Systematic review of worldwide variations of the prevalence of wheezing symptoms in children

Background: Considerable variation in the prevalence of childhood asthma and its symptoms (wheezing) has been observed in previous studies and there is evidence that the prevalence has been increasing over time. Methods: We have systematically reviewed the reported prevalence and time trends of wheezing symptoms among children, worldwide and within the same country over time. All studies comprising more than 1000 persons and meeting certain other quality criteria published over a 16-year period, between January 1990 and December 2005, are reported and a comparison of ISAAC (International Study of Asthma and Allergies in Childhood) and non-ISAAC studies is made, in part as a way of expanding the power to examine time trends (the older studies tend to be non-ISAAC), but also to examine possible methodological differences between ISAAC and non-ISAAC questions. Results: A wide range of current prevalence of wheeze was observed between and within countries over time. The UK had the highest recorded prevalence of 32.2% in children aged 13–14 in 1994–5 and Ethiopia had the lowest prevalence, 1.7% in children aged 10–19 in 1996. All studies in Australia and the UK were compared using multiple logistic regression. ISAAC phase I and III studies reported significantly higher prevalence of current wheeze (OR = 1.638) compared with non-ISAAC studies, after adjusting for various other factors (country, survey year, age of child, parental vs child response to the survey). Australia showed a significantly higher prevalence of current wheezing (OR = 1.343) compared with the UK, there was a significant increase in the prevalence odds ratio per survey year (2.5% per year), a significant decrease per age of child (0.7% per year), and a significantly higher response in current wheezing if the response was self-completed by the child (OR = 1.290). These factors, when explored separately for ISAAC and non-ISAAC studies, showed very different results. In ISAAC studies, or non-ISAAC studies using ISAAC questions, there was a significant decrease in current wheezing prevalence over time (2.5% per year). In non-ISAAC studies, which tend to cover an earlier period, there was a significant increase (2.6% per year) in current wheezing prevalence over time. This is very likely to be a result of prevalence of wheezing increasing from the 1970s up to the early 1990s, but decreasing since then. Conclusion: The UK has the highest recorded prevalence of wheezing and Ethiopia the lowest. Prevalence of wheezing in Australia and the UK has increased from the 1970s up to the early 1990s, but decreased since then and ISAAC studies report significantly higher prevalences than non-ISAAC studies.

Coping, conversation tactics and marital interaction in persons with acquired profound hearing loss (APHL): correlates of distress

This study investigated coping strategies, conversation tactics, and marital interaction in acquired profound hearing loss (APHL) and compared emotionally stable (n = 15) and emotionally distressed (n = 7) participants. Nominated family members were assessed on most measures. Comparisons were also made in the subgroup of married participants. A combined distress criterion was derived from scores on standardized measures of anxiety, depression, hearing handicap, and post-traumatic stress. Groups were compared on the Ways-of-Coping Checklist, a newly devised measure of conversation tactics, and on the Couple Behaviour Report. It was found that distressed APHL participants were more likely to cope through avoidance, self-blame, and wishful thinking, and they used more avoidant tactics in conversation. The coping profile of family members did not differentiate distress groups. However, there was some indication of greater employment of coercive tactics by family members of distressed participants. The results are consistent with the view that the coping style of a person with APHL and the nature of their conversational interactions with family members contribute to their level of distress. Implications for audiological rehabilitation are discussed.