• Acad Emerg Med · Jan 2003

    Randomized Controlled Trial Clinical Trial

    A randomized, controlled double-blind trial of usual-dose versus high-dose albuterol via continuous nebulization in patients with acute bronchospasm.

    • John Stein and M Andrew Levitt.
    • Emergency Medicine Residency, Alameda County Medical Center, Highland Campus, Oakland, CA, USA.
    • Acad Emerg Med. 2003 Jan 1;10(1):31-6.

    ObjectiveContinuous nebulization is becoming more popular in the management of acute bronchospasm in the emergency department (ED). Controversy still exists as to the optimal dose of albuterol for such exacerbations. The present study hypothesis was that there is no difference between continuous nebulization of albuterol at 7.5 mg/hr (usual dose) and 15 mg/hr (high dose) in peak flow improvement up to three hours.MethodsThis was a randomized, controlled, double-blind trial, set in an urban county teaching ED. One hundred twenty-seven patients with acute bronchospasm and an initial peak flow (PF) less than 75% predicted were enrolled. Patients were randomized to usual-dose (UD) or high-dose (HD) groups along with a standard treatment protocol. Primary end-points were analyzed using repeated-measures analysis of variance (ANOVA), and 95% confidence intervals (95% CIs) are given for such variables.ResultsSixty-seven patients were randomized to the HD albuterol group, and 63 completed the study. Sixty patients were randomized to the UD group, and 55 completed the study. Repeated-measures ANOVA found no difference in systolic blood pressure, diastolic blood pressure, pulse, respiratory rate, Borg dyspnea scale score, and peak flow over time between the groups. The mean (+/-SD) peak flow improvement at one hour was UD 51 (+/-49) L/min vs. HD 45 (+/-50) L/min, mean difference 6.8 L/min (95% CI = -11 to 24.9 L/min). Adjusting for baseline, the percentage increase in peak flow at one hour was UD 44% (+/-60%) vs. HD 30% (+/-40%), mean difference 14% (95% CI = -4.4% to 32.4%). Time to disposition showed a mean of 188 (+/-129) minutes for UD and 230 (+/-183) minutes for HD, mean difference 42 minutes (95% CI = -170 to 101 min). One patient in the HD group was intubated. Admission rate was UD 70.9% vs. HD 65%, mean difference 5.9% (95% CI = -10.9% to 22.7%).ConclusionsIn treating acute, moderately-severe bronchospastic ED patients with peak flow less than 75% of predicted with albuterol by continuous nebulization, 15 mg/hr appears to offer no advantage over 7.5 mg/hr in peak flow improvement or length of stay in the ED.

      Pubmed     Free full text   Copy Citation     Plaintext  

      Add institutional full text...

    Notes

     
    Knowledge, pearl, summary or comment to share?
    300 characters remaining
    help        
    You can also include formatting, links, images and footnotes in your notes
    • Simple formatting can be added to notes, such as *italics*, _underline_ or **bold**.
    • Superscript can be denoted by <sup>text</sup> and subscript <sub>text</sub>.
    • Numbered or bulleted lists can be created using either numbered lines 1. 2. 3., hyphens - or asterisks *.
    • Links can be included with: [my link to pubmed](http://pubmed.com)
    • Images can be included with: ![alt text](https://bestmedicaljournal.com/study_graph.jpg "Image Title Text")
    • For footnotes use [^1](This is a footnote.) inline.
    • Or use an inline reference [^1] to refer to a longer footnote elseweher in the document [^1]: This is a long footnote..

    hide…