Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36480687›Full record

ArticleJMIR formative research2023

Clinical Outcomes After Use of Inhaled Corticosteroids or Oral Steroids in a COVID-19 Telemedicine Clinic Cohort: Retrospective Chart Review.

Michele Cellai, Jodi Roberts, Miranda A Moore, Nikhila Gandrakota

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in JMIR formative research, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact, top 76% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

0 citing papers in PubMed, 0 citations in OpenAlex.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

4 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Michele CellaiGeneral Internal Medicine Seavey Clinic, School of Nursing, Emory University, Atlanta, GA, United States.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-6891-3522
Jodi RobertsGeneral Internal Medicine, Emory Healthcare, Atlanta, GA, United States.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-2899-9541
Miranda A MooreDepartment of Family and Preventive Medicine, School of Medicine, Emory University, Atlanta, GA, United States.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-1455-6099
Nikhila GandrakotaDepartment of Family and Preventive Medicine, School of Medicine, Emory University, Atlanta, GA, United States.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-4267-7533
Emory University · USEmory Healthcare · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundCOVID-19 concerns remain among health care providers, as there are few outpatient treatment options. In the early days of the pandemic, treatment options for nonhospitalized patients were limited, and symptomatic treatment and home-grown guidelines that used recommendations from the Global Initiative for Asthma Management and Treatment were used.

objectiveThe possibility that inhaled corticosteroids (ICS) might reduce the risk of respiratory symptoms and promote recovery was the impetus for this review, as it has already been shown that in the nonhospitalized patient population, oral corticosteroids (OCS) in the acute phase could have an adverse effect on recovery. We investigated if (1) patients treated with ICS were less likely to require referral to a post-COVID-19 clinic or pulmonary specialist than patients without ICS treatment or with OCS therapy, and (2) if OCS use was associated with worse health outcomes.

methodsIn a retrospective chart review, we identified all patients with acute illness due to COVID-19 that were followed and managed by a telemedicine clinic team between June and December 2020. The data were electronically pulled from electronic medical records through April 2021 and reviewed to determine which patients eventually required referral to a post-COVID-19 clinic or pulmonary specialist due to persistent respiratory symptoms of COVID-19. The data were then analyzed to compare outcomes between patients prescribed OCS and those prescribed ICS. We specifically looked at patients treated acutely with ICS or OCS that then required referral to a pulmonary specialist or post-COVID-19 clinic. We excluded any patients with a history of chronic OCS or ICS use for any reason.

resultsPrescribing ICS during the acute phase did not reduce the possibility of developing persistent symptoms. There was no difference in the referral rate to a pulmonary specialist or post-COVID-19 clinic between patients treated with OCS versus ICS. However, our data may not be generalizable to other populations, as it represents a patient population enrolled in a telemedicine program at a single center.

conclusionsWe found that ICS, as compared to OCS, did not reduce the risk of developing persistent respiratory symptoms. This finding adds to the body of knowledge that ICS and OCS medications remain potent treatments in patients with acute and postacute COVID-19 seen in an outpatient setting.

Indexed as

COVID-19COVID-19 treatmentCOVID symptomsICSlungpandemicpatient outcomepost-acute sequelapulmonarysteroid treatmentsteroid usetelehealththerapytreatment

Identifiers

PMID36480687
PMCPMC9953981
OpenAlexW4310945043

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.