Background The interplay between COVID‐19 pandemic and asthma in children is still unclear. We evaluated the impact of COVID‐19 pandemic on childhood asthma outcomes. Methods The PeARL multinational cohort included 1,054 children with asthma and 505 non‐asthmatic children aged between 4 and 18 years from 25 pediatric departments, from 15 countries globally. We compared the frequency of acute respiratory and febrile presentations during the first wave of the COVID‐19 pandemic between groups and with data available from the previous year. In children with asthma, we also compared current and historical disease control. Results During the pandemic, children with asthma experienced fewer upper respiratory tract infections, episodes of pyrexia, emergency visits, hospital admissions, asthma attacks, and hospitalizations due to asthma, in comparison with the preceding year. Sixty‐six percent of asthmatic children had improved asthma control while in 33% the improvement exceeded the minimal clinically important difference. Pre‐bronchodilatation FEV 1 and peak expiratory flow rate were improved during the pandemic. When compared to non‐asthmatic controls, children with asthma were not at increased risk of LRTIs, episodes of pyrexia, emergency visits, or hospitalizations during the pandemic. However, an increased risk of URTIs emerged. Conclusion Childhood asthma outcomes, including control, were improved during the first wave of the COVID‐19 pandemic, probably because of reduced exposure to asthma triggers and increased treatment adherence. The decreased frequency of acute episodes does not support the notion that childhood asthma may be a risk factor for COVID‐19. Furthermore, the potential for improving childhood asthma outcomes through environmental control becomes apparent.

Modern approaches to the management of urticaria in childrenThe authors presented the main provisions of the current clinical guidelines for the treatment of children with urticaria. The specifics of disease epidemiology, etiology and pathogenesis are described. The steps of differential diagnosis are highlighted. For pediatric patients, treatment recommendations are provided based on the principles of evidence and a step-by-step therapy is suggested. A clear explanation is given on how to conduct an analysis of the effectiveness of therapy and assess the degree of disease activity.Авторами представлены основные положения актуальных клинических рекомендаций по оказанию медицинской помощи детям с крапивницей. Рассматриваются особенности эпидемиологии, этиологии и патогенеза. Подробно освещаются этапы дифференциально-диагностического поиска. Для пациентов детского возраста приведены основанные на доказательной базе рекомендации по лечению и предложена ступенчатая схема терапии. Дано четкое разъяснение к проведению анализа эффективности терапии и оценки степени активности заболевания. Ключевые слова: крапивница, аллергические болезни, диагностика, лечение, клинические рекомендации, дети.

Клинические наблюдения Обоснование. Омализумаб рекомендован для лечения хронической спонтанной (идиопатической) крапивницы, резистентной к блокаторам Н1-гистаминовых рецепторов, у детей с 12 лет. Цель исследования-оценить результаты терапии, включавшей омализумаб, у подростков с хронической идиопатической крапивницей. Методы. Изучали истории болезни пациентов дневного стационара в возрасте 12-17 лет с хронической крапивницей, неконтролируемой антигистаминными препаратами 2-го поколения и/или иммунодепрессантами не менее 1 мес (в стандартной или выше стандартной дозировке), получавших омализумаб (300 мг 1 раз в 4 нед подкожно). Основной исход терапии-контроль болезни (индекс активности крапивницы за предыдущие 7 сут, ИАК7, равный нулю) к 3 и 6 мес терапии. Дополнительные исходы: количество значимых обострений (применение глюкокортикостероидов или экстренная госпитализация) к 6 мес терапии и через 6 и 12 мес после ее завершения; отмена сопутствующей терапии (антигистаминные препараты и/или иммунодепрессанты) к 3 и 6 мес и генно-инженерных биологических препаратов (ГИБП); ремиссия (ИАК7=0) через 6 и 12 мес после отмены ГИБП; нежелательные реакции на омализумаб (любые медицинские события, связанные с ГИБП). Результаты. Из 18 детей с хронической крапивницей контроль болезни к 3 мес лечения достигнут у 12 (67%) пациентов, к 6 мес-у 13 (72%). В период терапии омализумабом и через 6 мес после завершения значимых обострений крапивницы не было, через 12 мес после ее завершенияу 1 (6%) подростка. После 3 мес лечения сопутствующая терапия отменена у 3 (17%) пациентов, после 6 мес-у 10 (56%). Ремиссия заболевания сохранялась у 11 (61%) из 18 пациентов через 6 мес и у 9 из 15 оставшихся под наблюдением (60%) через 12 мес после завершения терапии. Нежелательных реакций на омализумаб не отмечено. Заключение. Добавление омализумаба к терапии подростков с неконтролируемой хронической идиопатической крапивницей позволяет достичь контроля болезни к 6 мес лечения у большинства пролеченных больных. Ключевые слова: подростки, хроническая крапивница, индекс активности крапивницы, антигистаминные препараты 2-го поколения, омализумаб, эффективность, безопасность.

No abstract

Background. Anti-inflammatory therapy is used to achieve and maintain asthma control, as well as respiratory function indicators monitoring. Telemedicine technologies can be used for this purpose, and it became particularly essential during the COVID-19 pandemic.Objective. The aim of the study is to analyze efficacy of the mobile technology MedQuizBot for asthma monitoring, to estimate patient compliance to use such instruments of self-control via the bot and without it, and bot's functioning satisfaction.Methods. 6-month prospective observational comparative study in patients with asthma from 4 to 17 years old was conducted. All patients were divided into two groups: patients who have used MedQuizBot and patients who have used any other self-control tools. Patients had to enter peakflowmetry data daily and undergo asthma control tests monthly. Patients were able to communicate with their doctor remotely via the chat bot. Main study indicators: determining the efficacy of MedQuizBot in patients with asthma by estimating the compliance to self-control tools at using the bot. Secondary study indicators: estimation of patients satisfaction on using the MedQuizBot and determination of level of asthma control due to the obtained data results.Results. 41 patients have used MedQuizBot, 27 patients were in the control group. Patients who used the bot more often answered asthma control test questions. Patients over 12 years old have completed the asthma control test less often than young children: ACT was filled on average in 1.5 times, САСТ — 1.8 times. 51% of patients filled in data on peakflowmetry via the new technology, patients from control group did not start the picflowmetry diary. Patients under 12 years old, who filled up the test with their parents, has entered picflowmetry data 7 times more often than adolescents. The asthma was under control in 70% of patients. The data was entered into the system 2.5 times more often during the lockdown period due to COVID-19 pandemic and during the tree flowering season in comparison to other periods of2020. Patients noted the usability of the MedQuizBot and agreed to use it in future.Conclusion. MedQuizBot is effective in achieving asthma control mainly during the period of need — in case of insufficient control over the disease itself (exposure to pollen allergens, acute respiratory diseases), during the limitations in medical care availability.