Pharmaceutical Care: Impact on Asthma Medication Use

Pharmacist Provided Spirometry Services: A Scoping Review

Purpose

Despite international guidelines' recommendations, spirometry is underutilized in the diagnosis and management of asthma and COPD. Spirometry may be an opportunity for trained pharmacists to meet the needs of patients with suspected or diagnosed lung conditions. The aim of this scoping review is to describe the literature including pharmacist provided spirometry services, specifically to identify: 1) the models of pharmacist provided spirometry services, and additional services commonly offered alongside spirometry, 2) pharmacist training and capability to obtain quality results, and (3) pharmacist, physician, and patient perspectives.

Methods

In September 2020, a comprehensive literature search in PubMed and EMBASE was conducted to identify all relevant literature on the topic of pharmacist provided spirometry services using the search term: "pharmacist or pharmacy" and "spirometry or pulmonary function test or lung function test." Literature was screened using inclusion/exclusion criteria and selected articles were charted and analyzed using the themes above.

Results

A total of 27 records were included. The scoping review found that pharmacist provided spirometry has been conducted around the world in community pharmacies and clinic settings. Community pharmacists may increase access to spirometry screening; the lack of communication with primary care providers and remuneration are barriers that need to be overcome to optimize the utility of the service. Clinic-based services are interprofessional and collaborative, allowing a patient to receive the test, results, diagnosis, and medication changes in one visit. Following comprehensive training, pharmacists felt confident in their ability to perform spirometry and met quality standards at acceptable rates.

Conclusion

Spirometry is an opportunity for pharmacists to improve evidence-based practice for screening and diagnosing lung conditions along with providing comprehensive services to complement testing. Data around provider and patient perspectives is limited and should be further investigated to determine if providers and patients would value and collaborate with pharmacists providing spirometry services.

Pharmacists performing quality spirometry testing: an evidence based review

BACKGROUND

The scope of pharmacist services for patients with pulmonary disease has primarily focused on drug related outcomes; however pharmacists have the ability to broaden the scope of clinical services by performing diagnostic testing including quality spirometry testing. Studies have demonstrated that pharmacists can perform quality spirometry testing based upon international guidelines.

AIM OF THE REVIEW

The primary aim of this review was to assess the published evidence of pharmacists performing quality spirometry testing based upon American Thoracic Society/European Respiratory Society (ATS/ERS) guidelines. In order to accomplish this, the description of evidence and type of outcome from these services were reviewed.

METHODS

A literature search was conducted using five databases [PubMed (1946-January 2015), International Pharmaceutical Abstracts (1970 to January 2015), Cumulative Index of Nursing and Allied Health Literature, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials and Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews] with search terms including pharmacy, spirometry, pulmonary function, asthma or COPD was conducted. Searches were limited to publications in English and reported in humans. In addition, Uniform Resource Locators and Google Scholar searches were implemented to include any additional supplemental information.

RESULTS

Eight studies (six prospective multi-center trials, two retrospective single center studies) were included. Pharmacists in all studies received specialized training in performing spirometry testing. Of the eight studies meeting inclusion and exclusion criteria, 8 (100%) demonstrated acceptable repeatability of spirometry testing based upon standards set by the ATS/ERS guidelines. Acceptable repeatability of seven studies ranged from 70 to 99% consistent with published data.

CONCLUSION

Available evidence suggests that quality spirometry testing can be performed by pharmacists. More prospective studies are needed to add to the current evidence of quality spirometry testing performed by pharmacists and to measure health outcomes of the pulmonary patient.

Anti-leukotriene agents compared to inhaled corticosteroids in the management of recurrent and/or chronic asthma in adults and children

BACKGROUND

Anti-leukotrienes (5-lipoxygenase inhibitors and leukotriene receptors antagonists) serve as alternative monotherapy to inhaled corticosteroids (ICS) in the management of recurrent and/or chronic asthma in adults and children.

OBJECTIVES

To determine the safety and efficacy of anti-leukotrienes compared to inhaled corticosteroids as monotherapy in adults and children with asthma and to provide better insight into the influence of patient and treatment characteristics on the magnitude of effects.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched MEDLINE (1966 to Dec 2010), EMBASE (1980 to Dec 2010), CINAHL (1982 to Dec 2010), the Cochrane Airways Group trials register, and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (Dec 2010), abstract books, and reference lists of review articles and trials. We contacted colleagues and the international headquarters of anti-leukotrienes producers.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included randomised trials that compared anti-leukotrienes with inhaled corticosteroids as monotherapy for a minimum period of four weeks in patients with asthma aged two years and older.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently assessed the methodological quality of trials and extracted data. The primary outcome was the number of patients with at least one exacerbation requiring systemic corticosteroids. Secondary outcomes included patients with at least one exacerbation requiring hospital admission, lung function tests, indices of chronic asthma control, adverse effects, withdrawal rates and biological inflammatory markers.

MAIN RESULTS

Sixty-five trials met the inclusion criteria for this review. Fifty-six trials (19 paediatric trials) contributed data (representing total of 10,005 adults and 3,333 children); 21 trials were of high methodological quality; 44 were published in full-text. All trials pertained to patients with mild or moderate persistent asthma. Trial durations varied from four to 52 weeks. The median dose of inhaled corticosteroids was quite homogeneous at 200 µg/day of microfine hydrofluoroalkane-propelled beclomethasone or equivalent (HFA-BDP eq). Patients treated with anti-leukotrienes were more likely to suffer an exacerbation requiring systemic corticosteroids (N = 6077 participants; risk ratio (RR) 1.51, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.17, 1.96). For every 28 (95% CI 15 to 82) patients treated with anti-leukotrienes instead of inhaled corticosteroids, there was one additional patient with an exacerbation requiring rescue systemic corticosteroids. The magnitude of effect was significantly greater in patients with moderate compared with those with mild airway obstruction (RR 2.03, 95% CI 1.41, 2.91 versus RR 1.25, 95% CI 0.97, 1.61), but was not significantly influenced by age group (children representing 23% of the weight versus adults), anti-leukotriene used, duration of intervention, methodological quality, and funding source. Significant group differences favouring inhaled corticosteroids were noted in most secondary outcomes including patients with at least one exacerbation requiring hospital admission (N = 2715 participants; RR 3.33; 95% CI 1.02 to 10.94), the change from baseline FEV(1) (N = 7128 participants; mean group difference (MD) 110 mL, 95% CI 140 to 80) as well as other lung function parameters, asthma symptoms, nocturnal awakenings, rescue medication use, symptom-free days, the quality of life, parents' and physicians' satisfaction. Anti-leukotriene therapy was associated with increased risk of withdrawals due to poor asthma control (N = 7669 participants; RR 2.56; 95% CI 2.01 to 3.27). For every thirty one (95% CI 22 to 47) patients treated with anti-leukotrienes instead of inhaled corticosteroids, there was one additional withdrawal due to poor control. Risk of side effects was not significantly different between both groups.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

As monotherapy, inhaled corticosteroids display superior efficacy to anti-leukotrienes in adults and children with persistent asthma; the superiority is particularly marked in patients with moderate airway obstruction. On the basis of efficacy, the results support the current guidelines' recommendation that inhaled corticosteroids remain the preferred monotherapy. 

An evaluation of a community pharmacy-based rural asthma management service

OBJECTIVE

To compare the effect of a pharmacist-delivered rural asthma management service (RAMS) on health outcomes for people with asthma in a rural/regional area with 'standard care' delivered through community pharmacies.

DESIGN

A parallel group controlled repeated measures study.

SETTING

Community pharmacies in Central West New South Wales.

INTERVENTION

Standardised protocols and resources based on national asthma management guidelines, delivered by specially trained community pharmacists. Patients visited the pharmacy at baseline and 1, 3 and 6 months after baseline in the intervention group and at baseline plus 6 months after baseline in the control group.

PARTICIPANTS

The intervention pharmacists (n = 12) were trained to deliver the RAMS model, while control pharmacists (n = 8) provided standard asthma care to their recruited patients. Fifty-one and 39 patients were recruited by intervention and control pharmacists.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE

Asthma severity score which was a composite score based on recency, frequency and severity of asthma symptoms, and asthma history.

RESULTS

Data compared at the final visit between groups indicated that the RAMS patient group demonstrated a significant reduction in the asthma severity scores (7.9 +/- 2.6 versus 10.4 +/- 2.6, P < 0.001); a reduction in the risk of non-adherence to medication scores (1.6 +/- 0.7 versus 2.3 +/- 1.1, P < 0.001); and an increase in the proportion of patients owning a written action plan (50% versus 23%, P = 0.04).

CONCLUSIONS

These results indicated that the community pharmacy-based RAMS model can improve asthma outcomes for patients in rural settings, and similar models for asthma and other chronic diseases should be tested rigorously and adopted in rural primary care practice.