Involvement of Spanish pulmonology centers in patient care, postgraduate education and research in asthma: the results of the ATENEA survey

Although asthma is one of the most prevalent chronic respiratory diseases, the participation of Spanish pulmonology units in the management of asthma may have room for improvement.

OBJECTIVE

To determine the degree of involvement of the Spanish pulmonology services in the patient care, education and research related with asthma disease and especially in difficult-to-control asthma.

METHODS

A survey made up of 75 questions was sent to the heads of several pulmonology departments. The survey asked questions pertaining to respiratory disease care in general, and in asthma in particular, as well as the educational activities and research in asthma during the previous five years.

RESULTS

Out of the 107 surveys sent, 69 (645%) centers filled them out and returned them. Forty-seven (681%) met the criteria for an important level of health-care activity in asthma. However, only 29 (42%) had a monographic consultation for difficult-to-control asthma and 37 (536%) used an education program. As for postgraduate education, only 31 (449%) provided their resident physicians with specific asthma training. And in the research field, 12 (174%) reported having projects funded by SEPAR and 25 (362%) had published studies in journals with an impact factor.

CONCLUSIONS

Although the majority of the pulmonology centers interviewed report a notable activity in asthma patient care, their involvement in the specialized approach for difficult-to-control asthma is insufficient. Likewise, participation in educational activities and research related with the disease is inconsistent and limited to few centers.

[Diagnosis and treatment guidelines for difficult-to-control asthma in children]

Children suffering from difficult-to-control asthma (DCA) require frequent appointments with their physician, complex treatment regimes and often admissions to hospital. Less than 5% of the asthmatic population suffer this condition. DCA must be correctly characterised to rule out false causes of DCA and requires making a differential diagnosis from pathologies that mimic asthma, comorbidity, environmental and psychological factors, and analysing the factors to determine poor treatment compliance. In true DCA cases, inflammation studies (exhaled nitric oxide, induced sputum, broncho-alveolar lavage and bronchial biopsy), pulmonary function and other clinical aspects can classify DCA into different phenotypes which could make therapeutic decision-making easier.

[Does experience influence perception of dyspnea?]

OBJECTIVE

The perception of somatic sensations like dyspnea can be influenced by such factors as an individual s personality, experiences, or ability to adapt to stimuli. Our aim was to determine whether the perception of acute bronchoconstriction is different for patients with asthma and patients who have never experienced an episode of airway obstruction.

PATIENTS AND METHOD

We studied 2 groups of patients. The first consisted of 24 subjects with intermittent rhinitis and asthma (10 females and 14 males) with a mean (SD) age of 25 (7) years. All reported not feeling dyspnea at rest on a Borg scale. The second group consisted of 24 subjects who only had rhinitis but no lung disease (no episode of asthma) or dyspnea at rest (12 females and 12 males) with a mean age of 27 (6) years. There were no significant differences between the groups with regard to sex, smoking, economic or educational level, anxiety (determined by the trait portion of the State-Trait Anxiety Inventory), depression (Beck Depression Inventory), or spirometric parameters. All took a histamine bronchial provocation test in which the patient assessed dyspnea on a modified Borg scale after each histamine dose. The provocation dose needed to produce a 20% decrease (PD20) in forced expiratory volume in the first second (FEV1) was calculated. We also recorded dyspnea perception score when FEV1 fell 5%, 10%, 15%, and 20%.

RESULTS

No dyspnea was perceived at PS20 by 12.5% of the asthmatics and by 45% of nonasthmatics (P< .0001). The mean PS20 was 2.4 (2.1) (range, 0-7) in the first group and 0.37 (0.48) (range, 0-3) in the second (P< .0001). More asthma patients than nonasthmatics perceived dyspnea at all degrees of bronchial obstruction. PD20 was different in the 2 groups (1.6 [2] vs 6.03 [5] for the first and second groups, respectively; P< .003), but there was no significant relation between PD20 and PS20 (Spearman s correlation coefficient, 0.19; P= .221).

CONCLUSION

Our findings support the hypothesis that appropriate perception of dyspnea is grounded in prior experience and learning.