IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/plo/pone00/0237620.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Combination of ipratropium bromide and salbutamol in children and adolescents with asthma: A meta-analysis

Author

Listed:
  • Hongzhen Xu
  • Lin Tong
  • Peng Gao
  • Yan Hu
  • Huijuan Wang
  • Zhimin Chen
  • Luo Fang

Abstract

Background: A combination of ipratropium bromide (IB) and salbutamol is commonly used to treat asthma in children and adolescents; however, there has been a lack of consistency in its usage in clinical practice. Objective: To evaluate the efficacy and safety of IB + salbutamol in the treatment of asthma in children and adolescents. Methods: The MEDLINE, Embase, and Cochrane Library as well as other Chinese biomedical databases (including China Biological Medicine Database, Chinese National Knowledge Infrastructure, Chongqing VIP, and Wanfang Chinese language bibliographic database) were systematically searched from the earliest record date to September 2020 for randomized controlled trials in children and adolescents (≤18 years) with asthma who received IB + salbutamol or salbutamol alone. The primary outcomes included hospital admission and adverse events. A random effects model with a 95% confidence interval (CI) was used. Subgroup analysis was performed according to age, severity of asthma, and co-interventions with other asthma controllers. This study was registered with PROSPERO. Results: Of the 1061 studies that were identified, 55 met the inclusion criteria and involved 6396 participants. IB + salbutamol significantly reduced the risk of hospital admission compared with salbutamol alone (risk ratio [RR] 0.79; 95% CI 0.66–0.95; p = 0.01; I2 = 40%). Subgroup analysis only showed significant difference in the risk of hospital admission in participants with severe asthma exacerbation (RR 0.73; 95% CI 0.60–0.88; p = 0.0009; I2 = 4%) and moderate-to-severe exacerbation (RR 0.69; 95% CI 0.50–0.96; p = 0.03; I2 = 3%). There were no significant differences in the risk of adverse events between IB + salbutamol group and salbutamol alone group (RR 1.77; 95% CI 0.63–4.98). Conclusion: IB + salbutamol may be more effective than salbutamol alone for the treatment of asthma in children and adolescents, especially in those with severe and moderate to severe asthma exacerbation. The very low to high quality of evidence indicated that future well-designed double-blind RCTs with large sample are needed for research on evaluating the effectiveness of IB + salbutamol treatment for asthma in children and adolescents.

Suggested Citation

  • Hongzhen Xu & Lin Tong & Peng Gao & Yan Hu & Huijuan Wang & Zhimin Chen & Luo Fang, 2021. "Combination of ipratropium bromide and salbutamol in children and adolescents with asthma: A meta-analysis," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 16(2), pages 1-15, February.
  • Handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0237620
    DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0237620
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0237620
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article/file?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0237620&type=printable
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1371/journal.pone.0237620?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0237620. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: plosone (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/ .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.