Features of asthma management: quantifying the patient perspective

Preferences for support in managing symptoms of an asthma flare-up: a pilot study of a discrete choice experiment

Objective: Information on the preferences of people with asthma for support in managing a flare-up can inform service design which may facilitate appropriate help-seeking. To date, little is known about support preferences for managing a flare-up. The aim of this study was to develop and pilot a discrete choice experiment (DCE) to elicit the preferences of people with asthma with regards to support in managing a flare-up.Methods: Steps in developing the DCE included identification and selection of attributes and levels of the support services, construction of choice tasks, experimental design, construction of DCE instrument, and pretest (n=16) and pilot (n=38) studies of the DCE instrument. A multinomial logit model was used to examine the strength and direction of the six attributes in the pilot study.Results: Our results indicate that from a patient perspective, having a healthcare professional that listens to their concerns was the most valued attribute of support in asthma flare-up management. The other features of support valued by participants were timely access to consultation, a healthcare professional with knowledge of their patient history, a specialist doctor and face-to-face communication. Having a written action plan was the least valued attribute.Conclusions: Our findings suggest patient preference for a model of support in managing their symptoms which includes timely, face-to-face access to a healthcare professional that knows them and listens to their concerns. The findings of the pilot study need to be verified with a larger sample and using models to account for preference heterogeneity.

A Systematic and Critical Review of Discrete Choice Experiments in Asthma and Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease

Background

Regulators have called for greater emphasis on the role of the patient voice to inform medical product development and decision making, and expert guidelines and reports for asthma and chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) both explicitly recommend the consideration of patient preferences in the management of these diseases. Discrete choice experiments (DCEs) are commonly used to quantify stakeholders’ treatment preferences and estimate the trade-offs they are willing to make between outcomes such as treatment benefits and risks.

Objective

The aim of this systematic literature review is to provide an up-to-date and critical review of DCEs published in asthma and COPD; specifically, we aim to evaluate the subject of preference studies conducted in asthma and COPD, what attributes have been included, stakeholders’ preferences, and the consistency in reporting of instrument development, testing and reporting of results.

Methods

A systematic review of published DCEs on asthma and COPD treatments was conducted using Embase, Medline and the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews. Studies were included if they included a DCE conducted in a relevant population (e.g. patients with asthma or COPD or their caregivers, asthma or COPD-treating clinicians, or the general population), and reported quantitative outcomes on participants’ preferences. Study characteristics were summarised descriptively, and descriptive analyses of attribute categories, consistency in reporting on key criteria, and stakeholder preferences were undertaken.

Results

A total of 33 eligible studies were identified, including 28 unique DCEs. The majority (n = 20; 71%) of studies were conducted in a patient sample. Studies focused on inhaler treatments, and included attributes in five key categories: symptoms and treatment benefits (n = 23; 82%), treatment convenience (n = 19; 68%), treatment cost (n = 17; 61%), treatment risks (n = 13; 46%), and other (n = 10; 36%). Symptoms and treatment benefits were the attributes most frequently ranked as important to patients (n = 26, 72%), followed by treatment risks (n = 7, 39%). Several studies (n = 9, 32%) did not qualitatively pre-test their DCE, and a majority did not report the uncertainty in estimated outcomes (n = 18; 64%).

Conclusions

DCEs in asthma and COPD have focused on treatment benefits and convenience, with less evidence generated on participants’ risk tolerance. Quality criteria and reporting standards are needed to promote study quality and ensure consistency in reporting between studies.

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s40271-021-00536-w.

Preferences of patients with asthma or COPD for treatments in pulmonary rehabilitation

INTRODUCTION

Pulmonary rehabilitation (PR) aims to improve disease control in patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) and asthma. However, the success of PR-programs depends on the patients' participation and willingness to cooperate. Taking the patients' preferences into consideration might improve both of these factors. Accordingly, our study aims to analyze patients' preferences regarding current rehabilitation approaches in order to deduce and discuss possibilities to further optimize pulmonary rehabilitation.

METHODS AND ANALYSIS

At the end of a 3 weeks in-house PR, patients' preferences concerning the proposed therapies were assessed during two different time slots (summer 2015 and winter 2015/2016) in three clinics using a choice-based conjoint analysis (CA). Relevant therapy attributes and their levels were identified through literature search and expert interviews. Inclusion criteria were as follows: PR-inpatient with asthma and/or COPD, confirmed diagnosis, age over 18 years, capability to write and read German, written informed consent obtained. The CA analyses comprised a generalized linear mixed-effects model and a latent class mixed logit model.

RESULTS

A total of 542 persons participated in the survey. The most important attribute was sport and exercise therapy. Rehabilitation preferences hardly differed between asthma and COPD patients. Health-related quality of life (HRQoL) as well as time since diagnosis were found to have a significant influence on patients' rehabilitation preferences.

CONCLUSIONS

Patients in pulmonary rehabilitation have preferences regarding specific program components. To increase the adherence to, and thus, the effectiveness of rehabilitation programs, these results must be considered when developing or optimizing PR-programs.

Initiating or changing to a fixed-dose combination of Fluticasone propionate/Formoterol over Fluticasone propionate/Salmeterol: A real-life effectiveness and cost impact evaluation

OBJECTIVE

Asthma has a substantial impact on quality of life and health care resources. The identification of a more cost-effective, yet equally efficacious, treatment could positively influence the economic burden of this disease. Fluticasone propionate/Formoterol (FP/FOR) may be as effective as Fluticasone Salmeterol (FP/SAL). We evaluated non-inferiority of asthma control in terms of the proportion of patients free from exacerbations, and conducted a cost impact analysis.

METHODS

This historical, matched cohort database study evaluated two treatment groups in the Optimum Patient Care Research Database in the UK: 1) an FP/FOR cohort of patients initiating treatment with FP/FOR or changing from FP/SAL to FP/FOR and; 2) an FP/SAL cohort comprising patients initiating, or remaining on FP/SAL pMDI combination therapy. The main outcome evaluated non-inferiority of effectiveness (defined as prevention of severe exacerbations, lower limit of the 95% confidence interval (CI) of the mean difference between groups in patient proportions with no exacerbations is -3.5% or higher) in patients treated with FP/FOR versus FP/SAL.

RESULTS

After matching 1:3, we studied a total of 2472 patients: 618 in the FP/FOR cohort (174 patients initiated on FP/FOR and 444 patients changed to FP/FOR) and 1854 in the FP/SAL cohort (522 patients initiated FP/SAL and 1332 continued FP/SAL). The percentage of patients prescribed FP/FOR met non-inferiority as the adjusted mean difference in proportion of no severe exacerbations (95%CI) was 0.008 (-0.032, 0.047) between the two cohorts. No other significant differences were observed except acute respiratory event rates, which were lower for patients prescribed FP/FOR (rate ratio [RR] 0.82, 95% CI 0.71, 0.94).

CONCLUSIONS

Changing to, or initiating FP/FOR combination therapy, is associated with a non-inferior proportion of patients who are severe exacerbation-free at a lower average annual cost compared with continuing or initiating treatment with FP/SAL.

What patients really think about asthma guidelines: barriers to guideline implementation from the patients' perspective

BACKGROUND

Treatment of asthma does not always comply with asthma guidelines (AG). This may be rooted in direct or indirect resistance on the doctors' and/or patients' side or be caused by the healthcare system. To assess whether patients' concepts and attitudes are really an implementation barrier for AG, we analysed the patients' perspective of a "good asthma therapy" and contrasted their wishes with current recommendations.

METHODS

Using a qualitative exploratory design, topic centred focus group (FG) discussions were performed until theoretical saturation was reached. Inclusion criteria were an asthma diagnosis and age above 18. FG sessions were recorded audio-visually and analysed via a mapping technique and content analysis performed according to Mayring (supported by MAXQDA®). Participants' speech times and the proportion of time devoted to different themes were calculated using the Videograph System® and related to the content analysis.

RESULTS

Thirteen men and 24 women aged between 20 and 77 from rural and urban areas attended five FG. Some patients had been recently diagnosed with asthma, others years previously or in childhood. The following topics were addressed: (a) concern about or rejection of therapy components, particularly corticosteroids, which sometimes resulted in autonomous uncommunicated medication changes, (b) lack of time or money for optimal treatment, (c) insufficient involvement in therapy choices and (d) a desire for greater empowerment, (e) suboptimal communication between healthcare professionals and (f) difficulties with recommendations conflicting with daily life. Primarily, (g) participants wanted more time with doctors to discuss difficulties and (h) all aspects of living with an impairing condition.

CONCLUSIONS

We identified some important patient driven barriers to implementing AG recommendations. In order to advance AG implementation and improve asthma treatment, the patients' perspective needs to be considered before drafting new versions of AG. These issues should be addressed at the planning stage.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

DRKS00000562 (German Clinical Trials Registry).

The Role of Qualitative Research Methods in Discrete Choice Experiments

Background. The use of qualitative research (QR) methods is recommended as good practice in discrete choice experiments (DCEs). This study investigated the use and reporting of QR to inform the design and/or interpretation of healthcare-related DCEs and explored the perceived usefulness of such methods. Methods. DCEs were identified from a systematic search of the MEDLINE database. Studies were classified by the quantity of QR reported (none, basic, or extensive). Authors (n = 91) of papers reporting the use of QR were invited to complete an online survey eliciting their views about using the methods. Results. A total of 254 healthcare DCEs were included in the review; of these, 111 (44%) did not report using any qualitative methods; 114 (45%) reported “basic” information; and 29 (11%) reported or cited “extensive” use of qualitative methods. Studies reporting the use of qualitative methods used them to select attributes and/or levels (n = 95; 66%) and/or pilot the DCE survey (n = 26; 18%). Popular qualitative methods included focus groups (n = 63; 44%) and interviews (n = 109; 76%). Forty-four studies (31%) reported the analytical approach, with content (n = 10; 7%) and framework analysis (n = 5; 4%) most commonly reported. The survey identified that all responding authors (n = 50; 100%) found that qualitative methods added value to their DCE study, but many (n = 22; 44%) reported that journals were uninterested in the reporting of QR results. Conclusions. Despite recommendations that QR methods be used alongside DCEs, the use of QR methods is not consistently reported. The lack of reporting risks the inference that QR methods are of little use in DCE research, contradicting practitioners’ assessments. Explicit guidelines would enable more clarity and consistency in reporting, and journals should facilitate such reporting via online supplementary materials.

Continuing discrepancy between patient perception of asthma control and real-world symptoms: a quantitative online survey of 1,083 adults with asthma from the UK

Background:

Previous studies have identified a discrepancy between patient perception of asthma control and real-world symptoms; despite several hypotheses, the reasons remain unclear.

Aims:

To explore patients' experiences of asthma symptoms and disease management and their educational needs in the UK; to assess recent progress in asthma control and management.

Methods:

A quantitative questionnaire-based online survey of UK patients aged ≥18 years with self-reported asthma.

Results:

Of the 1,083 individuals (55% female, 49% aged ≥55 years) who completed the survey, 79% described their asthma control as ‘good’ or ‘very good’. Despite this, in the previous 2 years, 65% had experienced ‘frequent’ day-time symptoms, 37% had ‘frequent’ night-time symptoms, and 25% had used oral steroids for asthma; 41% of those prescribed a reliever inhaler used it ≥1 a day. Overall, 76% had a ‘good’ or ‘very good’ relationship with their healthcare professional (HCP); 32% had not attended regular asthma reviews and only 12% were using a personal asthma action plan. Moreover, 70% of respondents felt that they had the ‘main responsibility’ for managing their asthma; 29% believed this responsibility to be shared with their HCP.

Conclusions:

This survey indicates a continuing discrepancy between patient perception of asthma control and real-world symptoms, with little change from previous studies. Many patients accept symptoms as the norm. The diversity among respondents' attitudes demonstrates a need to help patients change some of their beliefs and understanding about asthma, and to improve asthma management with better education about the understanding of control for patients and HCPs.

Patient preferences for community pharmacy asthma services: a discrete choice experiment

BACKGROUND

Specialized community pharmacy services, involving the provision of disease state management and care by pharmacists, have been developed and trialled and have demonstrated very good health outcomes. Most of these services have been developed from a healthcare professional perspective. However, for the future uptake and long-term sustainability of these services as well as for better and sustained health outcomes for patients, it is vital to gain an understanding of patients' preferences. We can then structure healthcare services to match these preferences and needs rather than around clinical viewpoints alone.

OBJECTIVE

The aim of this study was to elicit patient preferences for pharmacy-based specialized asthma services using a discrete choice experiment and to explore the value/importance that patients place on the different attributes of the asthma service. The existence of preference heterogeneity in the population was also investigated.

METHODS

The study was conducted with asthma patients who had recently experienced a specialized asthma management service at their pharmacy in New South Wales, Australia. Pharmacists delivering the asthma service mailed out the discrete choice questionnaires to participating patients at the end of 6 months of service provision. A latent class (LC) model was used to investigate each patient's strength of preference and preference heterogeneity for several key attributes related to asthma service provision: frequency of visits, access to pharmacist, interaction with pharmacy staff, availability of a private area for consultation, provision of lung function testing, type and depth of advice provision, number of days with asthma symptoms and cost of service.

RESULTS

Eighty useable questionnaires (of 170 questionnaires sent out) were received (response rate 47.1%). The study identified various key elements of asthma services important to patients. Further, the LC analysis revealed three classes with differing patient preferences for levels of asthma service provision. Patients in the Minimalistic Model class valued provision of lung function testing and preferred more frequent service visits. Cost of service had a negative effect on service preference for patients in this class. Patients in the Partial Model class mainly derived utility from the provision of lung function testing and comprehensive advice at the pharmacy and also wanted more frequent service visits. The Holistic Model class patients considered all attributes of the service to be important when making a choice. While the majority of the service attributes had a positive effect on preference for patients in this class, cost of service and days with symptoms of asthma had a negative effect on service preference. These patients also preferred fewer service visits.

CONCLUSION

The study identified various key attributes that are important to patients with respect to community pharmacy-based asthma services. The results also demonstrate the existence of preference heterogeneity in the population. Asthma service providers need to take these findings into consideration in the design and development of future service models so as to increase their uptake and ensure their long-term sustainability.

Understanding patients with asthma and COPD: insights from a European study

AIMS

To understand the needs of people with asthma and COPD, and to identify opportunities for improved care.

METHODS

Quantitative questionnaire-based survey performed in five European countries on patients with asthma and COPD. Questionnaires were administered to patients using Computer Assisted Web Interview methodology.

RESULTS

1022 patients with asthma (UK [n=190]; Germany [n=214]; France [n=200]; Italy [n=222]; Spain [n=196]) and 719 patients with COPD (UK [n=153]; Germany [n=147]; France [n=145]; Italy [n=140]; Spain [n=134]) were enrolled in the study. 32% of those with asthma and 67% of those with COPD considered that their condition had a significant effect on their quality of life, and stigma and emotional distress was common. Many expressed concern regarding potential medication side effects or that medicines might lose their effect with time. Major discrepancies between expectations and patient satisfaction with the doctor-patient relationship were observed, including a need to be consulted in the choice of inhalers. Consultations were infrequent, and 75% of respondents sought additional information beyond that received during consultations - commonly from the internet.

CONCLUSIONS

Patient satisfaction was high but information needs were not addressed and the emotional burden of disease is underappreciated.

Patient-centered care and its effect on outcomes in the treatment of asthma

Patient-centered care may be pivotal in improving health outcomes for patients with asthma. In addition to increased attention in both research and clinical forums, recent legislation also highlights the importance of patient-centered outcomes research in the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act. However, whether patient-centered care has been shown to improve outcomes for this population is unclear. To answer this question, we performed a systematic review of the literature that aimed to define current patient-focused management issues, characterize important patient-defined outcomes in asthma control, and identify current and emerging treatments related to patient outcomes and perspectives. We used a parallel search strategy via Medline(®), Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, CINAHL(®) (Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature), and PsycINFO(®), complemented with a reference review of key articles that resulted in a total of 133 articles; 58 were interventions that evaluated the effect on patient-centered outcomes, and 75 were descriptive studies. The majority of intervention studies demonstrated improved patient outcomes (44; "positive" results); none showed true harm (0; "negative"); and the remainder were equivocal (14; "neutral"). Key themes emerged relating to patients' desires for asthma knowledge, preferences for tailored management plans, and simplification of treatment regimens. We also found discordance between physicians and patients regarding patients' needs, beliefs, and expectations about asthma. Although some studies show promise regarding the benefits of patient-focused care, these methods require additional study on feasibility and strategies for implementation in real world settings. Further, it is imperative that future studies must be, themselves, patient-centered (eg, pragmatic comparative effectiveness studies) and applicable to a variety of patient populations and settings. Despite the need for further research, enough evidence exists that supports incorporating a patient-centered approach to asthma management, in order to achieve improved outcomes and patient health.

Asthma worsenings: approaches to prevention and management from the Asthma Worsenings Working Group

Most asthma patients prescribed maintenance asthma therapies still experience periods of asthma worsenings characterized by daytime or night-time symptoms, or an increased need for rescue medication. In fact, these episodes are highly prevalent even in patients with well-controlled disease. Published literature suggests that asthma worsenings likely represent a window of opportunity during which patients could intervene early to prevent exacerbations or further deterioration of asthma symptoms. However, current evidence suggests that most patients fail to respond or to self-manage appropriately during these periods.To address the issue of asthma worsenings, an interdisciplinary committee of respirologists, allergists, family physicians, pharmacists and certified asthma educators from across Canada developed a practical definition of asthma worsenings and provided approaches to the prevention and management of these episodes based on current literature. To date, combination inhaled corticosteroid/long-acting beta-agonist therapy, particularly single inhaler maintenance and reliever therapy, appears to be an effective strategy for preventing asthma worsenings and exacerbations. Addressing the potential barriers to appropriate patient self-management of asthma worsenings, such as failure to adequately identify and respond to worsenings, low expectations for controlling asthma, low health literacy and poor patient-health care professional communication, are also critical to the successful prevention and management of these episodes. Finally, an interdisciplinary team approach involving patients and their families, certified asthma educators, primary care physicians, pharmacists and specialists is likely to have the greatest impact on the identification, prevention and management of asthma worsenings.