Empowering pharmacists in asthma management through interactive SMS (EmPhAsIS): study protocol for a randomized controlled trial

Community pharmacy interventions for health promotion: effects on professional practice and health outcomes

BACKGROUND

Community pharmacies are an easily accessible and cost-effective platform for delivering health care worldwide, and the range of services provided has undergone rapid expansion in recent years. Thus, in addition to dispensing medication, pharmacy workers within community pharmacies now give advice on a range of health-promoting behaviours that aim to improve health and to optimise the management of long-term conditions. However, it remains uncertain whether these health-promotion interventions can change the professional practice of pharmacy workers, improve health behaviours and outcomes for pharmacy users and have the potential to address health inequalities.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the effectiveness and safety of health-promotion interventions to change community pharmacy workers' professional practice and improve outcomes for users of community pharmacies.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched MEDLINE, Embase, CENTRAL, six other databases and two trials registers to 6 February 2018. We also conducted reference checking, citation searches and contacted study authors to identify any additional studies.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included randomised trials of health-promotion interventions in community pharmacies targeted at, or delivered by, pharmacy workers that aimed to improve the health-related behaviour of people attending the pharmacy compared to no treatment, or usual treatment received in the community pharmacy. We excluded interventions where there was no interaction between pharmacy workers and pharmacy users, and those that focused on medication use only.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

We used standard procedures recommended by Cochrane and the Effective Practice and Organisation of Care review group for both data collection and analysis. We compared intervention to no intervention or to usual treatment using standardised mean differences (SMD) and 95% confidence intervals (95% CI) (higher scores represent better outcomes for pharmacy user health-related behaviour and quality of life, and lower scores represent better outcomes for clinical outcomes, costs and adverse events). Interpretation of effect sizes (SMD) was in line with Cochrane recommendations.

MAIN RESULTS

We included 57 randomised trials with 16,220 participants, described in 83 reports. Forty-nine studies were conducted in high-income countries, and eight in middle-income countries. We found no studies that had been conducted in low-income countries. Most interventions were educational, or incorporated skills training. Interventions were directed at pharmacy workers (n = 8), pharmacy users (n = 13), or both (n = 36). The clinical areas most frequently studied were diabetes, hypertension, asthma, and modification of cardiovascular risk. Duration of follow-up of interventions was often unclear. Only five studies gave details about the theoretical basis for the intervention, and studies did not provide sufficient data to comment on health inequalities. The most common sources of bias were lack of protection against contamination - mainly in individually randomised studies - and inadequate blinding of participants. The certainty of the evidence for all outcomes was moderate. We downgraded the certainty because of the heterogeneity across studies and evidence of potential publication bias. Professional practice outcomes We conducted a narrative analysis for pharmacy worker behaviour due to high heterogeneity in the results. Health-promotion interventions probably improve pharmacy workers' behaviour (2944 participants; 9 studies; moderate-certainty evidence) when compared to no intervention. These studies typically assessed behaviour using a simulated patient (mystery shopper) methodology. Pharmacy user outcomes Health-promotion interventions probably lead to a slight improvement in health-related behaviours of pharmacy users when compared to usual treatment (SMD 0.43, 95% CI 0.14 to 0.72; I² = 89%; 10 trials; 2138 participants; moderate-certainty evidence). These interventions probably also lead to a slight improvement in intermediate clinical outcomes, such as levels of cholesterol or glycated haemoglobin, for pharmacy users (SMD -0.43, 95% CI -0.65 to -0.21; I² = 90%; 20 trials; 3971 participants; moderate-certainty evidence). We identified no studies that evaluated the impact of health-promotion interventions on event-based clinical outcomes, such as stroke or myocardial infarction, or the psychological well-being of pharmacy users. Health-promotion interventions probably lead to a slight improvement in quality of life for pharmacy users (SMD 0.29, 95% CI 0.08 to 0.50; I²= 82%; 10 trials, 2687 participants; moderate-certainty evidence). Adverse events No studies reported adverse events for either pharmacy workers or pharmacy users. Costs We found that health-promotion interventions are likely to be cost-effective, based on moderate-certainty evidence from five of seven studies that reported an economic evaluation.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Health-promotion interventions in the community pharmacy context probably improve pharmacy workers' behaviour and probably have a slight beneficial effect on health-related behaviour, intermediate clinical outcomes, and quality of life for pharmacy users. Such interventions are likely to be cost-effective and the effects are seen across a range of clinical conditions and health-related behaviours. Nevertheless the magnitude of the effects varies between conditions, and more effective interventions might be developed if greater consideration were given to the theoretical basis of the intervention and mechanisms for effecting behaviour change.

Allergy and Asthma Care in the Mobile Phone Era

Strategies to improve patients' adherence to treatment are essential to reduce the great health and economic burden of allergic rhinitis and asthma. Mobile phone applications (apps) for a better management of allergic diseases are growing in number, but their usefulness for doctors and patients is still debated. Controlled trials have investigated the feasibility, cost-effectiveness, security, and perspectives of the use of tele-medicine in the self-management of asthma. These studies focused on different tools or devices, such as SMS, telephone calls, automatic voice response system, mobile applications, speech recognition system, or cloud-computing systems. While some trials concluded that m-Health can improve asthma control and the patient's quality of life, others did not show any advantage in relation to usual care. The only controlled study on allergic rhinitis showed an improvement of adherence to treatment among tele-monitored patients compared to those managed with usual care. Most studies have also highlighted a few shortcomings and limitations of tele-medicine, mainly concerning security and cost-efficiency. The use of smartphones and apps for a personalized asthma and allergy care needs to be further evaluated and optimized before conclusions on its usefulness can be drawn.

Mobile phone short message service for adherence support and care of patients with tuberculosis infection: Evidence and opportunity

To attain the Global End Tuberculosis (TB) goals, the treatment of persons with TB requires advancements in coordinated approaches that are low-cost and highly accessible. Treating TB successfully requires prolonged medication regimens with good adherence, which in turn requires patients to be adequately supported. Furthermore, TB care-providers often wish to monitor treatment-taking by patients in order to track the success of their programs and ensure adequate completion of therapies by individuals. The standard-of-care for treatment monitoring in TB programs often includes directly observed therapy (DOT). Video observed therapy (VOT) has emerged as a method to mimic in-person visits or observations, especially in the smartphone era with internet data connections, but remains simply inaccessible to patients in areas where TB is most endemic. Both approaches may be considered more intensive than necessary for many patients, leaving an opportunity for more affordable and acceptable approaches. The rapid increase in mobile phone penetration provides an opportunity to reach patients between clinical visits. Short message services (SMS) are available on almost every mobile phone and are supported by first generation cellular communication networks, thus providing the farthest reach and penetration globally. Evidence from non-TB conditions suggests SMS, used in a variety of ways, may support outpatients for better medication adherence and quality of care but the evidence in TB remains limited. In this paper, we discuss how basic mobile phones and SMS-related services may be used in supporting global care of persons with TB, with a focus on patient-centered approaches.

Pharmacist services for non-hospitalised patients

BACKGROUND

This review focuses on non-dispensing services from pharmacists, i.e. pharmacists in community, primary or ambulatory-care settings, to non-hospitalised patients, and is an update of a previously-published Cochrane Review.

OBJECTIVES

To examine the effect of pharmacists' non-dispensing services on non-hospitalised patient outcomes.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase, two other databases and two trial registers in March 2015, together with reference checking and contact with study authors to identify additional studies. We included non-English language publications. We ran top-up searches in January 2018 and have added potentially eligible studies to 'Studies awaiting classification'.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomised trials of pharmacist services compared with the delivery of usual care or equivalent/similar services with the same objective delivered by other health professionals.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

We used standard methodological procedures of Cochrane and the Effective Practice and Organisation of Care Group. Two review authors independently checked studies for inclusion, extracted data and assessed risks of bias. We evaluated the overall certainty of evidence using GRADE.

MAIN RESULTS

We included 116 trials comprising 111 trials (39,729 participants) comparing pharmacist interventions with usual care and five trials (2122 participants) comparing pharmacist services with services from other healthcare professionals. Of the 116 trials, 76 were included in meta-analyses. The 40 remaining trials were not included in the meta-analyses because they each reported unique outcome measures which could not be combined. Most trials targeted chronic conditions and were conducted in a range of settings, mostly community pharmacies and hospital outpatient clinics, and were mainly but not exclusively conducted in high-income countries. Most trials had a low risk of reporting bias and about 25%-30% were at high risk of bias for performance, detection, and attrition. Selection bias was unclear for about half of the included studies.Compared with usual care, we are uncertain whether pharmacist services reduce the percentage of patients outside the glycated haemoglobin target range (5 trials, N = 558, odds ratio (OR) 0.29, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.04 to 2.22; very low-certainty evidence). Pharmacist services may reduce the percentage of patients whose blood pressure is outside the target range (18 trials, N = 4107, OR 0.40, 95% CI 0.29 to 0.55; low-certainty evidence) and probably lead to little or no difference in hospital attendance or admissions (14 trials, N = 3631, OR 0.85, 95% CI 0.65 to 1.11; moderate-certainty evidence). Pharmacist services may make little or no difference to adverse drug effects (3 trials, N = 590, OR 1.65, 95% CI 0.84 to 3.24) and may slightly improve physical functioning (7 trials, N = 1329, mean difference (MD) 5.84, 95% CI 1.21 to 10.48; low-certainty evidence). Pharmacist services may make little or no difference to mortality (9 trials, N = 1980, OR 0.79, 95% CI 0.56 to 1.12, low-certaintly evidence).Of the five studies that compared services delivered by pharmacists with other health professionals, no studies evaluated the impact of the intervention on the percentage of patients outside blood pressure or glycated haemoglobin target range, hospital attendance and admission, adverse drug effects, or physical functioning.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

The results demonstrate that pharmacist services have varying effects on patient outcomes compared with usual care. We found no studies comparing services delivered by pharmacists with other healthcare professionals that evaluated the impact of the intervention on the six main outcome measures. The results need to be interpreted cautiously because there was major heterogeneity in study populations, types of interventions delivered and reported outcomes.There was considerable heterogeneity within many of the meta-analyses, as well as considerable variation in the risks of bias.

Interactive Two-Way mHealth Interventions for Improving Medication Adherence: An Evaluation Using The Behaviour Change Wheel Framework

BACKGROUND

Medication adherence is an important but highly complex set of behaviors, which for life-threatening and infectious diseases such as HIV carry critical consequences for individual and public health. There is growing evidence that mobile phone text messaging interventions (mHealth) connecting providers with patients positively impact medication adherence, particularly two-way engagement platforms that require bidirectional communication versus one-way in which responses are not mandatory. However, mechanisms of action have not been well defined. The Behavior Change Wheel is a comprehensive framework for behavior change that includes an all-encompassing model of behavior known as Capability Opportunity Motivation-Behavior and is complemented by a taxonomy of behavior change techniques. Evaluating mHealth interventions for medication adherence using these tools could provide useful insights that may contribute to optimizing their integration into the healthcare system and successful scaling-up.

OBJECTIVE

This study aimed to help address the current knowledge gap regarding how two-way mHealth interventions for medication adherence may work by applying the Behavior Change Wheel to characterize WelTel: an interactive digital health outreach platform with robust evidence for improving adherence to antiretroviral therapy.

METHODS

To characterize how WelTel may promote medication adherence, we applied the Behavior Change Wheel to systematically (1) generate a behavioral diagnosis through mapping known antiretroviral therapy adherence barriers onto the Capability Opportunity Motivation-Behavior model of behavior, (2) specify the behavior change techniques that WelTel delivers, (3) link identified behavior change techniques to corresponding intervention functions of the Behavior Change Wheel, and (4) connect these behavior change techniques and intervention functions to respective Capability Opportunity Motivation-Behavior influences on behavior to determine potential mechanisms of action.

RESULTS

Our evaluation of WelTel using the Behavior Change Wheel suggests that most of its impact is delivered primarily through its personalized communication component, in which 8 different behavior change techniques were identified and linked with 5 intervention functions (environmental restructuring, enablement, education, persuasion, and training). Its mechanisms of action in promoting antiretroviral therapy adherence may involve addressing all Capability Opportunity Motivation-Behavior influences on behavior (physical and psychological capability, physical and social opportunity, reflective and automatic motivation).

CONCLUSIONS

Systematically unpacking the potential active ingredients of effective interventions facilitates the creation and implementation of more parsimonious, tailored, and targeted approaches. Evaluating WelTel using the Behavior Change Wheel has provided valuable insights into how and why such interactive two-way mHealth interventions may produce greater impact than one-way in addressing both nonintentional and intentional forms of nonadherence. The application of the Behavior Change Wheel for evidence synthesis across mHealth interventions targeting various conditions would contribute to strengthening the knowledge base regarding how they may work to impact medication adherence behavior.

Operationalizing mHealth to improve patient care: a qualitative implementation science evaluation of the WelTel texting intervention in Canada and Kenya

BACKGROUND

Mobile health (mHealth) applications have proliferated across the globe with much enthusiasm, although few have reached scale and shown public health impact. In this study, we explored how different contextual factors influenced the implementation, effectiveness and potential for scale-up of WelTel, an easy-to-use and evidence-based mHealth intervention. WelTel uses two-way SMS communication to improve patient adherence to medication and engagement in care, and has been developed and tested in Canada and Kenya.

METHODS

We used a comparative qualitative case study design, which drew on 32 key informant interviews, conducted in 2016, with stakeholders involved in six WelTel projects. Our research was guided by the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research (CFIR), a meta-theoretical framework, and our analysis relied on a modified approach to grounded theory, which allowed us to compare findings across these projects.

RESULTS

We found that WelTel had positive influences on the "culture of care" at local clinics and hospitals in Canada and Kenya, many of which stretched beyond the immediate patient-client relationship to influence wider organizational systems. However, these were mediated by clinician norms and practices, the availability of local champion staff, the receptivity and capacity of local management, and the particular characteristics of the technology platform, including the ability for adaptation and co-design. We also found that scale-up was influenced by different forms of data and evidence, which played important roles in legitimization and partnership building. Even with robust research evidence, scale-up was viewed as a precarious and uncertain process, embedded within the wider politics and financing of Canadian and Kenyan health systems. Challenges included juggling different interests, determining appropriate financing pathways, maintaining network growth, and "packaging" the intervention for impact and relevance.

CONCLUSIONS

Our comparative case study, of a unique transnational mobile health research network, revealed that moving from mHealth pilots to scale is a difficult, context-specific process that couples social and technological innovation. Fostering new organizational partnerships and ways of learning are paramount, as mHealth platforms straddle the world of research, industry and public health. Partnerships need to avoid the perils of the technological fix, and engage the structural barriers that mediate people's health and access to services.

The effectiveness of daily SMS reminders in pharmaceutical care of older adults on improving patients' adherence to antihypertensive medication (SPPA): study protocol for a randomized controlled trial

BACKGROUND

Despite a variety of efficient and cost-effective antihypertensive medication, hypertension remains a serious health and economic burden. High consumption of cardiovascular drugs in the Slovak Republic does result neither in better hypertension control nor in significant decrease in cardiovascular mortality. At the same time, Slovakia has alarmingly low patients' adherence to medication intake. Studies have shown the efficiency of short messaging service (SMS) reminders to improve patients' adherence and health outcomes at low costs. Since SMS is popular among Slovaks, this approach may be feasible also in Slovakia. The primary objective is to assess if daily SMS reminders of antihypertensive medication intake provided by pharmacists in addition to the standard pharmaceutical care increase the proportion of adherent older hypertensive ambulatory patients.

METHODS

The SPPA trial is a pragmatic randomized parallel group (1:1) trial in 300 older hypertensive patients carried out in community pharmacies in Slovakia. Trial pharmacies will be selected from all main regions of Slovakia. Trial intervention comprises daily personalized SMS reminders of medication intake embedded into usual pharmaceutical practice. The primary outcome is a combined adherence endpoint consisting of subjective self-reported medication adherence via the eight-item Morisky Medication Adherence Scale (MMAS-8) and objective pill count rate. Secondary outcomes include: change in the MMAS-8; comparison of adherence rates using pill count; change in systolic blood pressure; and patient satisfaction. Also, direct treatment costs will be evaluated and a cost-effectiveness analysis will be carried out.

DISCUSSION

The SPPA trial engages community pharmacists and mobile health (mHealth) technologies via evidence-based pharmaceutical care to efficiently and cost-effectively addresses current main healthcare challenges: high prevalence of hypertension; overconsumption of cardiovascular medicines; low adherence to medication treatment; and resulting uncontrolled blood pressure. The results may identify new possibilities and capacities in healthcare with low additional costs and high value to patients.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT03105687 . Registered on 07 March 2017.

Interventions to improve adherence to inhaled steroids for asthma

BACKGROUND

Despite its proven efficacy in improving symptoms and reducing exacerbations, many patients with asthma are not fully adherent to their steroid inhaler. Suboptimal adherence leads to poorer clinical outcomes and increased health service utilisation, and has been identified as a contributing factor to a third of asthma deaths in the UK. Reasons for non-adherence vary, and a variety of interventions have been proposed to help people improve treatment adherence.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the efficacy and safety of interventions intended to improve adherence to inhaled corticosteroids among people with asthma.

SEARCH METHODS

We identified trials from the Cochrane Airways Trials Register, which contains studies identified through multiple electronic searches and handsearches of other sources. We also searched trial registries and reference lists of primary studies. We conducted the most recent searches on 18 November 2016.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included parallel and cluster randomised controlled trials of any duration conducted in any setting. We included studies reported as full-text articles, those published as abstracts only and unpublished data. We included trials of adults and children with asthma and a current prescription for an inhaled corticosteroid (ICS) (as monotherapy or in combination with a long-acting beta2-agonist (LABA)). Eligible trials compared an intervention primarily aimed at improving adherence to ICS versus usual care or an alternative intervention.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors screened the searches, extracted study characteristics and outcome data from included studies and assessed risk of bias. Primary outcomes were adherence to ICS, exacerbations requiring at least oral corticosteroids and asthma control. We graded results and presented evidence in 'Summary of findings' tables for each comparison.We analysed dichotomous data as odds ratios, and continuous data as mean differences or standardised mean differences, all using a random-effects model. We described skewed data narratively. We made no a priori assumptions about how trials would be categorised but conducted meta-analyses only if treatments, participants and the underlying clinical question were similar enough for pooling to make sense.

MAIN RESULTS

We included 39 parallel randomised controlled trials (RCTs) involving adults and children with asthma, 28 of which (n = 16,303) contributed data to at least one meta-analysis. Follow-up ranged from two months to two years (median six months), and trials were conducted mainly in high-income countries. Most studies reported some measure of adherence to ICS and a variety of other outcomes such as quality of life and asthma control. Studies generally were at low or unclear risk of selection bias and at high risk of biases associated with blinding. We considered around half the studies to be at high risk for attrition bias and selective outcome reporting.We classified studies into four comparisons: adherence education versus control (20 studies); electronic trackers or reminders versus control (11 studies); simplified drug regimens versus usual drug regimens (four studies); and school-based directly observed therapy (three studies). Two studies are described separately.All pooled results for adherence education, electronic trackers or reminders and simplified regimens showed better adherence than controls. Analyses limited to studies using objective measures revealed that adherence education showed a benefit of 20 percentage points over control (95% confidence interval (CI) 7.52 to 32.74; five studies; low-quality evidence); electronic trackers or reminders led to better adherence of 19 percentage points (95% CI 14.47 to 25.26; six studies; moderate-quality evidence); and simplified regimens led to better adherence of 4 percentage points (95% CI 1.88 to 6.16; three studies; moderate-quality evidence). Our confidence in the evidence was reduced by risk of bias and inconsistency.Improvements in adherence were not consistently translated into observable benefit for clinical outcomes in our pooled analyses. None of the intervention types showed clear benefit for our primary clinical outcomes - exacerbations requiring an oral corticosteroid (OCS) (evidence of very low to low quality) and asthma control (evidence of low to moderate quality); nor for our secondary outcomes - unscheduled visits (evidence of very low to moderate quality) and quality of life (evidence of low to moderate quality). However, some individual studies reported observed benefits for OCS and use of healthcare services. Most school or work absence data were skewed and were difficult to interpret (evidence of low quality, when graded), and most studies did not specifically measure or report adverse events.Studies investigating the possible benefit of administering ICS at school did not measure adherence, exacerbations requiring OCS, asthma control or adverse events. One study showed fewer unscheduled visits, and another found no differences; data could not be combined.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Pooled results suggest that a variety of interventions can improve adherence. The clinical relevance of this improvement, highlighted by uncertain and inconsistent impact on clinical outcomes such as quality of life and asthma control, is less clear. We have low to moderate confidence in these findings owing to concerns about risk of bias and inconsistency. Future studies would benefit from predefining an evidence-based 'cut-off' for acceptable adherence and using objective adherence measures and validated tools and questionnaires. When possible, covert monitoring and some form of blinding or active control may help disentangle effects of the intervention from effects of inclusion in an adherence trial.

Home telemonitoring and remote feedback between clinic visits for asthma

BACKGROUND

Asthma is a chronic disease that causes reversible narrowing of the airways due to bronchoconstriction, inflammation and mucus production. Asthma continues to be associated with significant avoidable morbidity and mortality. Self management facilitated by a healthcare professional is important to keep symptoms controlled and to prevent exacerbations.Telephone and Internet technologies can now be used by patients to measure lung function and asthma symptoms at home. Patients can then share this information electronically with their healthcare provider, who can provide feedback between clinic visits. Technology can be used in this manner to improve health outcomes and prevent the need for emergency treatment for people with asthma and other long-term health conditions.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the efficacy and safety of home telemonitoring with healthcare professional feedback between clinic visits, compared with usual care.

SEARCH METHODS

We identified trials from the Cochrane Airways Review Group Specialised Register (CAGR) up to May 2016. We also searched www.clinicaltrials.gov, the World Health Organization (WHO) trials portal and reference lists of other reviews, and we contacted trial authors to ask for additional information.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included parallel randomised controlled trials (RCTs) of adults or children with asthma in which any form of technology was used to measure and share asthma monitoring data with a healthcare provider between clinic visits, compared with other monitoring or usual care. We excluded trials in which technologies were used for monitoring with no input from a doctor or nurse. We included studies reported as full-text articles, those published as abstracts only and unpublished data.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors screened the search and independently extracted risk of bias and numerical data, resolving disagreements by consensus.We analysed dichotomous data as odds ratios (ORs) while using study participants as the unit of analysis, and continuous data as mean differences (MDs) while using random-effects models. We rated evidence for all outcomes using the GRADE (Grades of Recommendation, Assessment, Development and Evaluation Working Group) approach.

MAIN RESULTS

We found 18 studies including 2268 participants: 12 in adults, 5 in children and one in individuals from both age groups. Studies generally recruited people with mild to moderate persistent asthma and followed them for between three and 12 months. People in the intervention group were given one of a variety of technologies to record and share their symptoms (text messaging, Web systems or phone calls), compared with a group of people who received usual care or a control intervention.Evidence from these studies did not show clearly whether asthma telemonitoring with feedback from a healthcare professional increases or decreases the odds of exacerbations that require a course of oral steroids (OR 0.93, 95% confidence Interval (CI) 0.60 to 1.44; 466 participants; four studies), a visit to the emergency department (OR 0.75, 95% CI 0.36 to 1.58; 1018 participants; eight studies) or a stay in hospital (OR 0.56, 95% CI 0.21 to 1.49; 1042 participants; 10 studies) compared with usual care. Our confidence was limited by imprecision in all three primary outcomes. Evidence quality ratings ranged from moderate to very low. None of the studies recorded serious or non-serious adverse events separately from asthma exacerbations.Evidence for measures of asthma control was imprecise and inconsistent, revealing possible benefit over usual care for quality of life (MD 0.23, 95% CI 0.01 to 0.45; 796 participants; six studies; I(2) = 54%), but the effect was small and study results varied. Telemonitoring interventions may provide additional benefit for two measures of lung function.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Current evidence does not support the widespread implementation of telemonitoring with healthcare provider feedback between asthma clinic visits. Studies have not yet proven that additional telemonitoring strategies lead to better symptom control or reduced need for oral steroids over usual asthma care, nor have they ruled out unintended harms. Investigators noted small benefits for quality of life, but these are subject to risk of bias, as the studies were unblinded. Similarly, some benefits for lung function are uncertain owing to possible attrition bias.Larger pragmatic studies in children and adults could better determine the real-world benefits of these interventions for preventing exacerbations and avoiding harms; it is difficult to generalise results from this review because benefits may be explained at least in part by the increased attention participants receive by taking part in clinical trials. Qualitative studies could inform future research by focusing on patient and provider preferences, or by identifying subgroups of patients who are more likely to attain benefit from closer monitoring, such as those who have frequent asthma attacks.

Remote versus face-to-face check-ups for asthma

BACKGROUND

Asthma remains a significant cause of avoidable morbidity and mortality. Regular check-ups with a healthcare professional are essential to monitor symptoms and adjust medication.Health services worldwide are considering telephone and internet technologies as a way to manage the rising number of people with asthma and other long-term health conditions. This may serve to improve health and reduce the burden on emergency and inpatient services. Remote check-ups may represent an unobtrusive and efficient way of maintaining contact with patients, but it is uncertain whether conducting check-ups in this way is effective or whether it may have unexpected negative consequences.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the safety and efficacy of conducting asthma check-ups remotely versus usual face-to-face consultations.

SEARCH METHODS

We identified trials from the Cochrane Airways Review Group Specialised Register (CAGR) up to 24 November 2015. We also searched www.clinicaltrials.gov, the World Health Organization (WHO) trials portal, reference lists of other reviews and contacted trial authors for additional information.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included parallel randomised controlled trials (RCTs) of adults or children with asthma that compared remote check-ups conducted using any form of technology versus standard face-to-face consultations. We excluded studies that used automated telehealth interventions that did not include personalised contact with a health professional. We included studies reported as full-text articles, as abstracts only and unpublished data.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors screened the literature search results and independently extracted risk of bias and numerical data. We resolved any disagreements by consensus, and we contacted study authors for missing information.We analysed dichotomous data as odds ratios (ORs) using study participants as the unit of analysis, and continuous data as mean differences using the random-effects models. We rated all outcomes using the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) approach.

MAIN RESULTS

Six studies including a total of 2100 participants met the inclusion criteria: we pooled four studies including 792 people in the main efficacy analyses, and presented the results of a cluster implementation study (n = 1213) and an oral steroid tapering study (n = 95) separately. Baseline characteristics relating to asthma severity were variable, but studies generally recruited people with asthma taking regular medications and excluded those with COPD or severe asthma. One study compared the two types of check-up for oral steroid tapering in severe refractory asthma and we assessed it as a separate question. The studies could not be blinded and dropout was high in four of the six studies, which may have biased the results.We could not say whether more people who had a remote check-up needed oral corticosteroids for an asthma exacerbation than those who were seen face-to-face because the confidence intervals (CIs) were very wide (OR 1.74, 95% CI 0.41 to 7.44; 278 participants; one study; low quality evidence). In the face-to-face check-up groups, 21 participants out of 1000 had exacerbations that required oral steroids over three months, compared to 36 (95% CI nine to 139) out of 1000 for the remote check-up group. Exacerbations that needed treatment in the Emergency Department (ED), hospital admission or an unscheduled healthcare visit all happened too infrequently to detect whether remote check-ups are a safe alternative to face-to-face consultations. Serious adverse events were not reported separately from the exacerbation outcomes.There was no difference in asthma control measured by the Asthma Control Questionnaire (ACQ) or in quality of life measured on the Asthma Quality of Life Questionnaire (AQLQ) between remote and face-to-face check-ups. We could rule out significant harm of remote check-ups for these outcomes but we were less confident because these outcomes are more prone to bias from lack of blinding.The larger implementation study that compared two general practice populations demonstrated that offering telephone check-ups and proactively phoning participants increased the number of people with asthma who received a review. However, we do not know whether the additional participants who had a telephone check-up subsequently benefited in asthma outcomes.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Current randomised evidence does not demonstrate any important differences between face-to-face and remote asthma check-ups in terms of exacerbations, asthma control or quality of life. There is insufficient information to rule out differences in efficacy, or to say whether or not remote asthma check-ups are a safe alternative to being seen face-to-face.

Adherence to controller asthma medications: 6-month prevalence across a US community pharmacy chain

WHAT IS KNOWN AND OBJECTIVE

Non-adherence to controller asthma medications is an important public health problem. It is estimated to occur in 30-70% of individuals and is a significant risk factor for asthma morbidity and mortality. The aim of this study was to determine the level of adherence, as indicated by refill rates, to controller asthma medications in a community pharmacy setting.

METHODS

Secondary analyses of a community pharmacy dispensing database in 15 locations throughout Utah.

RESULTS AND DISCUSSION

The dispensing records of 2193 patients who received controller medications for asthma in a 12-month period, and had a minimum of 6-month potential coverage (180 days) from the date of their first receipt of a controller medication in that period, were examined. Using standard metrics to gauge adherence, the proportion of days covered (PDC) and the medication possession ratio (MPR), the average coverage for controller asthma medications across a 6-month period (180 days) was poor, averaging less than 50% of days' availability. Standard cut-offs (≥80% medication availability) indicated that only 14-16% of patients had 'satisfactory' adherence over their 6-month follow-on period. Females and older patients had significantly greater satisfactory adherence. Medication adherence was significantly greater with inhaled corticosteroid (ICS)-long-acting β₂ -agonist (LABA) combinations than with ICS alone.

WHAT IS NEW AND CONCLUSION

This study confirms the considerable scope of the asthma therapy non-adherence problem. Therefore, it is imperative to conduct survey-based research linked directly to pharmacy-based dispensing data to derive patient behavioural, attitudinal and environmental factors that may contribute to the issue, and then pilot and evaluate interventions for change.