4.6 Article

Utilization of Inhaled Corticosteroids for Infants with Bronchopulmonary Dysplasia

期刊

PLOS ONE
卷 9, 期 9, 页码 -

出版社

PUBLIC LIBRARY SCIENCE
DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0106838

关键词

-

资金

  1. National Heart, Lung, And Blood Institute of the National Institutes of Health [K08HL121182]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Objective: To determine demographic and clinical variables associated with inhaled corticosteroid administration and to evaluate between-hospital variation in inhaled steroid use for infants with bronchopulmonary dysplasia (BPD). Design: Retrospective Cohort Study. Setting: Neonatal units of 35 US children's hospitals; as recorded in the Pediatric Health Information System (PHIS) database. Patients: 1429 infants with evolving BPD at 28 days who were born at,29 weeks gestation with birth weight,1500 grams, admitted within the first 7 postnatal days, and discharged between January 2007-June 2011. Results: Inhaled steroids were prescribed to 25% (n = 352) of the cohort with use steadily increasing during the first two months of hospitalization. The most frequently prescribed steroid was beclomethasone (n = 194, 14%), followed by budesonide (n = 125, 9%), and then fluticasone (n = 90, 6%). Birth gestation,24 weeks, birth weight 500-999 grams, and prolonged ventilation all increased the adjusted odds of ever receiving inhaled corticosteroids (p, 0.05). Wide variations between hospitals in the frequency of infants ever receiving inhaled steroids (range: 0-60%) and the specific drug prescribed were noted. This variation persisted, even after controlling for observed confounders. Conclusions: Inhaled corticosteroid administration to infants with BPD is common in neonatal units within U.S. Children's hospitals. However, its utilization varies markedly between centers from no treatment at some institutions to the majority of infants with BPD being treated at others. This supports the need for further research to identify the benefits and potential risks of inhaled steroid usage in infants with BPD.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.6
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据