/pdf/australian-college-of-rural-and-remote-medicine-4et2u5nv2b.pdf

Australian College of Rural and Remote Medicine.

Background
Asthma is the most common chronic disease in childhood and prevalence is also high in adulthood, thereby placing a considerable burden on healthcare resources. Therefore, effective asthma management is important to reduce morbidity and to optimise utilisation of healthcare facilities.

Objectives
To review the effectiveness of nurse-led asthma care provided by a specialised asthma nurse, a nurse practitioner, a physician assistant or an otherwise specifically trained nursing professional, working relatively independently from a physician, compared to traditional care provided by a physician. Our scope included all outpatient care for asthma, both in primary care and in hospital settings.

Search methods
We carried out a comprehensive search of databases including The Cochrane Library, MEDLINE and EMBASE to identify trials up to August 2012. Bibliographies of relevant papers were searched, and handsearching of relevant publications was undertaken to identify additional trials.

Selection criteria
Randomised controlled trials comparing nurse-led care versus physician-led care in asthma for the same aspect of asthma care.

Data collection and analysis
We used standard methodological procedures expected by The Cochrane Collaboration.

Main results
Five studies on 588 adults and children were included concerning nurse-led care versus physician-led care. One study included 154 patients with uncontrolled asthma, while the other four studies including 434 patients with controlled or partly controlled asthma. The studies were of good methodological quality (although it is not possible to blind people giving or receiving the intervention to which group they are in). There was no statistically significant difference in the number of asthma exacerbations and asthma severity after treatment (duration of follow-up from six months to two years). Only one study had healthcare costs as an outcome parameter, no statistical differences were found. Although not a primary outcome, quality of life is a patient-important outcome and in the three trials on 380 subjects that reported on this outcome, there was no statistically significant difference (standardised mean difference (SMD) -0.03; 95% confidence interval (CI) -0.23 to 0.17).

Authors' conclusions
We found no significant difference between nurse-led care for patients with asthma compared to physician-led care for the outcomes assessed. Based on the relatively small number of studies in this review, nurse-led care may be appropriate in patients with well-controlled asthma. More studies in varied settings and among people with varying levels of asthma control are needed with data on adverse events and health-care costs.

Nurse versus physician-led care for the management of asthma

Background Spirometry and fraction of exhaled nitric oxide (FeNO) are commonly used in specialist centres to monitor children with asthma. The National Institute for Health and Care Excellence recommends spirometry for asthma monitoring from 5 years in all healthcare settings. There is little spirometry and FeNO data in children managed for asthma in UK primary care to support their use. Objectives To study the prevalence of abnormal spirometry and FeNO in children with asthma managed in primary care and to explore their relationship with asthma control and unplanned healthcare attendances (UHA). Methods Prospective observational cohort study in children aged 5–16 years with suspected or doctor-diagnosed asthma attending an asthma review in UK general practice. Spirometry, FeNO, asthma control test (ACT) scores and number of UHAs were studied. Results Of 612 children from 10 general practices, 23.5% had abnormal spirometry, 36.0% had raised FeNO ≥35 parts per billion and 41.8% reported poor control. Fifty-four per cent of children reporting good asthma control had abnormal spirometry and/or raised FeNO. At follow-up, the mean number of UHAs fell from 0.31/child in the 6 months preceding review to 0.20/child over the 6 months following review (p=0.0004). Median ACT scores improved from 20 to 22 (p=0.032), and children’s ACT from 21 to 23 (p Conclusions Abnormal lung function and FeNO are common in children attending for asthma review in primary care and relate poorly to symptom scores. A symptoms-based approach to asthma monitoring without objective testing is likely to miss children at high risk of future severe asthma attacks.

https://thorax.bmj.com/content/thoraxjnl/75/2/101.full.pdf

Lung function and asthma control in school-age children managed in UK primary care: a cohort study

BACKGROUND: Chronically ill and ageing populations demand increasing human resources who can provide on-going and frequent follow-up care. We performed a systematic review to assess the effect of physician-nurse substitution on process care outcomes.
METHODS: We searched OVID Medline, Embase, CINAHL and The Cochrane Library for all available dates up to August 2012 and updated in February 2014. We selected and critically appraised published randomised controlled trials (RCT) and followed the PRISMA guidelines for the reporting of systematic reviews.
RESULTS: A total of 14 RCTs comprising 10,743 participants met the inclusion criteria. Studies were generally small and suffered from attrition of ≥20% and selection biases. There were 53 process measurements investigated in the 14 RCTs, many of which were unique to specific conditions. Accounts of nurses' roles, responsibilities, tasks, qualifications and training content/components were not described in sufficient detail. Most study estimates showed no significant differences between nurse-led care and physician-led care while less than a half (~40%) favoured nurse-led care.
CONCLUSIONS: Despite the methodological limitations and the varying nurses' roles and competencies across studies, specially trained nurses can provide care that is at least as equivalent to care provided by physicians for the management of chronic diseases, in terms of process of care. Future, larger studies with better quality methods are needed and should report and assess whether the differences in effects vary due to diversity in roles, qualifications, training competencies and characteristics of clinicians delivering substitution of care.

https://www.zora.uzh.ch/id/eprint/111201/1/Martinez%20The%20effect%20of%20physician-nurse%20substitution%20in%20primary.pdf

The effect of physician-nurse substitution in primary care in chronic diseases: a systematic review.

Background
Asthma is defined as the presence of variable airflow obstruction with symptoms (more than one of wheeze, breathlessness, chest tightness, cough). It is becoming increasingly common worldwide and this is especially true in higher income countries. In several of these countries there has been a move towards delivery of asthma care via primary care based asthma clinics. Such clinics deliver proactive asthma care sited within primary care, via regular, dedicated sessions which are usually nurse led and doctor supported. They include organised recall of patients on an asthma register and care usually comprises education, symptom review and guideline-based management. Despite the proliferation of such clinics, especially in countries such as the United Kingdom (UK), there is a paucity of evidence to support their use. This review sets out to look at the evidence for the effectiveness of asthma clinics.

Objectives
To determine the effectiveness of organised asthma care delivered via primary care based asthma clinics.

Search methods
We searched the Cochrane Airways Group Specialised Register of trials (last search December 2011) and reviewed reference lists of all primary studies for additional references.

Selection criteria
We included randomised controlled trials of primary care based asthma clinics with a parallel group design, where clinics took place within dedicated time slots and included face-to-face interaction with doctor or nurse and control groups received usual clinical practice care by a general practitioner.

Data collection and analysis
Two review authors independently assessed the trials for inclusion and conducted all data extraction and analysis. All disagreements were resolved by discussion.

Main results
A total of three studies involving 466 participants were included. There was no statistically significant difference between the asthma clinic group and the control group for most outcomes (primary outcomes: asthma exacerbations leading to hospitalisation or accident and emergency (AE secondary outcomes: symptoms, time lost from work and withdrawals from the intervention or usual care). However, the confidence intervals were wide for all outcomes and there was substantial heterogeneity between the studies for both AE 95% CI 0.12 to 0.77). There were no studies looking at the secondary outcome of exacerbations requiring oral steroids.

Authors' conclusions
There is limited evidence of efficacy for primary care based asthma clinics, and firm conclusions cannot be formed until more good quality trials have been carried out.

/pdf/primary-care-based-clinics-for-asthma-1aw249olo7.pdf

Jess Dorrett

Papers

Evaluation of a Nurse-run asthma clinic in general practice.