1.
Comparative effectiveness of budesonide inhalation suspension and montelukast in children with mild asthma in Korea.
Shin, J, Oh, SJ, Petigara, T, Tunceli, K, Urdaneta, E, Navaratnam, P, Friedman, HS, Park, SW, Hong, SH
The Journal of asthma : official journal of the Association for the Care of Asthma. 2020;(12):1354-1364
Abstract
Objective: The comparative effectiveness of low-dose budesonide inhalation suspension (BIS) versus oral montelukast (MON) in managing asthma control among children with mild asthma was assessed in Korea.Methods: Claims from Korea's national health insurance database for children (2-17 years) with mild asthma (GINA 1 or 2) who initiated BIS or MON during 2015 were retrospectively analyzed. Pre- and post-index windows were 1 year each. Adherence, persistency, asthma control, asthma-related health-care resource utilization, and costs were evaluated using unadjusted descriptive statistics and propensity score-matched regression analyses.Results: The number of children identified was 26,052 for unmatched (n = 1,221 BIS; n = 24,831 MON) and 2,290 for matched populations (n = 1,145 per cohort). Medication adherence, measured by proportion of days covered, was low for both cohorts but significantly higher for MON versus BIS (13.8% vs. 4.5%; p < .001). Time to loss of persistency was longer for MON versus BIS (82.3 vs. 78.4 days, respectively; p < .001). Mean number of post-index asthma-related office visits was 6.6 for BIS versus 8.3 for MON (p < .001). However, a greater proportion of patients in the BIS cohort had an asthma exacerbation-related office visit than the MON cohort (78.3% vs. 56.1%; p < .001). Asthma-related total health-care costs were higher with MON versus BIS (₩ 190,185 vs. ₩ 167,432, respectively; p < .001), likely driven by higher pharmaceutical costs associated with MON (₩ 69,113 vs. ₩ 49,225; p < .001).Conclusions: Montelukast patients had better adherence, a longer time to loss of persistency, and were less likely to experience an exacerbation-related office visit in the post-index period than BIS patients.
2.
Association between eating behaviour and diet quality: eating alone vs. eating with others.
Chae, W, Ju, YJ, Shin, J, Jang, SI, Park, EC
Nutrition journal. 2018;17(1):117
-
-
-
Free full text
Plain language summary
Selecting foods for a day is easily influenced by the social environment and eating together or alone plays a big role in that decision. The study aims to evaluate the association between diet quality of the modern Korean adult population based on the eating behaviour and the socioeconomic factors that influence their diet quality. The study is a cross-sectional study which included 3365 men and 5258 women aged between 19 and 64 years. The study included demographic, socioeconomics, and health behaviour factors as covariates. Results indicate that diet quality is influence by eating behaviour. Authors observed that when Korean adults ate without a companion, their diet quality was significantly lower than those who consistently ate with others. Furthermore, from the higher education to lower education level, the diet quality declined when they eat alone. Authors conclude that many Korean adults are experiencing low diet quality when they eat alone. The study provides evidence to promote interventions to improve diet quality among the public.
Abstract
BACKGROUND To discover the association between eating alone and diet quality among Korean adults who eat alone measured by the mean adequacy ratio (MAR), METHODS The cross-sectional study in diet quality which was measured by nutrient intakes, indicated as MAR and nutrient adequacy ratio (NAR) with the Korean National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey (KNHANES) VI 2013-2015 data. Study population was 8523 Korean adults. Multiple linear regression was performed to identify the association between eating behaviour and MAR and further study analysed how socioeconomic factors influence the diet quality of those who eat alone. RESULTS We found that the diet quality of people who eat alone was lower than that of people who eat together in both male (β: - 0.110, p = 0.002) and female participants (β: - 0.069, p = 0.005). Among who eats alone, the socioeconomic factors that negatively influenced MAR with the living arrangement, education level, income levels, and various occupation classifications. CONCLUSIONS People who eat alone have nutrition intake below the recommended amount. This could lead to serious health problems not only to those who are socially disadvantaged but also those who are in a higher social stratum. Policy-makers should develop strategies to enhance diet quality to prevent potential risk factors.