Spotlight on primary care management of COPD: Electronic health records

[Implementation of an electronic clinical decision aid to support quality of care for COPD in family medicine]

BACKGROUND

Electronic clinical decision aids (eCDAs) have the potential to improve the quality of chronic disease management (CDM) and; therefore, patient relevant outcomes. However, eCDAs are only sparsely implemented in primary care for chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD). The aim of this pilot study was to develop and implement of an eCDA for COPD primary care in two Swiss primary care practices.

METHOD

Two primary care practices, each with five primary care physicians and their assistants participated in the study. The eCDA was developed in collaboration with one of the two GP practices (Practice 1) following a development cycle encompassing alpha- and beta-testing stages. Long-term testing for one year was conducted in both practices. The implementation of the eCDA was evaluated according to the RE-AIM framework counting occurrences as follows: Reach: the number of patients included in the CDM using the eCDA.

EFFECTIVENESS

the number of treatment processes initiated per patient. Adoption: practice utilization of the diverse functions featured in the eCDA. Implementation and Maintenance: health care professionals' attitudes towards the impact of the eCDA on the quality of care and their willingness to continue using the eCDA after long-term testing. Data were collected by the eCDA itself, which was programmed to track user data, and from practice staff using questionnaires.

RESULTS

Reach: After the long-term test, the number of patients recorded in the eCDA was 28 in practice 1, and 12 in practice 2.

EFFECTIVENESS

The number of evidence-based treatment processes per patient was 14 (IQR 6 to 22) in Practice 1 and 6 (IQR 5 to 8) in Practice 2. Adoption: The utilization profiles of the eCDA differed greatly between practices. Implementation and Maintenance: After the long-term test, respondents were more critical of the quality of the CDM for patients with COPD, and attitudes consistent with interprofessional care were more prevalent compared to baseline. Respondents were optimistic regarding both the potential of the eCDA to improve the quality of CDM and their motivation to continue using the eCDA after long-term testing.

CONCLUSION

This pilot study is a roadmap for future projects aiming to develop and implement eCDAs for the CDM of COPD in primary care. Future larger implementation studies in this domain should place greater emphasis on the measurement of structural practice characteristics as potential determinants of patient-relevant outcomes. The modifiable determinants should then be tested for their effects on patient-relevant outcomes in a randomized controlled design.

Withdrawal of inhaled corticosteroids from patients with COPD with mild or moderate airflow limitation in primary care: a feasibility randomised trial

Background

Inhaled corticosteroids (ICS) are frequently prescribed outside guidelines to patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) with mild/moderate airflow limitation and low exacerbation risk. This primary care trial explored the feasibility of identifying patients with mild/moderate COPD taking ICS, and the acceptability of ICS withdrawal.

Methods

Open feasibility trial. Outcome measures included prevalence of suitable participants, feasibility of their identification, their willingness-to-accept open randomisation to ICS withdrawal or continuation over 6 months follow-up.

Results

392 (13%) of 2967 patients with COPD from 20 practices (209 618 population) identified as eligible for ICS withdrawal by electronic search algorithm. After individual patient record review, 243 (62%) were excluded because of: severe airflow limitation (65, 17%); one or more severe or two or more moderate COPD exacerbations in the previous year (86, 22%); asthma (15, 4%); and severe comorbidities (77, 20%). After exclusion, 149 patients with COPD were invited to participate and 61 agreed to randomisation. At clinical assessment, 10 patients exhibited undocumented airflow reversibility (forced expiratory volume in 1 s (FEV₁) reversibility >12% and >200 mL); 2 had suffered two or more undocumented, moderate exacerbations in the previous year; 7 had severe airflow limitation; and 2 had normal spirometry. Finally, 40 were randomised. One patient died and one was lost to follow-up. 18 (45%) of the 38 (10 withdrawal and 8 usual care) exhibited previously undocumented FEV₁ variability suggestive of asthma, supported in the withdrawal group by significant associations with elevated fractional exhaled nitric oxide (p=0.04), elevated symptom score (p=0.04), poorer quality of life (p=0.04) and atopic status (p=0.01).

Conclusions

Identifying primary care patients with mild/moderate COPD suitable for ICS withdrawal is feasible but requires real-time verification because of unreliable recording of exacerbations and lung function. Suitable patients accepted randomisation to ICS withdrawal or continuation for the purposes of future studies. Follow-up compliance was high. Nearly 50% of participants with a diagnosis of mild/moderate COPD demonstrated previously undocumented FEV₁ variability during follow-up, mandating monitoring for at least 6 months following withdrawal to exclude undiagnosed asthma.

Investigating primary healthcare practitioners' barriers and enablers to referral of patients with COPD to pulmonary rehabilitation: a mixed-methods study using the Theoretical Domains Framework

OBJECTIVES

Pulmonary rehabilitation (PR) is a highly effective, recommended intervention for patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD). Using behavioural theory within mixed-methods research to understand why referral remains low enables the development of targeted interventions in order to improve future PR referral.

DESIGN

A multiphase sequential mixed-methods study.

SETTING

United Kingdom (UK).

PARTICIPANTS

252 multiprofessional primary healthcare practitioners (PHCPs).

MEASURES

Phase 1: semistructured interviews. Phase 2: a 54-item paper and online questionnaire, based on the Theoretical Domains Framework (TDF). Content and descriptive analysis utilised. Data mixed at two points: instrument design and interpretation.

RESULTS

19 PHCPs took part in interviews and 233 responded to the survey. Integrated results revealed that PHCPs with a post qualifying respiratory qualification (154/241; 63.9%) referred more frequently (91/154; 59.1%) than those without (28/87; 32.2%). There were more barriers than enablers for referral in all 13 TDF domains. Key barriers included: infrequent engagement from PR provider to referrer, concern around patient's physical ability and access to PR (particularly for those in work), assumed poor patient motivation, no clear practice referrer and few referral opportunities. These mapped to domains: belief about capabilities, social influences, environment, optimism, skills and social and professional role. Enablers to referral were observed in knowledge, social influences memory and environment domains. Many PHCPs believed in the physical and psychological value of PR. Helpful enablers were out-of-practice support from respiratory interested colleagues, dedicated referral time (annual review) and on-screen referral prompts.

CONCLUSIONS

Referral to PR is complex. Barriers outweighed enablers. Aligning these findings to behaviour change techniques will identify interventions to overcome barriers and strengthen enablers, thereby increasing referral of patients with COPD to PR.