4.7 Article

Inhaled Corticosteroids and the Risk of Pneumonia in People With Asthma A Case-Control Study

期刊

CHEST
卷 144, 期 6, 页码 1788-1794

出版社

AMER COLL CHEST PHYSICIANS
DOI: 10.1378/chest.13-0871

关键词

-

资金

  1. Boehringer Ingelheim GmbH
  2. GlaxoSmithKline
  3. Napp Pharmaceuticals Limited
  4. Medical Research Council
  5. Roy Castle clinical fellowship award
  6. British Lung Foundation [C05/01] Funding Source: researchfish

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Background: In clinical trials, the use of inhaled corticosteroids is associated with an increased risk of pneumonia in people with COPD, but whether the same is true for people with asthma is not known. Methods: With the use of primary care data from The Health Improvement Network, we identified people with asthma, and from this cohort, we identified patients with pneumonia or lower respiratory tract infection and age-and sex-matched control subjects. Conditional logistic regression was used to determine the association between the dose and type of inhaled corticosteroid and the risk of pneumonia or lower respiratory tract infection. Results: A dose-response relationship was found between the strength of inhaled corticosteroid dose and risk of pneumonia or lower respiratory tract infection (P<.001 for trend) such that after adjusting for confounders, people receiving the highest strength of inhaled corticosteroid (>= 1,000 mu g) had a 2.04 (95% CI, 1.59-2.64) increased risk of pneumonia or lower respiratory tract infection compared with those with asthma who did not have a prescription for inhaled corticosteroids within the previous 90 days. Conclusions: People with asthma receiving inhaled corticosteroids are at an increased risk of pneumonia or lower respiratory infection, with those receiving higher doses being at greater risk. Pneumonia should be considered as a possible side effect of inhaled corticosteroids, and the lowest possible dose of inhaled corticosteroids should be used in the management of asthma.

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

4.7
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