View clinical trials related to Asthma in Children.
Filter by:Over 200,000 children have a 911 Emergency Medical Services (EMS) activation for respiratory distress each year, most of whom have acute wheezing. Early treatment in the prehospital setting could more rapidly relieve respiratory distress symptoms, prevent hypoxia, reduce invasive interventions, and reduce the need to be hospitalized, thereby facilitating earlier return to normal daily activities. Preliminary data from one site found hospital admission was reduced from 30% to 21% among children when an EMS system introduced a pediatric asthma protocol with oral dexamethasone. The current standard for Emergency Department (ED) treatment for acute wheezing for children two and older includes inhaled ipratropium and dexamethasone. These treatments have a longstanding history of safety and are effective in preventing hospitalization when used early in the ED. Specific treatment protocols generally direct prehospital care. Ipratropium and dexamethasone are recommended by national EMS organizations that develop model protocols for prehospital care. However, only 25% of EMS agencies from large US metropolitan areas allow ipratropium, and only 10% include dexamethasone in their treatment protocols. A clinical trial is critically needed to evaluate whether the significant EMS resources required to implement interventions for children with life-threatening wheezing that have proven benefit in the ED result in improved patient outcomes. The overall objective of this three-site pilot trial is to address specific questions related to the implementation of the study and ensure its feasibility. The study will be conducted in the Pediatric Emergency Care Applied Research Network (PECARN) EMS Affiliates (EMSAs). The investigators will include patients aged 2-17 who have a 911 call for acute life-threatening wheezing. The specific aims are 1) to develop and produce a prehospital checklist for the treatment bundle, including ipratropium and dexamethasone, 2) to determine the feasibility of collecting patient outcomes for wheezing children treated in the EMS system, and 3) to evaluate the implementation of the EMS treatment bundle and checklist using the Reach, Effectiveness, Adoption, Implementation, and Maintenance (RE-AIM) framework. Our overall hypothesis is that the study will be feasible to implement. This study will provide the necessary data to ensure the eventual trial is feasible, primarily by establishing the ability to measure the outcomes of interest as well as evaluating implementation. This study is innovative by focusing on pediatric care in the prehospital environment, a critical component of our emergency care system that is often neglected in research.
Peak inspiratory flow (PIF) may be due to respiratory muscle strength, especially in those with severe airflow obstruction. PIF appears to be lower in children and adolescents with asthma than in non-asthmatics and correlates positively with age, height, weight, and respiratory muscle strength. Although physical activity and fitness are also believed to be important in lung health, the relationship between lung function and physical fitness is unclear. It measures dynamic lung volumes, s-index and PIF and provides information on dynamic lung function in children and adolescents. In this study, the dynamic components of the lung will be compared between asthmatic and healthy children, and the relationship between respiratory parameters and physical assessment, such as physical fitness, activity and functional capacity, will be investigated in children with asthma.
Nature of potential dysbiosis, interrelation of the different microbiomes of the respiratory tract, and potential role of the immune system in the pathogenesis of severe asthma in infants, and its evolution under treatment. Exploring and understanding these data is to improve patient care and discover new therapeutic targets. The aim is to open up prospects for therapeutic studies, such as the use of azithromycin as an immunomodulator in infant asthma, the results of which are discordant.
Our UH3 clinical trial, "Reducing Asthma Attacks in Disadvantaged School Children with Asthma," seeks broad-scale implementation of our effective school-based approach to improve asthma disparities for children, ages 5-12 years, in low-income communities. The investigators will contextualize dissemination and implementation (D&I) of our Colorado school-based asthma program (Col-SBAP) that reduces asthma exacerbations and missed school days, while also addressing social determinants of health. Our Better Asthma Control for Kids (BACK) Program will evaluate key metrics identified by diverse stakeholders during this dissemination trial in rural and small metropolitan areas of Colorado. Our clinical trial includes two implementation strategies: our standard Col-SBAP, titled BACK-Standard (BACK-S) and an enhanced community-centered approach, titled Back-Enhanced (BACK-E). These two strategies are designed for sustainable delivery by school asthma navigators and school nurses who coordinate with primary care and community resources. The Exploration, Preparation, Implementation, Sustainment (EPIS) D&I framework was applied with community partners during the UG3 planning phase to tailor implementation plans that meet local community needs, resources and priorities (EPIS Phases 1 & 2). BACK-S and BACK-E will be delivered from years 1-3 with data collection for implementation and effectiveness outcomes in 4 Colorado regions. In year 4, the investigators will collect data for sustainment outcomes (EPIS phase 3). The investigators will apply the work from EPIS phases 1-3 to refine our "dissemination playbook" that guides adoption by other school systems (EPIS Phase 4). Our primary implementation hypothesis is: Reach will be greater among students when delivered using the BACK-E arm as compared to BACK-S. Our effectiveness hypothesis is: BACK will be more effective than usual care at reducing asthma exacerbations. The BACK playbook includes training materials and a calculation of return on investment. The investigators are targeting schools with high levels of uncontrolled asthma and asthma associated burden. Our UH3 trial includes partner engagement to ensure BACK is disseminated to diverse geopolitical areas of Colorado with attention to sustainability. Collectively, our approach will accelerate dissemination of BACK nationally to communities experiencing health inequities in pediatric asthma care.
Asthma is characterised by episodic symptoms (attacks) caused by airway inflammation and decreased airflow to the lungs. It affects 10% of the Canadian population and is the most common chronic disease in childhood. Despite its burden and its potential to be life-threatening, establishing the diagnosis takes time due to difficulty in accessing specialised breathing tests. Indeed, the current diagnostic strategy relies on a breathing test (spirometry) and, if non-diagnostic, a subsequent more complicated breathing test conducted in hospitals (a bronchial provocation test). Our dependence on the latter test must be confronted to the bottleneck created by our reliance on it and the difficulty to do these tests in children. Furthermore, within the current framework, people receiving a diagnosis do not know if they have active airway inflammation - a key feature with predicts increased susceptibility to asthma attacks and treatment responsiveness. Our study's goal is to validate clinically accessible and useful diagnostic tests for peoplesuspected to have asthma. Specifically, we are interested in alternative tests that are a) achievable outside the hospital; b) useful markers of airway inflammation/risk c) can identify people at with a higher likelihood of responding to anti-inflammatory therapy. The two tests we are mainly interested in are: - Exhaled nitric oxide (measured with a portable handheld machine) - The blood eosinophil count (obtained on a general blood test) +/- Other tests which we might be able to develop within this cohort (e.g. urine tests)
The aim is to identify the underlying disease mechanisms driving specific asthma phenotypes as well as certain disease outcomes and their relation to impaired indoor air quality. This may also help in underpinning specific target mechanisms in order to personalize and improve current treatment options in childhood asthma and develop more successful prevention strategies. This will be done by combining data from detailed clinical phenotyping with multiple -omics data.
The goal of this open-label, single arm home intervention feasibility study is to improve quality of life for children ages 4-16 years with asthma. The main questions it aims to answer are: - How can Home-Based Environmental Interventions (HEI) improve home air-quality problems in the home? - How can HEI improve asthma outcomes in children? Participants will be receiving HEI and completing asthma surveys.
This is a two-arm, parallel design, randomized, controlled pilot trial comparing access to Asma Guardián, a culturally tailored multi-component app-based asthma intervention for Hispanic/Latinx school age children with asthma, to usual care.
In this study, the investigators hypothesize that the reference product (SalbR/Ventolin) is more effective than SalbG (Salbutamol Sandoz) at improving the lung function in children with asthma, and that this difference increases alongside the severity of the airway resistance. (Null hypothesis: There is no difference). This could be explained by different properties and deposition of the aerosol. Purpose of this research: Rejecting the null hypothesis. This is based on the answers to the questions below. Research questions: 1. Is there a difference between the increase in FEV1 (and FVC) after 100 μg SalbG versus FEV1 after 100 μg SalbR in children aged 4-14 years with insufficient asthma control? (primary question) 2. Is there a difference in the subjective feeling of the children after inhalation with 100 μg SalbR and after 100 μg SalbG, measured with a VAS score? 3. Is the increase in FEV1 (and FVC) in children with asthma between 4-14 years of age with insufficient asthma control after inhalation of 400 μg SalbR different than after inhalation of 400 μg SalbG? 4. Is there a difference in the subjective feeling of the children after inhalation with 400 μg SalbR and after 400 μg SalbG, measured with a VAS score?
The goal of this clinical trial is to study if starting bi-level positive airway pressure (BiPAP), a mask that gives pressure to the lungs, works well for children in the emergency department with moderate to severe asthma attacks. The main questions it aims to answer are: 1. Whether initiation of BiPAP at the same time as continuous beta-agonist therapy (e.g., nebulized albuterol) will decrease how long children with moderate to severe asthma attacks need to receive continuous beta-agonist therapy. 2. Whether early BiPAP changes how the lungs function in children with asthma attacks. 3. Whether children receiving early BiPAP experience more issues or side effects than those children who do not. All children will receive the usual treatment for asthma attacks; if they are still experiencing moderate to severe symptoms after the initial treatment, they will be asked to participate in the study. Participants will then wear a mask while they are receiving the continuous beta-agonist therapy. Some patients will receive BiPAP where pressure is given to the lungs and others will have a sham BiPAP mask where no pressure is given to the lungs. Study participants will wear the mask for 4 hours or until their treatment team feels they are ready to come off of the continuous beta-agonist therapy. Participants will receive more medications and decisions on going home or being admitted to the hospital will be decided as usual by their treatment team. Researchers will compare BiPAP versus Control (Sham BiPAP) groups to see if there is a difference in how long continuous beta-agonist therapy is needed, how the lungs are functioning, and number or type of side effects.