95% confidence interval 10 to 45 for a baseline risk of 20%; 920 patients). Unadjusted results from a single large trial with low risk of bias showed that combined dexamethasone and adrenaline reduced admissions on day 7 (risk ratio 0.65, 0.44 to 0.95; number needed to treat 11, 7 to 76 for a baseline risk of 26%; 400 patients). A mixed treatment comparison supported adrenaline alone or combined with steroids as the preferred treatments for outpatients (probability of being the best treatment based on admissions at day 1 were 45% and 39%, respectively). The incidence of reported harms did not differ. None of the interventions examined showed clear efficacy for length of stay among inpatients.

Conclusions

Evidence shows the effectiveness and superiority of adrenaline for outcomes of most clinical relevance among outpatients with acute bronchiolitis, and evidence from a single precise trial for combined adrenaline and dexamethasone.

SUBMITTER: Hartling L

PROVIDER: S-EPMC3071611 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:Acute bronchiolitis is the commonest cause of hospitalisation in infancy. Currently management consists of supportive care and oxygen. A Cochrane review concluded that, "nebulised 3 % saline may significantly reduce the length of hospital stay". We conducted a systematic review of controlled trials of nebulised hypertonic saline (HS) for infants hospitalised with primary acute bronchiolitis.Searches to January 2015 involved: Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials; Ovid MEDLINE; Embase; Google Scholar; Web of Science; and, a variety of trials registers. We hand searched Chest, Paediatrics and Journal of Paediatrics on 14 January 2015. Reference lists of eligible trial publications were checked. Randomised or quasi-randomised trials which compared HS versus either normal saline (+/- adjunct treatment) or no treatment were included. Eligible studies involved children less than 2 years old hospitalised due to the first episode of acute bronchiolitis. Two reviewers extracted data to calculate mean differences (MD) and 95 % Confidence Intervals (CIs) for length of hospital stay (LoS-primary outcome), Clinical Severity Score (CSS) and Serious Adverse Events (SAEs). Meta-analysis was undertaken using a fixed effect model, supplemented with additional sensitivity analyses. We investigated statistical heterogeneity using I(2). Risk of bias, within and between studies, was assessed using the Cochrane tool, an outcome reporting bias checklist and a funnel plot.Fifteen trials were included in the systematic review (n?=?1922), HS reduced mean LoS by 0.36, (95 % CI 0.50 to 0.22) days, but with considerable heterogeneity (I(2)?=?78 %) and sensitivity to alternative analysis methods. A reduction in CSS was observed where assessed [n?=?516; MD -1.36, CI -1.52, -1.20]. One trial reported one possible intervention related SAE, no other studies described intervention related SAEs.There is disparity between the overall combined effect on LoS as compared with the negative results from the largest and most precise trials. Together with high levels of heterogeneity, this means that neither individual trials nor pooled estimates provide a firm evidence-base for routine use of HS in inpatient acute bronchiolitis.

Project description:BackgroundThe first 1000 days of life are critical for a child's health and development. Impaired growth during this period is linked to increased child morbidity, mortality, and long-term consequences. Undernutrition is the main cause, and addressing it within the first 1000 days of life is vital. Maternal education is consistently identified as a significant predictor of child undernutrition, but its specific impact remains to be determined. This study presents a systematic review and meta-analysis investigating the influence of high versus low maternal education levels on child growth from birth to age two, using population-based cohort studies.MethodsDatabases including PubMed, Scopus, EMBASE, Web of Science, ERIC, and Google Scholar were searched from January 1990 to January 2024 using appropriate search terms. We included population-based cohort studies of healthy children aged two years and under and their mothers, categorizing maternal education levels. Child growth and nutritional outcomes were assessed using various indicators. Two reviewers independently conducted data extraction and assessed study quality. The Newcastle Ottawa scale was utilized for quality assessment. Random-effects models were used for meta-analysis, and heterogeneity was assessed using the Cochrane Q and I2 statistic. Subgroup and sensitivity analyses were performed, and publication bias was evaluated.FindingsThe literature search retrieved 14,295 titles, and after full-text screening of 639 reports, 35 studies were included, covering eight outcomes: weight for age z-score (WAZ), height for age z-score (HAZ), BMI for age z-scores (BMIZ), overweight, underweight, stunting, wasting, and rapid weight gain. In middle-income countries, higher maternal education is significantly associated with elevated WAZ (MD 0.398, 95% CI 0.301-0.496) and HAZ (MD 0.388, 95% CI 0.102-0.673) in children. Similarly, in studies with low-educated population, higher maternal education is significantly linked to increased WAZ (MD 0.186, 95% CI 0.078-0.294) and HAZ (0.200, 95% CI 0.036-0.365). However, in high-income and highly educated population, this association is either absent or reversed. In high-income countries, higher maternal education is associated with a non-significant lower BMI-Z (MD -0.028, 95% CI -0.061 to 0.006). Notably, this inverse association is statistically significant in low-educated populations (MD -0.045, 95% CI -0.079 to -0.011) but not in highly educated populations (MD 0.003, 95% CI -0.093 to 0.098).InterpretationMaternal education's association with child growth varies based on country income and education levels. Further research is needed to understand this relationship better.FundingThis study was a student thesis supported financially by Tehran University of Medical Sciences (TUMS).

Project description:ImportancePreterm birth is associated with an increased risk for long-lasting attention deficits. Early-life markers of attention abnormalities have not been established to date but could provide insights into the pathogenesis of attention abnormalities and could help identify susceptible individuals.ObjectiveTo examine whether preterm birth is associated with visual attention impairments in early life, and if so, in which attention functions and at which developmental period during the first 2 years of life.Data sourcesPubMed and PsycINFO were searched on November 17, 2019, to identify studies involving visual attention outcomes in infants born preterm vs full term.Study selectionPeer-reviewed studies from the past 50 years met the eligibility criteria if they directly assessed visual attention outcomes until the age of 2 years in generally healthy infants born preterm or full term. The selection process was conducted by 2 independent reviewers.Data extraction and synthesisThe Meta-analysis of Observational Studies in Epidemiology (MOOSE) reporting guideline was followed. Random-effects models were used to determine standardized mean differences. The risk of bias was assessed both within and between studies.Main outcomes and measuresFive nascent indices of visual attention were analyzed, including very basic functions-namely, the abilities to follow and fixate on visual targets-and more complex functions, such as visual processing (ie, habituation), recognition memory (ie, novelty preference), and the ability to effortfully focus attention for learning.ResultsA total of 53 studies were included, with 69 effect sizes and assessing a total of 3998 infants (2047 born preterm and 1951 born full term; of the 3376 for whom sex was reported, 1693 [50.1%] were girls). Preterm birth was associated with impairments in various attention indices, including visual-following in infancy (Cohen d, -0.77; 95% CI, -1.23 to -0.31), latency to fixate (Cohen d, -0.18; 95% CI, -0.33 to -0.02), novelty preference (Cohen d, -0.20; 95% CI, -0.32 to -0.08), and focused attention (Cohen d, -0.28; 95% CI, -0.45 to -0.11). In the neonatal period, preterm birth was associated with superior visual-following (Cohen d, 0.22; 95% CI, 0.03 to 0.40), possibly owing to the additional extrauterine exposure to sensory stimulation. However, this early association waned rapidly in infancy (Cohen d, -0.77; 95% CI, -1.23 to -0.31).Conclusions and relevanceThe findings suggest that preterm birth is associated with impingements to visual attention development in early life, as manifested in basic and then complex forms of attention. Advancements in neonatal care may underlie improvements found in the current era and accentuate several early protective factors.

Project description:BackgroundParents are the primary caregivers of young children. Responsive parent-child relationships and parental support for learning during the earliest years of life are crucial for promoting early child development (ECD). We conducted a global systematic review and meta-analysis to evaluate the effectiveness of parenting interventions on ECD and parenting outcomes.Methods and findingsWe searched MEDLINE, Embase, PsycINFO, CINAHL, Web of Science, and Global Health Library for peer-reviewed, published articles from database inception until November 15, 2020. We included randomized controlled trials (RCTs) of parenting interventions delivered during the first 3 years of life that evaluated at least 1 ECD outcome. At least 2 reviewers independently screened, extracted data, and assessed study quality from eligible studies. ECD outcomes included cognitive, language, motor, and socioemotional development, behavior problems, and attachment. Parenting outcomes included parenting knowledge, parenting practices, parent-child interactions, and parental depressive symptoms. We calculated intervention effect sizes as the standardized mean difference (SMD) and estimated pooled effect sizes for each outcome separately using robust variance estimation meta-analytic approaches. We used random-effects meta-regression models to assess potential effect modification by country-income level, child age, intervention content, duration, delivery, setting, and study quality. This review was registered with PROSPERO (CRD42018092458 and CRD42018092461). Of the 11,920 articles identified, we included 111 articles representing 102 unique RCTs. Pooled effect sizes indicated positive benefits of parenting interventions on child cognitive development (SMD = 0.32, 95% CI [confidence interval]: 0.23, 0.40, P < 0.001), language development (SMD = 0.28, 95% CI: 0.18 to 0.37, P < 0.001), motor development (SMD = 0.24, 95% CI: 0.15 to 0.32, P < 0.001), socioemotional development (SMD = 0.19, 95% CI: 0.10 to 0.28, P < 0.001), and attachment (SMD = 0.29, 95% CI: 0.18 to 0.40, P < 0.001) and reductions in behavior problems (SMD = -0.13, 95% CI: -0.18 to -0.08, P < 0.001). Positive benefits were also found on parenting knowledge (SMD = 0.56, 95% CI: 0.33 to 0.79, P < 0.001), parenting practices (SMD = 0.33, 95% CI: 0.22 to 0.44, P < 0.001), and parent-child interactions (SMD = 0.39, 95% CI: 0.24 to 0.53, P < 0.001). However, there was no significant reduction in parental depressive symptoms (SMD = -0.07, 95% CI: -0.16 to 0.02, P = 0.08). Subgroup analyses revealed significantly greater effects on child cognitive, language, and motor development, and parenting practices in low- and middle-income countries compared to high-income countries; and significantly greater effects on child cognitive development, parenting knowledge, parenting practices, and parent-child interactions for programs that focused on responsive caregiving compared to those that did not. On the other hand, there was no clear evidence of effect modification by child age, intervention duration, delivery, setting, or study risk of bias. Study limitations include considerable unexplained heterogeneity, inadequate reporting of intervention content and implementation, and varying quality of evidence in terms of the conduct of trials and robustness of outcome measures used across studies.ConclusionsParenting interventions for children during the first 3 years of life are effective for improving ECD outcomes and enhancing parenting outcomes across low-, middle-, and high-income countries. Increasing implementation of effective and high-quality parenting interventions is needed globally and at scale in order to support parents and enable young children to achieve their full developmental potential.