Loading

wait a moment

Continuous vs Intermittent ^-Agonists in the Treatment of Acute Adult Asthma

Continuous vs Intermittent ^-Agonists in the Treatment of Acute Adult AsthmaInhaled (P2-agonists are the drugs of choice with which to treat patients with acute severe asthma. In comparison to the systemic approach, inhalation is associated with a more rapid onset of action and fewer systemic side effects. However, there are controversies regarding the use of (P2-agonists in the treatment of patients with acute asthma exacerbations. Thus, there is a consensus that frequent intermittent nebulizations (ie, every 20 min within the first hour) are appropriate, but continuous nebulization also has been proposed. Thus, since the late 1980s, there has been considerable clinical and academic interest in the use of continuous aerosolized bronchodilators for the treatment of acute asthma. This method of therapy has potential advantages in terms of time, costs, and medication delivery. This feature may allow deeper penetration into the airways and greater reduction of broncho-constriction Here buy antibiotics. Furthermore, this may result in fewer side effects.
To date, a limited number of trials have examined this topic. Thus, therapy with continuous albuterol nebulization was considered to be better than intermittent therapy in children, but in adults the data are contradictory and do not allow definitive conclu-sions.
We reviewed the literature to determine whether continuous nebulization offered an advantage over intermittent nebulization for the treatment of adults with acute asthma in the emergency department (ED). We also wanted to determine whether the intensity of the treatment and the severity of the exacerbation influenced the extent of the effect.
Materials and Methods
Literature Search and Selection of Studies

A computerized search was conducted to identify Literature on the topic of continuous vs intermittent nebulization with P-agonists in adult patients with acute asthma.