A randomized controlled trial using the school for anti-inflammatory therapy in asthma.

Asthma and Pulmonary Rehabilitation Center, Baylor University Medical Center, Dallas, Texas, USA.
Journal of Asthma (Impact Factor: 1.83). 02/2003; 40(7):769-76. DOI: 10.1081/JAS-120023504
Source: PubMed

ABSTRACT This study investigated the impact of providing low-dose inhaled corticosteroids (ICS) at school or at home to asthmatic inner city children over a 14-week period, compared with the existing community standard. Eight elementary schools in the Dallas Independent School District with a high incidence of asthma located in predominantly urban African-American communities were randomly assigned to one of four groups. The treatment arms were school-based delivery of inhaled steroids, home-based delivery of inhaled steroids, and home-based delivery of inhaled steroids with school-based asthma education, and the control group was no change in current therapy. Fifty students were objectively diagnosed with mild, persistent asthma and participated in the study. Students in the treatment arms received beclomethasone (42 mcg/puff) 4 puffs, twice a day, either at school or at home. Students in the control, "community standard of care" group received no additional medical intervention. Higher peak flows for the treatment groups were seen in the first week and maintained throughout the study (P = .047). By week 5 significant differences were found in frequency of bronchodilator use (P = .025), episodes of nocturnal awakening with asthma symptoms (P = .022), and visits to the primary health care provider (P = .022). Treatment groups rated their asthma as "better than the week before" more frequently than the control group (P = .001). Delivering ICS in school is associated with improved asthma control than when anti-inflammatory medication was delivered to children with asthma in a home-based setting, and both are superior when compared with a control, "community standard of care" group in which no additional medical intervention occurred.

  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: As other chapters in this text have illustrated, asthma is affected by a myriad of social and economic factors. It is also greatly influenced by factors in the physical environment of a person with asthma. As children spend a significant amount of time at school, the conditions at school are important for their asthma control. For example, they may experience asthma symptoms or exacerbations while at school and need to take medication. Moreover, they may need to use preventive medication before engaging in physical education activities or take steps to avoid other asthma triggers throughout the day. These precautions often require support from school administrators and assistance from school staff.
    12/2009: pages 229-244;
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Impoverished urban children suffer disproportionately from asthma and underuse preventive asthma medications. The objective of this study was to examine cost-effectiveness (CE) of the School-Based Asthma Therapy (SBAT) program compared with usual care (UC). The analysis was based on the SBAT trial, including 525 children aged 3 to 10 years attending urban preschool or elementary school who were randomized to either UC or administration of 1 dose of preventive asthma medication at school by the school nurse each school day. The primary outcome was the mean number of symptom-free days (SFDs). The impact of the intervention on medical costs was estimated by using parent-reported child health services utilization data and average national reimbursement rates. We estimated the cost of running the program using wages for program staff. Productivity costs were estimated by using value of parent lost time due to child illness. CE of the SBAT program compared with UC was evaluated based on the incremental CE ratio. The health benefit of the intervention was equal to ∼158 SFD gained per each 30-day period (P < .05) per 100 children. The programmatic expenses summed to an extra $4822 per 100 children per month. The net saving due to the intervention (reduction in medical costs and parental productivity, and improvement in school attendance) was $3240, resulting in the incremental cost-savings difference of $1583 and CE of $10 per 1 extra SFD gained. The SBAT was effective and cost-effective in reducing symptoms in urban children with asthma compared with other existing programs.
    PEDIATRICS 03/2013; 131(3):e709-17. · 5.30 Impact Factor