S Kilburn1, T J Lasserson, M McKean. 1. School of Postgraduate Medicine, University of Portsmouth, Gloucester House, Queen Alexandra Hospital, Cosham, Hants, UK, PO6 3LY. sally.kilburn@port.ac.uk
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Although pet removal has been recommended in guidelines on the management of allergic asthma, pet ownership remains high in families where one or more members have an allergy to pet dander. Allergen control measures such as air filtration units placed in the homes of pet-allergic asthmatics have been used as a means of reducing allergen exposure. OBJECTIVES: To determine the clinical efficacy of pet allergen control measures in the homes of people with pet-allergic asthma. SEARCH STRATEGY: An electronic search of the Cochrane Controlled Trials Register was carried out. No restriction was placed on language of publication. SELECTION CRITERIA: Randomised controlled trials comparing an active allergen reduction measure with control were considered for analysis. Participants had stable pet-allergic asthma. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: 34 references were identified by electronic searching, but only three appeared suitable for potential inclusion in the review. Two met the inclusion criteria for the analysis. Both examined the effectiveness of air filtration units. Two reviewers extracted data independently. A limited amount of data were usable for a meta-analysis. MAIN RESULTS: Both trials were small (n=22 and n=35). No significant differences were detected between active intervention and control on the primary and secondary outcome measures reported in the studies. Data on absence from school or work were not reported in either study. No meta-analysis could be performed due to lack of common outcomes. REVIEWER'S CONCLUSIONS: The available trials are too small to provide evidence for or against the use of airfiltration units to reduce allergen levels in the management of pet-allergic asthma. Adequately powered trials are needed. There are no trials of other allergen reduction measures, such as pet washing or possibly pet removal.
BACKGROUND: Although pet removal has been recommended in guidelines on the management of allergic asthma, pet ownership remains high in families where one or more members have an allergy to pet dander. Allergen control measures such as air filtration units placed in the homes of pet-allergic asthmatics have been used as a means of reducing allergen exposure. OBJECTIVES: To determine the clinical efficacy of pet allergen control measures in the homes of people with pet-allergic asthma. SEARCH STRATEGY: An electronic search of the Cochrane Controlled Trials Register was carried out. No restriction was placed on language of publication. SELECTION CRITERIA: Randomised controlled trials comparing an active allergen reduction measure with control were considered for analysis. Participants had stable pet-allergic asthma. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: 34 references were identified by electronic searching, but only three appeared suitable for potential inclusion in the review. Two met the inclusion criteria for the analysis. Both examined the effectiveness of air filtration units. Two reviewers extracted data independently. A limited amount of data were usable for a meta-analysis. MAIN RESULTS: Both trials were small (n=22 and n=35). No significant differences were detected between active intervention and control on the primary and secondary outcome measures reported in the studies. Data on absence from school or work were not reported in either study. No meta-analysis could be performed due to lack of common outcomes. REVIEWER'S CONCLUSIONS: The available trials are too small to provide evidence for or against the use of airfiltration units to reduce allergen levels in the management of pet-allergic asthma. Adequately powered trials are needed. There are no trials of other allergen reduction measures, such as pet washing or possibly pet removal.
Authors: H Francis; G Fletcher; C Anthony; C Pickering; L Oldham; E Hadley; A Custovic; R Niven Journal: Clin Exp Allergy Date: 2003-01 Impact factor: 5.018
Authors: K Lönnkvist; G Halldén; S E Dahlén; I Enander; M van Hage-Hamsten; M Kumlin; G Hedlin Journal: Pediatr Allergy Immunol Date: 1999-02 Impact factor: 6.377
Authors: James Krieger; David E Jacobs; Peter J Ashley; Andrea Baeder; Ginger L Chew; Dorr Dearborn; H Patricia Hynes; J David Miller; Rebecca Morley; Felicia Rabito; Darryl C Zeldin Journal: J Public Health Manag Pract Date: 2010 Sep-Oct
Authors: Emily Bain; Kristen L Pierides; Vicki L Clifton; Nicolette A Hodyl; Michael J Stark; Caroline A Crowther; Philippa Middleton Journal: Cochrane Database Syst Rev Date: 2014-10-21
Authors: Jay Portnoy; Kevin Kennedy; James Sublett; Wanda Phipatanakul; Elizabeth Matsui; Charles Barnes; Carl Grimes; J David Miller; James M Seltzer; P Brock Williams; Jonathan A Bernstein; David I Bernstein; Joann Blessing-Moore; Linda Cox; David A Khan; David M Lang; Richard A Nicklas; John Oppenheimer Journal: Ann Allergy Asthma Immunol Date: 2012-04 Impact factor: 6.347
Authors: Frank E van Boven; Nicolette W de Jong; Gert Jan Braunstahl; Lidia R Arends; Roy Gerth van Wijk Journal: Int Arch Allergy Immunol Date: 2020-03-18 Impact factor: 2.749
Authors: Chris D Bailey; Richard Wagland; Rasha Dabbour; Ann Caress; Jaclyn Smith; Alex Molassiotis Journal: BMC Pulm Med Date: 2010-12-09 Impact factor: 3.317