scispace - formally typeset

Journal ArticleDOI

Primary care based clinics for asthma.

18 Apr 2012-Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews (John Wiley & Sons, Ltd)-Vol. 2012, Iss: 4

TL;DR: 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.

AbstractBackground 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.

Topics: Health care (56%), Wheeze (54%), Asthma (51%)

...read more

Content maybe subject to copyright    Report

Citations
More filters

Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: Behavior change interventions including education, training, and enablement in the context of collaborative team-based approaches are effective to change practice of primary healthcare professionals.
Abstract: There is a plethora of interventions and policies aimed at changing practice habits of primary healthcare professionals, but it is unclear which are the most appropriate, sustainable, and effective. We aimed to evaluate the evidence on behavior change interventions and policies directed at healthcare professionals working in primary healthcare centers. Study design: overview of reviews. Data source: MEDLINE (Ovid), Embase (Ovid), The Cochrane Library (Wiley), CINAHL (EbscoHost), and grey literature (January 2005 to July 2015). Study selection: two reviewers independently, and in duplicate, identified systematic reviews, overviews of reviews, scoping reviews, rapid reviews, and relevant health technology reports published in full-text in the English language. Data extraction and synthesis: two reviewers extracted data pertaining to the types of reviews, study designs, number of studies, demographics of the professionals enrolled, interventions, outcomes, and authors’ conclusions for the included studies. We evaluated the methodological quality of the included studies using the AMSTAR scale. For the comparative evaluation, we classified interventions according to the behavior change wheel (Michie et al.). Of 2771 citations retrieved, we included 138 reviews representing 3502 individual studies. The majority of systematic reviews (91%) investigated behavior and practice changes among family physicians. Interactive and multifaceted continuous medical education programs, training with audit and feedback, and clinical decision support systems were found to be beneficial in improving knowledge, optimizing screening rate and prescriptions, enhancing patient outcomes, and reducing adverse events. Collaborative team-based policies involving primarily family physicians, nurses, and pharmacists were found to be most effective. Available evidence on environmental restructuring and modeling was found to be effective in improving collaboration and adherence to treatment guidelines. Limited evidence on nurse-led care approaches were found to be as effective as general practitioners in patient satisfaction in settings like asthma, cardiovascular, and diabetes clinics, although this needs further evaluation. Evidence does not support the use of financial incentives to family physicians, especially for long-term behavior change. Behavior change interventions including education, training, and enablement in the context of collaborative team-based approaches are effective to change practice of primary healthcare professionals. Environmental restructuring approaches including nurse-led care and modeling need further evaluation. Financial incentives to family physicians do not influence long-term practice change.

96 citations


Cites background from "Primary care based clinics for asth..."

  • ...Advance practice nurse care [136], quality improvement strategies [137, 148–152], case management [138], collaborative care [140], evidencebased medicine practice strategies [144], midwife-led continuity services [145], comprehensive asthma care [146], and patient-centered medical home [125, 147] have all been evaluated....

    [...]


Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: ABM seems to be a promising, novel treatment for child and/or adolescent anxiety disorders with merits over lengthier, talking based therapies, however, more rigorous research trials are needed to clarify the mechanisms behind ABM and establish effective, standardised treatment protocols.
Abstract: Background Attention Bias Modification (ABM) is a novel computer based treatment for anxiety disorders. It has been proposed as an efficient, accessible psychological therapy and is based on cognitive theories of attention. The present review sought to investigate the efficacy of ABM as a potential treatment for child and adolescent anxiety. Method A systematic literature review was conducted, using three main databases, PsycINFO, Embase and Medline, to identify original research articles which measured the effect of ABM on anxiety levels in children and/or adolescents. Results Ten articles met the inclusion criteria and of these 10, three were randomised control trials. A lack of standardisation in relation to the treatment protocol was observed; nonetheless the identified studies generally provided evidence for the efficacy of ABM as an anxiety treatment. Limitations Due to the nature of the studies found, a statistical meta-analysis was not possible. Conclusions ABM seems to be a promising, novel treatment for child and/or adolescent anxiety disorders with merits over lengthier, talking based therapies. However, more rigorous research trials are needed to clarify the mechanisms behind ABM and establish effective, standardised treatment protocols.

53 citations


Journal ArticleDOI
Abstract: Care co-ordination is reported to be an effective component of chronic disease (CD) management within primary care. While nurses often perform this role, it has not been reported if they or other disciplines are best placed to take on this role, and whether the discipline of the co-ordinator has any impact on clinical and health service outcomes. We conducted a rapid review of previous systematic reviews from 2006 to 2013 to answer these questions with a view to informing improvements in care co-ordination programmes. Eighteen systematic reviews from countries with developed health systems comparable to Australia were included. All but one included complex interventions and 12 of the 18 involved a range of multidisciplinary co-ordination strategies. This multi-strategy and multidisciplinarity made it difficult to isolate which were the most effective strategies and disciplines. Nurses required specific training for these roles, but performed co-ordination more often than any other discipline. There was, however, no evidence that discipline had a direct impact on clinical or service outcomes, although specific expertise gained through training and workforce organisational support for the co-ordinator was required. Hence, skill mix is an important consideration when employing care co-ordination, and a sustained consistent approach to workforce change is required if nurses are to be enabled to perform effective care co-ordination in CD management in primary care.

44 citations


Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: An integrative review of systematic reviews of non-pharmacological and pharmacological interventions for breathlessness in non-malignant disease was undertaken to identify the current state of clinical understanding of the management of breathlessness and highlight promising interventions that merit further investigation.
Abstract: Background: Breathlessness is a debilitating and distressing symptom in a wide variety of diseases and still a difficult symptom to manage. An integrative review of systematic reviews of non-pharmacological and pharmacological interventions for breathlessness in non-malignant disease was undertaken to identify the current state of clinical understanding of the management of breathlessness and highlight promising interventions that merit further investigation. Methods: Systematic reviews were identified via electronic databases between July 2007 and September 2009. Reviews were included within the study if they reported research on adult participants using either a measure of breathlessness or some other measure of respiratory symptoms. Results: In total 219 systematic reviews were identified and 153 included within the final review, of these 59 addressed non-pharmacological interventions and 94 addressed pharmacological interventions. The reviews covered in excess of 2000 trials. The majority of systematic reviews were conducted on interventions for asthma and COPD, and mainly focussed upon a small number of pharmacological interventions such as corticosteroids and bronchodilators, including beta-agonists. In contrast, other conditions involving breathlessness have received little or no attention and studies continue to focus upon pharmacological approaches. Moreover, although there are a number of non-pharmacological studies that have shown some promise, particularly for COPD, their conclusions are limited by a lack of good quality evidence from RCTs, small sample sizes and limited replication. Conclusions: More research should focus in the future on the management of breathlessness in respiratory diseases other than asthma and COPD. In addition, pharmacological treatments do not completely manage breathlessness and have an added burden of side effects. It is therefore important to focus more research on promising non-pharmacological interventions.

29 citations


Cites background from "Primary care based clinics for asth..."

  • ...Treatments assessed within the reviews included: acupuncture [32], breathing exercises/training [30,33,34]; dietary measures [35-39]; Heliox [29,31]; homeopathy [40]; control of allergens [41,42]; humidity control/ionisers [43,44]; education programs [45-47]; manual therapy[48]; primary care clinics [49]; psychological interventions [50,51]; individualised care plans [52]; and non-invasive positive pressure ventilation (NIPPV) [53], which enhances ventilation by compensating for fatigued ventilator muscles....

    [...]

  • ...Of those reviews with positive findings, four reported a single study only [35,49,53,54]....

    [...]


Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: Evidence is reported on from systematic reviews and international studies that show that nurse practitioners improve healthcare outcomes, particularly for hard to service populations, and also maps out the limited Australian evidence on the impact of nurse practitioners' care in aged care settings.
Abstract: Aim. To consider evidence surrounding the emerging role of nurse practitioners in Australia with a particular focus on the provision of healthcare to older people. Methods. Methods used included keyword, electronic database and bibliographic searches of international literature, as well as review of prominent policy reports in relation to aged care and advanced nursing roles. Results. This paper reports on evidence from systematic reviews and international studies that show that nurse practitioners improve healthcare outcomes, particularly for hard to service populations. It also maps out the limited Australian evidence on the impact of nurse practitioners' care in aged care settings. Conclusions. If Australia is to meet the health needs of its ageing population, more evidence on the effectiveness, economic viability and sustainability of models of care, including those utilising nurse practitioners, is required.

24 citations


References
More filters


Journal Article
TL;DR: The variation in the prevalences of asthma, allergic rhinoconjunctivitis, and atopic-eczema symptoms is striking between different centres throughout the world and will form the basis of further studies to investigate factors that potentially lead to these international patterns.
Abstract: BACKGROUND Systematic international comparisons of the prevalences of asthma and other allergic disorders in children are needed for better understanding of their global epidemiology, to generate new hypotheses, and to assess existing hypotheses of possible causes. We investigated worldwide prevalence of asthma, allergic rhinoconjunctivitis, and atopic eczema. METHODS We studied 463,801 children aged 13-14 years in 155 collaborating centres in 56 countries. Children self-reported, through one-page questionnaires, symptoms of these three atopic disorders. In 99 centres in 42 countries, a video asthma questionnaire was also used for 304,796 children. FINDINGS We found differences of between 20-fold and 60-fold between centres in the prevalence of symptoms of asthma, allergic rhinoconjunctivitis, and atopic eczema, with four-fold to 12-fold variations between the 10th and 90th percentiles for the different disorders. For asthma symptoms, the highest 12-month prevalences were from centres in the UK, Australia, New Zealand, and Republic of Ireland, followed by most centres in North, Central, and South America; the lowest prevalences were from centres in several Eastern European countries, Indonesia, Greece, China, Taiwan, Uzbekistan, India, and Ethiopia. For allergic rhinoconjunctivitis, the centres with the highest prevalences were scattered across the world. The centres with the lowest prevalences were similar to those for asthma symptoms. For atopic eczema, the highest prevalences came from scattered centres, including some from Scandinavia and Africa that were not among centres with the highest asthma prevalences; the lowest prevalence rates of atopic eczema were similar in centres, as for asthma symptoms. INTERPRETATION The variation in the prevalences of asthma, allergic rhinoconjunctivitis, and atopic-eczema symptoms is striking between different centres throughout the world. These findings will form the basis of further studies to investigate factors that potentially lead to these international patterns.

3,523 citations


Journal ArticleDOI
01 May 2004-Allergy
TL;DR: This report provides a wealth of information that will be an invaluable source of information for those who wish to explore available data on the burden of asthma by region and will be extremely useful to develop background materials for World Asthma Day activities in 2004 and well into the future.
Abstract: It is estimated that as many as 300 million people of all ages, and all ethnic backgrounds, suffer from asthma and the burden of this disease to governments, health care systems, families, and patients is increasing worldwide. In 1989 the Global Initiative for Asthma (GINA) program was initiated in an effort to raise awareness among public health and government officials, health care workers, and the general public that asthma was on the increase. The GINA program recommends a management program based on the best available scientific evidence to provide effective medical care for asthma tailored to local health care systems and resources. Working in continued collaboration with leaders in asthma care from many countries, GINA sponsors World Asthma Day (first Tuesday in May) which has been extremely successful. A vast number of people have made a commitment to bring awareness about the burden of asthma to their local health care officials, and to implement programs of effective asthma care. Beginning in 2003, the theme of World Asthma Day has been the ‘‘Global Burden of Asthma.’’ GINA commissioned Professor Richard Beasley, Wellington, New Zealand (member, GINA Dissemination Committee) to provide available data on the burden of asthma. A summary of this report is provided in this publication; the full document with data sets for 20 different regions worldwide may be obtained from the GINA website (http://www.ginasthma.com). Professor Beasley and his colleagues obtained data on the burden of asthma from literature primarily published through the International StudyofAsthmaandAllergies in Childhood (ISAAC) and the European Community Respiratory Health Survey (ECHRS). Methodologies differ in these studies, and epidemiological data on asthma are very difficult to collect, as Professor Beasley carefully describes in his segment on ‘‘Methodological Issues.’’ Nonetheless, the full report provides a wealth of information, along with a large number of scientific references. The study regions have been grouped according to geographical, political, historical, and racial considerations based on official data from WHO, the United Nations (UN), and other sources, and to some extent, the availability of asthma epidemiological data within the study region. Using the United Nations World Population Prospect Population Database (http://esa.un.org/unpp) as a source within each region, all countries were included, and in some cases territories and dependencies if specific asthma epidemiological data were available. For simplicity some data from small territories have been omitted or lumped in a larger sub-regional unit. The report will be updated as new information becomes available and following feedback from individual countries and regions. The GINA Executive Committee is indebted to Professor Beasley and his colleagues for providing this report that will be an invaluable source of information for those who wish to explore available data on the burden of asthma by region. It will be extremely useful to develop background materials for World Asthma Day activities in 2004 and well into the future. Matthew Masoli, Denise Fabian, Shaun Holt, Richard Beasley for the Global Initiative for Asthma (GINA) Program

3,222 citations


Journal ArticleDOI
Abstract: Background: Systematic international comparisons of the prevalences of asthma and other allergic disorders in children are needed for better understanding of their global epidemiology, to generate new hypotheses, and to assess existing hypotheses of possible causes. We investigated worldwide prevalence of asthma, allergic rhinoconjunctivitis, and atopic. Methods: We studied 463 801 children aged 13—14 years in 155 collaborating centres in 56 countries. Children self-reported, through one-page questionnaires, symptoms of these three atopic disorders. In 99 centres in 42 countries, a video asthma questionnaire was also used for 304 796 children. Findings: We found differences of between 20-fold and 60-fold between centres in the prevalence of symptoms of asthma, allergic rhinoconjunctivitis, and atopic eczema, with four-fold to 12-fold variations between the 10th and 90th percentiles for the different disorders. For asthma symptoms, the highest 12-month prevalences were from centres in the UK, Australia, New Zealand, and Republic of Ireland, followed by most centres in North, Central, and South America; the lowest prevalences were from centres in several Eastern European countries, Indonesia, Greece, China, Taiwan, Uzbekistan, India, and Ethiopia. For allergic rhinoconjunctivitis, the centres with the highest prevalences were scattered across the world. The centres with the lowest prevalences were similar to those for asthma symptoms. For atopic eczema, the highest prevalences came from scattered centres, including some from Scandinavia and Africa that were not among centres with the highest asthma prevalences; the lowest prevalence rates of atopic eczema were similar in centres, as for asthma symptoms. Interpretation: The variation in the prevalences of asthma, allergic rhinoconjunctivitis, and atopic-eczema symptoms is striking between different centres throughout the world. These findings will form the basis of further studies to investigate factors that potentially lead to these international patterns.

2,944 citations


Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: It is reasonable to expect that in most patients with asthma, control of the disease can and should be achieved and maintained, and the Global Initiative for Asthma recommends a change in approach to asthma management, with asthma control, rather than asthma severity, being the focus of treatment decisions.
Abstract: Asthma is a serious health problem throughout the world During the past two decades, many scientific advances have improved our understanding of asthma and ability to manage and control it effectively However, recommendations for asthma care need to be adapted to local conditions, resources and services Since it was formed in 1993, the Global Initiative for Asthma, a network of individuals, organisations and public health officials, has played a leading role in disseminating information about the care of patients with asthma based on a process of continuous review of published scientific investigations A comprehensive workshop report entitled "A Global Strategy for Asthma Management and Prevention", first published in 1995, has been widely adopted, translated and reproduced, and forms the basis for many national guidelines The 2006 report contains important new themes First, it asserts that "it is reasonable to expect that in most patients with asthma, control of the disease can and should be achieved and maintained," and recommends a change in approach to asthma management, with asthma control, rather than asthma severity, being the focus of treatment decisions The importance of the patient-care giver partnership and guided self-management, along with setting goals for treatment, are also emphasised

2,672 citations