Scolaris Content Display Scolaris Content Display

Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews

Combinaison de fluticasone et de salmétérol versus combinaison à dose fixe de budésonide et de formotérol en cas d’asthme chronique chez les adultes et les enfants

Información

DOI:
https://doi.org/10.1002/14651858.CD004106.pub4Copiar DOI
Base de datos:
  1. Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews
Versión publicada:
  1. 07 diciembre 2011see what's new
Tipo:
  1. Intervention
Etapa:
  1. Review
Grupo Editorial Cochrane:
  1. Grupo Cochrane de Vías respiratorias

Copyright:
  1. Copyright © 2012 The Cochrane Collaboration. Published by John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

Cifras del artículo

Altmetric:

Citado por:

Citado 0 veces por enlace Crossref Cited-by

Contraer

Autores

  • Toby J Lasserson

    Correspondencia a: Cochrane Editorial Unit, The Cochrane Collaboration, London, UK

    [email protected]

  • Giovanni Ferrara

    Section of Respiratory Diseases, Department of Internal Medicine, University of Perugia, Terni, Italy

    Lung Allergi Kliniken, Karolinska University Hospital, Stockholm, Sweden

  • Lucio Casali

    Internal Medicine, University of Perugia, Terni, Italy

Contributions of authors

TJL devised the protocol with editorial support from CJC; assessed studies, extracted data, contacted trialists and study sponsors for additional outcome data; analysis and write‐up

GF developed the protocol; wrote up study characteristics, extracted data and assisted with development of discussion section.

LC developed discussion section.

We acknowledge the input of Chris Cates who helped with data extraction and checking, interpretation and guidance on conceptual issues in earlier versions of this review.

Sources of support

Internal sources

  • Cochrane Editorial Unit, UK.

External sources

  • NHS Cochrane Collaboration Programme Grant Scheme, UK.

Declarations of interest

There are no known conflicts of interest.

Acknowledgements

We thank Elizabeth Stovold and Susan Hansen for assistance in designing a search strategy and for electronic literature searching, Emma Jackson and Veronica Stewart for assistance in retrieving the papers, and Emma Welsh for managing the editorial process. We are grateful to René Aalbers, Jeff Fletcher and Steve Edwards from AZ in our efforts to obtain data for the Aalbers 2004 and COMPASS. We are grateful to Pim Kon and Richard Fellows from GSK for assisting us in obtaining ED visit data for EXCEL.

Version history

Published

Title

Stage

Authors

Version

2011 Dec 07

Combination fluticasone and salmeterol versus fixed dose combination budesonide and formoterol for chronic asthma in adults and children

Review

Toby J Lasserson, Giovanni Ferrara, Lucio Casali

https://doi.org/10.1002/14651858.CD004106.pub4

2008 Jan 23

Combination fluticasone and salmeterol versus fixed dose combination budesonide and formoterol for chronic asthma in adults and children

Review

Toby J Lasserson, Christopher J Cates, Giovanni Ferrara, Lucio Casali

https://doi.org/10.1002/14651858.CD004106.pub3

2007 Jul 18

Combination fluticasone and salmeterol vesus fixed dose combination budesonide and formoterol for chronic asthma in adults and children

Protocol

Toby J Lasserson, Christopher J Cates, Giovanni Ferrara

https://doi.org/10.1002/14651858.CD004106.pub2

2003 Jan 20

Single inhalers containing corticosteroid and long‐acting bronchodilator for chronic asthma in adults and children

Protocol

Felix S F Ram, Paul W Jones

https://doi.org/10.1002/14651858.CD004106

Differences between protocol and review

  1. Added items to the risk of bias tool (allocation generation, selective reporting bias & other bias domains). This amendment reflects current recommendations regarding the risk of bias assessment from Cochrane Handbook of Systematic Reviews of Interventions (Higgins 2011).

  2. Added mortality as an outcome measure. In view of possible concerns raised by related Cochrane Reviews in the area of harms, we included this outcome in the 2011 update of the review.

  3. Summary of findings table has been added and quality of evidence assessed based on recommendations developed by GRADE. In the 2011 version we included withdrawals due to adverse events and mortality in this table. Both of these outcomes are potentially important in healthcare decision‐making.

Notes

A previous version of this review was withdrawn prior to publication following the identification of incomplete data by GSK for the outcome ED visit/admission to hospital. The data included in the original version of the review indicated a significant increase in the odds of ED visit/hospitalisation with FP/SAL. However, this reflected data that were drawn from those participants who were admitted to hospital only. The pooled outcome data did not an accurately represent the composite outcome of presentation at ED or hospital admission (EXCEL). We have now included data made available to us by GSK which are an accurate record of ED visit or admission to hospital.

PICO

Population
Intervention
Comparison
Outcome

El uso y la enseñanza del modelo PICO están muy extendidos en el ámbito de la atención sanitaria basada en la evidencia para formular preguntas y estrategias de búsqueda y para caracterizar estudios o metanálisis clínicos. PICO son las siglas en inglés de cuatro posibles componentes de una pregunta de investigación: paciente, población o problema; intervención; comparación; desenlace (outcome).

Para saber más sobre el uso del modelo PICO, puede consultar el Manual Cochrane.