Asthma in low-income and middle-income countries: an urgent call to action

Implementing lung health interventions in low- and middle-income countries: a FRESH AIR systematic review and meta-synthesis

The vast majority of patients with chronic respiratory disease live in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs). Paradoxically, relevant interventions often fail to be effective particularly in these settings, as LMICs lack solid evidence on how to implement interventions successfully. Therefore, we aimed to identify factors critical to the implementation of lung health interventions in LMICs, and weigh their level of evidence.

This systematic review followed Cochrane methodology and Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Review and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) reporting standards. We searched eight databases without date or language restrictions in July 2019, and included all relevant original, peer-reviewed articles. Two researchers independently selected articles, critically appraised them (using Critical Appraisal Skills Programme (CASP)/Meta Quality Appraisal Tool (MetaQAT)), extracted data, coded factors (following the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research (CFIR)), and assigned levels of confidence in the factors (via Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation-Confidence in the Evidence from Reviews of Qualitative research (GRADE-CERQual)). We meta-synthesised levels of evidence of the factors based on their frequency and the assigned level of confidence (PROSPERO:CRD42018088687).

We included 37 articles out of 9111 screened. Studies were performed across the globe in a broad range of settings. Factors identified with a high level of evidence were: 1) “Understanding needs of local users”; 2) ensuring “Compatibility” of interventions with local contexts (cultures, infrastructures); 3) identifying influential stakeholders and applying “Engagement” strategies; 4) ensuring adequate “Access to knowledge and information”; and 5) addressing “Resource availability”. All implementation factors and their level of evidence were synthesised in an implementation tool.

To conclude, this study identified implementation factors for lung health interventions in LMICs, weighed their level of evidence, and integrated the results into an implementation tool for practice. Policymakers, non-governmental organisations, practitioners, and researchers may use this FRESH AIR (Free Respiratory Evaluation and Smoke-exposure reduction by primary Health cAre Integrated gRoups) Implementation tool to develop evidence-based implementation strategies for related interventions. This could increase interventions’ implementation success, thereby optimising the use of already-scarce resources and improving health outcomes.

This systematic review and meta-synthesis shows why implementation of lung health interventions often fails in low- and middle-income countries, and it provides critical factors to prevent failure with their level of evidencehttps://bit.ly/2UYJOSa

The socioeconomic burden of chronic lung disease in low-resource settings across the globe - an observational FRESH AIR study

Background

Low-resource settings are disproportionally burdened by chronic lung disease due to early childhood disadvantages and indoor/outdoor air pollution. However, data on the socioeconomic impact of respiratory diseases in these settings are largely lacking. Therefore, we aimed to estimate the chronic lung disease-related socioeconomic burden in diverse low-resource settings across the globe. To inform governmental and health policy, we focused on work productivity and activity impairment and its modifiable clinical and environmental risk factors.

Methods

We performed a cross-sectional, observational FRESH AIR study in Uganda, Vietnam, Kyrgyzstan, and Greece. We assessed the chronic lung disease-related socioeconomic burden using validated questionnaires among spirometry-diagnosed COPD and/or asthma patients (total N = 1040). Predictors for a higher burden were studied using multivariable linear regression models including demographics (e.g. age, gender), health parameters (breathlessness, comorbidities), and risk factors for chronic lung disease (smoking, solid fuel use). We applied identical models per country, which we subsequently meta-analyzed.

Results

Employed patients reported a median [IQR] overall work impairment due to chronic lung disease of 30% [1.8–51.7] and decreased productivity (presenteeism) of 20.0% [0.0–40.0]. Remarkably, work time missed (absenteeism) was 0.0% [0.0–16.7]. The total population reported 40.0% [20.0–60.0] impairment in daily activities. Breathlessness severity (MRC-scale) (B = 8.92, 95%CI = 7.47–10.36), smoking (B = 5.97, 95%CI = 1.73–10.22), and solid fuel use (B = 3.94, 95%CI = 0.56–7.31) were potentially modifiable risk factors for impairment.

Conclusions

In low-resource settings, chronic lung disease-related absenteeism is relatively low compared to the substantial presenteeism and activity impairment. Possibly, given the lack of social security systems, relatively few people take days off work at the expense of decreased productivity. Breathlessness (MRC-score), smoking, and solid fuel use are potentially modifiable predictors for higher impairment. Results warrant increased awareness, preventive actions and clinical management of lung diseases in low-resource settings from health policymakers and healthcare workers.