Action plans in patients presenting to emergency departments with asthma exacerbations: Frequency of use and description of contents

Emerging Roles of Malaysian Pharmacists in Asthma Management Amidst the COVID-19 Pandemic: A Narrative Review

The arrival of COVID-19 pandemic in March 2020 adversely affected every aspect of human life, including the management of asthma. The pandemic has forced clinicians to revisit the application of high-risk aerosol-generating procedures in asthma management, including spirometry and nebuliser therapy. The use of commercial spacers with pressurised metered-dose inhalers to replace nebulisation is limited by the high cost and pandemic-induced stock unavailability of these inhalers. The need for social distancing, healthcare reserves reallocation, and scarce personal protective equipment has promote increased telemedicine uptake for patients' asthma control and monitoring. Malaysian pharmacists have been providing long-term care of asthma through the introduction of the respiratory Medication Therapy Adherence Clinic (MTAC) to empower patients' general health literacy, train and regularly evaluate their inhalation technique, and reinforce the importance of medication compliance. To minimise the use of unplanned healthcare resources and avoidable COVID-19 infection exposure, Malaysian pharmacists need to better support asthma self-management via increased uptake of written Asthma Action Plans (AAPs). Pharmacist-led asthma treatment step-down to attain the lowest effective dose of inhaled corticosteroids (ICS) has become increasingly relevant during the pandemic, as its prolonged use carries risk of numerous side effects and possible hospitalisation. Telepharmacy offers a promising model for exploration and an alternative to the traditional service delivery of asthma education. Despite not being authorised as vaccinators, Malaysian pharmacists hold strong positions in COVID-19 immunisation programmes for pharmacovigilance and advocacy. The pandemic demands an increased role for pharmacists within medication management to prevent patients from the stockpiling that can cause adverse effects on pharmaceutical supply chain. This review intends to summarise the impact of COVID-19 on asthma management, with a focus on the transitional roles of Malaysian pharmacists before and after the pandemic era.

Educational interventions for health professionals managing chronic obstructive pulmonary disease in primary care

BACKGROUND

Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) is a common, preventable and treatable health condition. COPD is associated with substantial burden on morbidity, mortality and healthcare resources.

OBJECTIVES

To review existing evidence for educational interventions delivered to health professionals managing COPD in the primary care setting.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Airways Trials Register from inception to May 2021. The Register includes records from the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), MEDLINE, Embase, Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature (CINAHL), Allied and Complementary Medicine Database (AMED) and PsycINFO. We also searched online trial registries and reference lists of included studies.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included randomised controlled trials (RCTs) and cluster-RCTs. Eligible studies tested educational interventions aimed at any health professionals involved in the management of COPD in primary care. Educational interventions were defined as interventions aimed at upskilling, improving or refreshing existing knowledge of health professionals in the diagnosis and management of COPD.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently reviewed abstracts and full texts of eligible studies, extracted data and assessed the risk of bias of included studies. We conducted meta-analyses where possible and used random-effects models to yield summary estimates of effect (mean differences (MDs) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs)). We performed narrative synthesis when meta-analysis was not possible. We assessed the overall certainty of evidence for each outcome using Grades of Recommendation, Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE). Primary outcomes were: 1) proportion of COPD diagnoses confirmed with spirometry; 2) proportion of patients with COPD referred to, participating in or completing pulmonary rehabilitation; and 3) proportion of patients with COPD prescribed respiratory medication consistent with guideline recommendations.

MAIN RESULTS

We identified 38 studies(22 cluster-RCTs and 16 RCTs) involving 4936 health professionals (reported in 19/38 studies) and 71,085 patient participants (reported in 25/38 studies). Thirty-six included studies evaluated interventions versus usual care; seven studies also reported a comparison between two or more interventions as part of a three- to five-arm RCT design. A range of simple to complex interventions were used across the studies, with common intervention features including education provided to health professionals via training sessions, workshops or online modules (31 studies), provision of practice support tools, tool kits and/or algorithms (10 studies), provision of guidelines (nine studies) and training on spirometry (five studies). Health professionals targeted by the interventions were most commonly general practitioners alone (20 studies) or in combination with nurses or allied health professionals (eight studies), and the majority of studies were conducted in general practice clinics. We identified performance bias as high risk for 33 studies. We also noted risk of selection, detection, attrition and reporting biases, although to a varying extent across studies. The evidence of efficacy was equivocal for all the three primary endpoints evaluated: 1) proportion of COPD diagnoses confirmed with spirometry (of the four studies that reported this outcome, two supported the intervention); 2) proportion of patients with COPD who are referred to, participate in or complete pulmonary rehabilitation (of the four studies that reported this outcome, two supported the intervention); and 3) proportion of patients with COPD prescribed respiratory medications consistent with guideline recommendations (12 studies reported this outcome, the majority evaluated multiple drug classes and reported a mixed effect). Additionally, the low quality of evidence and potential risk of bias make the interpretation more difficult. Moderate-quality evidence (downgraded due to risk of bias concerns) suggests that educational interventions for health professionals probably improve the proportion of patients with COPD vaccinated against influenza (three studies) and probably have little impact on the proportion of patients vaccinated against pneumococcal infection (two studies). Low-quality evidence suggests that educational interventions for health professionals may have little or no impact on the frequency of COPD exacerbations (10 studies). There was a high degree of heterogeneity in the reporting of health-related quality of life (HRQoL). Low-quality evidence suggests that educational interventions for health professionals may have little or no impact on HRQoL overall, and when using the COPD-specific HRQoL instrument, the St George's Respiratory Questionnaire (at six months MD 0.87, 95% CI -2.51 to 4.26; 2 studies, 406 participants, and at 12 months MD -0.43, 95% CI -1.52 to 0.67, 4 studies, 1646 participants; reduction in score indicates better health). Moderate-quality evidence suggests that educational interventions for health professionals may improve patient satisfaction with care (one study). We identified no studies that reported adverse outcomes.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

The evidence of efficacy was equivocal for educational interventions for health professionals in primary care on the proportion of COPD diagnoses confirmed with spirometry, the proportion of patients with COPD who participate in pulmonary rehabilitation, and the proportion of patients prescribed guideline-recommended COPD respiratory medications. Educational interventions for health professionals may improve influenza vaccination rates among patients with COPD and patient satisfaction with care. The quality of evidence for most outcomes was low or very low due to heterogeneity and methodological limitations of the studies included in the review, which means that there is uncertainty about the benefits of any currently published educational interventions for healthcare professionals to improve COPD management in primary care. Further well-designed RCTs are needed to investigate the effects of educational interventions delivered to health professionals managing COPD in the primary care setting.

Effect of Two Educational Models including Face-to-Face and Training Pamphlets for Disease Control in Asthmatic Patients

BACKGROUND

Asthma is a common condition in which the patient requires self-management and teaching programs that lead to reduced prevalence and mortality. The main aim of this study was to improve the management knowledge of the disease through the use of educational tools, pamphlets and face-to-face lecture, concurrent with evaluating and comparing its effectiveness in response to treatment.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

In this study, 82 asthmatic patients were enrolled. Training necessary to control the disease and use of drugs were provided to patients in one group by pamphlets (39 patients) and the other by face-to-face education (43 patients). After a month, Disease control examination and Asthma Control Test (ACT) scores were evaluated and compared.

RESULTS

The mean age of participants was 39.12±14.25 years. There was no significant difference between the two groups in age, gender and education (P> 0.05) and no significant difference in asthma control between the two groups before the intervention (P = 0.065). The overall asthma control score in the pamphlet was increased from 15.43±4.99 at baseline to 20.58±4.47 in the assessment after one month education (P <0.001) and in face-to-face training an overall score was increased from 13.27±5.39 to 21.95±2.77 (P <0.001). After one month education, asthma control score was increased 5.23 ± 6.88 in pamphlets group and 8.9 ± 6.32 in face-to-face group (P = 0.014).

CONCLUSION

Evaluation of both educational methods showed face-to-face training is more efficient.

Engaging patients and primary care providers in the design of novel opinion leader based interventions for acute asthma in the emergency department: a mixed methods study

BACKGROUND

Multifaceted interventions driven by the needs of patients and providers can help move evidence into practice more rapidly. This study engaged both patients and primary care providers (PCPs) to help design novel opinion leader (OL)-based interventions for patients with acute asthma seen in emergency departments (EDs).

METHODS

A mixed methods design was employed. In phase I, we invited convenience samples of patients with asthma presenting to the ED and PCPs to participate in a survey. Perceptions with respect to: a) an ideal OL-profile for asthma guidance; and b) content, style and delivery methods of OL-based interventions in acute asthma directed from the ED were collected. In phase II, we conducted focus groups to further explore preferences and expectations for such interventions with attention to barriers and facilitators for implementation.

RESULTS

Overall, 54 patients completed the survey; 39% preferred receiving guidance from a respirologist, 44% during their ED visit and 56% through individual discussions. In addition, 55% expressed interest in having PCP follow-up within a week of ED discharge. A respirologist was identified as the ideal OL-profile by 59% of the 39 responding PCPs. All expressed interest in receiving notification of their patients' ED presentation, most within a week and including diagnosis and ED/post ED-treatment. Personalized, guideline-based, recommendations were considered to be the ideal content by the majority; 39% requested this guidance through a pamphlet faxed to their offices. In the focus groups, patients and PCPs recognized the importance of health professional liaisons in transitions in care; patient anxiety and PCP time constraints were identified as potential barriers for ED-educational information uptake and proper post-ED follow-up, respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

Engaging patients and PCPs yielded actionable information to tailor OL-based multifaceted interventions for acute asthma in the ED. We identified potential facilitators for the implementation of such interventions (e.g., patient interaction with alternative health care professionals who could facilitate transitions in asthma care between the ED and the primary care setting), and for the provision of post discharge self-management education (e.g., consideration of the first week of ED discharge as a practical time frame for this intervention). Prioritization of identified barriers (e.g., lack of PCP involvement) could be addressed by the identification of potential early adopters in practice environments (e.g., clinicians with special interest in asthma).

Reasons and outcomes for patients receiving ICS/LABA agents prior to, and one month after, emergency department presentations for acute asthma

Objective: Asthma is a common emergency department (ED) presentation. This study examined factors associated with inhaled corticosteroids/long-acting beta-agonist (ICS/LABA) use; and management and outcomes before and after ED presentation. Methods: Secondary analysis of a prospective cohort study; adults treated for acute asthma in Canadian EDs underwent a structured interview before discharge and were followed-up four weeks later. Patients received oral corticosteroids (OCS) at discharge and, at physician discretion, most received ICS or ICS/LABA inhaled agents. Analyses focused on ICS/LABA vs "other" treatment groups at ED presentation. Results: Of 807 enrolled patients, 33% reported receiving ICS/LABA at ED presentation; 62% were female, median age was 31 years. Factors independently associated with ICS/LABA treatment prior to ED presentation were: having an asthma action plan; using an asthma diary/peak flow meter; influenza immunization; not using the ED as usual site for prescriptions; ever using OCS and currently using ICS. Patients were treated similarly in the ED and at discharge; however, relapse was higher in the ICS/LABA group, even after adjustment. Conclusion: One-third of patients presenting to the ED with acute asthma were already receiving ICS/LABA agents; this treatment was independently associated with preventive measures. While ICS/LABA management improves control of chronic asthma, patients using these agents who develop acute asthma reflect higher severity and increased risk of future relapse.

Assessing the knowledge to practice gap: The asthma practices of community pharmacists

Background

Community pharmacists are well positioned to identify patients with poorly controlled asthma and trained to optimize asthma therapy. Yet, over 90% of patients with asthma live with uncontrolled disease. We sought to understand the current state of asthma management in practice in Alberta and explore the potential use of the Chat, Check and Chart (CCC) model to enhance pharmacists' care for patients with asthma.

Methods

An 18-question survey was used to examine pharmacists' monitoring of asthma control and prior use of the CCC tools. Descriptive statistics were used to characterize the response rate, sample demographics, asthma management and CCC use. Survey validity and reliability were established.

Results

One hundred randomly selected pharmacists completed the online survey with a 40% (100/250) response rate. A third of responding pharmacists reported talking to most patients about asthma symptoms and medication, with a greater focus on talking with patients on new prescriptions over those with ongoing therapies. Fewer than 1 in 10 pharmacists routinely talked to most patients about asthma action plans (AAPs). The majority of pharmacists (76%) were familiar with the CCC model, and 83% of those reported that the CCC model influenced their practice anywhere from somewhat (45%) to a great deal (38%). Both scales had good reliability, and factor analysis provided support for scale validity.

Conclusions

There was considerable variability in pharmacists' activities in monitoring asthma. Pharmacists rarely used AAPs. The CCC model had a high level of self-reported familiarity, use and influence among pharmacists.

Effectiveness of written action plans for acute asthma: A systematic review

OBJECTIVE

Self-management is an essential part of achieving asthma control and improving long-term outcomes. While guidelines recommend the provision of written asthma action plans (AAPs), few patients presenting to emergency departments (ED) have one. This systematic review examined if individualized written AAPs reduce relapses in adults following an ED visit for acute asthma.

DATA SOURCES

Comprehensive searches of seven electronic databases and grey literature were conducted.

STUDY SELECTIONS

Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) examining the effectiveness of individualized written AAPs to reduce relapses after ED visits for acute asthma were included. Study quality was determined using the Cochrane Risk of Bias (RoB) tool; intervention fidelity was assessed.

RESULTS

From 695 potentially relevant studies, three RCTs were included. The RoB was low in two studies and high in one study; description of intervention fidelity varied across studies. The provision of individualized written AAPs in adults following an ED visit for acute asthma did not reduce the risk of relapse after ED discharge (risk ratio [RR] = 0.66; 95% confidence intervals [CI]: 0.36, 1.23; I² = 40%). There was a 49% reduction in the risk of relapse after ED discharge when only studies with low RoB were pooled (RR = 0.51; 95% CI: 0.31, 0.83; I² = 0%).

CONCLUSION

This review did not provide conclusive evidence to support the consideration of individualized written AAPs for the reduction of relapses after an ED visit; however, the low frequency of events, small number of studies and samples, and their methodological quality might play an important role in this overall finding.

Enablers and determinants of the provision of written action plans to patients with asthma: a stratified survey of Canadian physicians

Despite national recommendations, most patients with asthma are not given a written action plan . The objectives were to ascertain physicians' endorsement of potential enablers to providing a written action plan, and the determinants and proportion, of physician-reported use of a written action plan. We surveyed 838 family physicians, paediatricians, and emergency physicians in Quebec. The mailed questionnaire comprised 102 questions on asthma management, 11 of which pertained to written action plan and promising enablers. Physicians also selected a case vignette that best corresponded to their practice and reported their management. The survey was completed by 421 (56%) physicians (250 family physicians, 115 paediatricians and 56 emergency physicians); 43 (5.2%) reported providing a written action plan to ≥70% of their asthmatic patients and 126 (30%) would have used a written action plan in the selected vignette. Most (>60%) physicians highly endorsed the following enablers: patients requesting a written action plan, adding a blank written action plan to the chart, receiving a copy of the written action plan completed by a consultant, receiving a monetary compensation for its completion, and having another healthcare professional explain the completed written action plan to patients. Four determinants were significantly associated with providing a written action plan: being a paediatrician (RR:2.1), treating a child (RR:2.0), aiming for long-term asthma control (RR:2.5), and being aware of national recommendations to provide a written action plan to asthmatic patients (RR:2.9). A small minority of Quebec physicians reported providing a written action plan to most of their patients, revealing a huge care gap. Several enablers to improve uptake, highly endorsed by physicians, should be prioritised in future implementation efforts.

ASTHMA

ENCOURAGING DOCTORS TO PROVIDE WRITTEN ACTION PLANS: Changes to practice organization and doctors' perceptions should encourage the provision of written action plans for all asthma patients. International guidelines state that effective long-term treatment of asthma requires educated self-management, regular reviews and provision of a written action plan (WAP). However, many patients have poor asthma control and as few as 30 per cent have a WAP. Fabienne Djandji at the Saint-Justine University Central Hospital in Montreal, Canada, and co-workers conducted a survey of 421 doctors to determine their attitudes and provision of WAPs. Only 5.2 per cent of respondents provided WAPs to patients; those treating children or aiming for long-term asthma control were more likely to do so. The doctors said that incentives to provide WAPs would include requests from patients themselves, being paid to complete WAPs and having extra support from specialists or other health care professionals such as pharmacists.