Community Assessment of COPD Health Care (COACH) study: a clinical audit on primary care performance variability in COPD care

Systematic review of Indigenous cultural safety training interventions for healthcare professionals in Australia, Canada, New Zealand and the United States

OBJECTIVE

To synthesise and appraise the design and impact of peer-reviewed evaluations of Indigenous cultural safety training programmes and workshops for healthcare workers in Australia, Canada, New Zealand and/or the United States.

DESIGN

Systematic review.

DATA SOURCES

Ovid Medline, Embase, PsycINFO, CINAHL, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, Bibliography of Indigenous Peoples in North America, Applied Social Sciences Index & Abstracts, ERIC (Education Resources Information Center), International Bibliography of the Social Sciences, ProQuest Dissertations & Theses Global, Sociological Abstracts, and Web of Science's Social Sciences Citation Index and Science Citation Index from 1 January 2006 to 12 May 2022.

ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA

Studies that evaluated the outcomes of educational interventions for selecting studies: designed to improve cultural safety, cultural competency and/or cultural awareness for non-Indigenous adult healthcare professionals in Canada, Australia, New Zealand or the United States.

DATA EXTRACTION AND SYNTHESIS

Our team of Indigenous and allied scientists tailored existing data extraction and quality appraisal tools with input from Indigenous health service partners. We synthesised the results using an iterative narrative approach.

RESULTS

2442 unique titles and abstracts met screening criteria. 13 full texts met full inclusion and quality appraisal criteria. Study designs, intervention characteristics and outcome measures were heterogeneous. Nine studies used mixed methods, two used qualitative methods and two used quantitative methods. Training participants included nurses, family practice residents, specialised practitioners and providers serving specific subpopulations. Theoretical frameworks and pedagogical approaches varied across programmes, which contained overlapping course content. Study outcomes were primarily learner oriented and focused on self-reported changes in knowledge, awareness, beliefs, attitudes and/or the confidence and skills to provide care for Indigenous peoples. The involvement of local Indigenous communities in the development, implementation and evaluation of the interventions was limited.

CONCLUSION

There is limited evidence regarding the effectiveness of specific content and approaches to cultural safety training on improving non-Indigenous health professionals' knowledge of and skills to deliver quality, non-discriminatory care to Indigenous patients. Future research is needed that advances the methodological rigour of training evaluations, is focused on observed clinical outcomes, and is better aligned to local, regional,and/or national Indigenous priorities and needs.

Reductions in inhaler greenhouse gas emissions by addressing care gaps in asthma and chronic obstructive pulmonary disease: an analysis

INTRODUCTION

Climate change from greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions represents one of the greatest public health threats of our time. Inhalers (and particularly metred-dose inhalers (MDIs)) used for asthma and chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD), constitute an important source of GHGs. In this analysis, we aimed to estimate the carbon footprint impact of improving three distinct aspects of respiratory care that drive avoidable inhaler use in Canada.

METHODS

We used published data to estimate the prevalence of misdiagnosed disease, existing inhaler use patterns, medication class distributions, inhaler type distributions and GHGs associated with inhaler actuations, to quantify annual GHG emissions in Canada: (1) attributable to asthma and COPD misdiagnosis; (2) attributable to overuse of rescue inhalers due to suboptimally controlled symptoms; and (3) avoidable by switching 25% of patients with existing asthma and COPD to an otherwise comparable therapeutic option with a lower GHG footprint.

RESULTS

We identified the following avoidable annual GHG emissions: (1) ~49 100 GHG metric tons (MTs) due to misdiagnosed disease; (2) ~143 000 GHG MTs due to suboptimal symptom control; and (3) ~262 100 GHG MTs due to preferential prescription of strategies featuring MDIs over lower-GHG-emitting options (when 25% of patients are switched to lower GHG alternatives). Combined, the GHG emission reductions from bridging these gaps would be the equivalent to taking ~101 100 vehicles off the roads each year.

CONCLUSIONS

Our analysis shows that the carbon savings from addressing misdiagnosis and suboptimal disease control are comparable to those achievable by switching one in four patients to lower GHG-emitting therapeutic strategies. Behaviour change strategies required to achieve and sustain delivery of evidence-based real-world care are complex, but the added identified incentive of carbon footprint reduction may in itself prove to be a powerful motivator for change among providers and patients. This additional benefit can be leveraged in future behaviour change interventions.

Economic Impact of Low Adherence to COPD Management Guidelines in Spain

OBJECTIVE

The objective of this study was to assess the non-adherence level of Spanish clinical practice to guideline recommendations for the treatment of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) and to estimate the potential impact on pharmaceutical expenditure resulting from transitioning current treatment patterns according to guidelines.

METHODS

A model was developed to compare current prescribing patterns with two alternative scenarios: the first aligned with the Global Initiative for Chronic Obstructive Lung Disease (GOLD 2020) recommendations, and the second with the Spanish Guidelines for COPD (GesEPOC 2017). Current treatment practice was obtained from publications that describe treatment patterns by pulmonology departments in Spain. The economic impact between patterns was calculated from the perspective of the Spanish National Health System (NHS), considering the annual pharmacological costs of COPD inhaled maintenance therapy. Two additional analyses were performed: one that included current prescribing patterns of patients managed by pulmonology and primary care centers in Spain (published aggregated data); and another that only considered the appropriate use of inhaled corticosteroids (ICS) treatment according to guidelines.

RESULTS

It was estimated that 54% and 38% of patients were not treated in line with GOLD and GesEPOC recommendations, respectively, mainly due to a broader use of ICS-based therapies. Adapting treatment to recommendations could provide a potential annual cost-saving of €17,792,022 (according to GOLD) and €5,881,785 (according to GesEPOC). In scenario analysis 1, a 26% of non-adherence to GesEPOC guideline was observed with a potential annual pharmacological cost-saving of €2,707,554. In scenario analysis 2, considering only inappropriate use of ICS treatment, an annual cost-saving of €17,863,750 (according to GOLD) and €9,904,409 (according to GesEPOC) was calculated.

CONCLUSION

More than a third of treatments for COPD patients in Spain are not prescribed in accordance with guideline recommendations. The adaptation of clinical practice to guideline recommendations could provide important cost-savings for the Spanish NHS.

Step-Up and Step-Down Treatment Approaches for COPD: A Holistic View of Progressive Therapies

Recent advances in inhaled drugs and a clearer definition of the disease have made the task of managing COPD more complex. Different proposals have been put forward which combine all the available treatments and the different clinical presentations in an effort to select the best therapeutic options for each clinical context. As COPD is a chronic progressive disease, the escalation of therapy has traditionally been considered the most natural way to tackle it. However, the notion of COPD as a constantly progressing disease has recently been challenged and, in specific areas, this points to the possibility of a de-escalation in treatment. In this context, the clinician requires simple, specific recommendations to guide these changes in treatment in their daily clinical practice. To accomplish this, the first step must be a correct evaluation and an accurate initial preliminary diagnosis of the patient's condition. Thereafter, the first escalation in therapy must be introduced with caution as the disease progresses, since clinical trials are not designed with clinical decision-making in mind. During this escalation, three possibilities are open to change the current treatment for a different one within the same family, to increase non-pharmacological interventions or to increase the pharmacological therapies. Beyond that point, a patient with persistent symptoms represents a complex clinical scenario which requires a specialized approach, including the evaluation of different respiratory and non-respiratory comorbidities. Unfortunately, there are few de-escalation studies available, and these are mainly observational in nature. The debate on de-escalation in pharmacological treatment, therefore, involves two main discussion points: the withdrawal of bronchodilators and the withdrawal of inhaled steroids. Altogether, the scheme for modifying treatment must be more personalized than just adding molecules, and the therapeutic response and its conditioning factors should be evaluated at each step before proceeding further.

Does Evaluation and Management of COPD Follow Therapeutic Strategy Recommendations?

Introduction

Recommendations for chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) diagnosis and management requires symptom and exacerbation risk assessment. Adherence to these recommendations appears to be limited. We examined the impact of a COPD quality improvement (QI) program in the Southeastern United States.

Methods

From 2017 to 2018, nine pulmonary and 15 primary care physicians were included in our study and asked to identify 6 to 7 of their COPD patients using maintenance COPD medications with at least 2 office visits in the past year. A separate group of COPD patients (n=135 pulmonary and 165 primary care) from the same practices were evaluated. Physicians underwent focused, educational, peer-to-peer small group webinars. Data were collected from physicians and their patients using a systematic survey. Chart audits occurred at baseline and 6 months after the webinars.

Results

The majority of physicians (67%) saw ≥ 20 COPD patients/week. There were important discrepancies between the care clinicians thought they provided, and the care recalled by their patients. Clinicians felt that 33% of their patients experienced at least 2 exacerbations in the past year; 56% of their patients reported this frequency. There was discrepancy in the clinicians' interpretations and the patients' reasons for discontinuing their medications and in the use of referrals. Self-reported changes were noted by clinicians after educational webinars and improvements in patient care were noted in the year following intervention.

Conclusion

We identified notable discrepancies between the clinicians' impression of care provided and the components actually recalled by their patients. We also identified improvements in processes of care and outcomes following an educational intervention based on the principles of audit and feedback.

Predictors of Single Bronchodilation Treatment Response for COPD: An Observational Study with the Trace Database Cohort

Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) patients constitute a heterogeneous population in terms of treatment response. Our objective was to identify possible predictive factors of response to treatment with single bronchodilation monotherapy in patients diagnosed with COPD. The Time-based Register and Analysis of COPD Endpoints (TRACE; clinicaltrials.gov NCT03485690) is a prospective cohort of COPD patients who have been attending annual visits since 2012. Patients who were kept on a single bronchodilator during the first year of follow-up were selected. The responders were defined according to all of the following variables: any improvement in morning post-dose forced expiratory volume in 1 s or deterioration <100 mL, no change or improvement in dyspnea score, and no occurrence of exacerbations. Significant and plausible variables were analyzed using a proportional hazard Cox regression for single bronchodilator responders. We analyzed 764 cases, of whom 128 (16.8%) were receiving monotherapy with one bronchodilator. Of these, 85 patients (66.4%) were responders. Factors affecting responder status were: female gender (hazard ratio (HR) 0.276; 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.089–0.858), dyslipidemia (HR 0.436; 95%CI 0.202–0.939), not performing regular exercise (HR 0.523; 95%CI 0.254–1.076), active smoking (HR 0.413; 95%CI 0.186–0.920), and treatment adherence (HR 2.527; 95%CI 1.271–5.027). The factors associated with a single bronchodilation response are mainly non-pharmacological interventions and comorbidities.

Triple therapy for COPD: a crude analysis from a systematic review of the evidence

We systematically reviewed the current knowledge on fixed-dose triple therapies for the treatment of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD), with a specific focus on its efficacy versus single bronchodilation, double fixed dose combinations, and open triple therapies. Articles were retrieved from PubMed, Embase, and Scopus up to 3 August 2018. We selected articles with randomized controlled or crossover design conducted in patients with COPD and published as full-length articles or scientific letters, evaluating triple therapy combinations in a single or different inhaler, and with efficacy data versus monocomponents, double combinations, or open triple therapies. Our systematic search reported 108 articles, of which 24 trials were finally selected for the analysis. A total of 7 studies with fixed dose triple therapy combinations, and 17 studies with open triple therapies combinations. Triple therapy showed improvements in lung function [trough forced expiratory volume (FEV₁₎ ranging from not significant (NS) to 147 ml], health status using the St. George’s Respiratory Questionnaire [(SGRQ) from NS to 8.8 points], and exacerbations [risk ratio (RR) from NS to 0.59 for all exacerbations] versus single or double therapies with a variability in the response, depending the specific combination, and the comparison group. The proportion of adverse effects was similar between study groups, the exception being the increase in pneumonia for some inhaled corticosteroid (ICS) containing groups.

The reviews of this paper are available via the supplementary material section.

Quantification of inaccurate diagnosis of COPD in primary care medicine: an analysis of the COACH clinical audit

Background: Inaccurate diagnosis in COPD is a current problem with relevant consequences in terms of inefficient health care, which has not been thoroughly studied in primary care medicine. The aim of the present study was to evaluate the degree of inaccurate diagnosis in Primary Care in Spain and study the determinants associated with it. Methods: The Community Assessment of COPD Health Care (COACH) study is a national, observational, randomized, non-interventional, national clinical audit aimed at evaluating clinical practice for patients with COPD in primary care medicine in Spain. For the present analysis, a correct diagnosis was evaluated based on previous exposure and airway obstruction with and without the presence of symptoms. The association of patient-level and center-level variables with inaccurate diagnosis was studied using multivariate multilevel binomial logistic regression models. Results: During the study 4,307 cases from 63 centers were audited. The rate of inaccurate diagnosis was 82.4% (inter-regional range from 76.8% to 90.2%). Patient-related interventions associated with inaccurate diagnosis were related to active smoking, lung function evaluation, and specific therapeutic interventions. Center-level variables related to the availability of certain complementary tests and different aspects of the resources available were also associated with an inaccurate diagnosis. Conclusions: The prevalence data for the inaccurate diagnosis of COPD in primary care medicine in Spain establishes a point of reference in the clinical management of COPD. The descriptors of the variables associated with this inaccurate diagnosis can be used to identify cases and centers in which inaccurate diagnosis is occurring considerably, thus allowing for improvement.

Effectiveness of an Intervention to Improve Management of COPD using the AUDIT Methodology: Results of the Neumo-Advance Study

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE

The implementation of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) guidelines in the real-world setting remains low. Pulmonologists should participate in the new paradigms of chronicity of COPD, by providing their knowledge, expertise, innovation and research. The objective of this study was to survey pulmonologists on the adherence to COPD guidelines and to measure the change of attitude after holding meetings presenting the latest research on the subject.

METHODS

Fifty questions on COPD management were sent to 150 pulmonologists. Using the AUDIT methodology, the responses were discussed at several face-to-face meetings, held in different autonomous communities of Spain. The same questionnaire was subsequently sent to the participants and changes in their responses were analysed.

RESULTS

In total, 148 physicians (60.1% female) completed study. The main responses were: (1) 16.2% diagnose following clinical criteria; (2) 78.4% performed diagnostic tests other than spirometry; (3) 73.6% always determined alpha-1 antitrypsin levels (81.8% in the second questionnaire, p < 0.05); (4) 73% determined the patient's phenotype; (5) 42% always asked about passive exposure to cigarette smoke (55% after the meetings, p < 0.05); (6) 58.1% always asked about exposure to other pollutants or biomass; (7) 29.1% always assessed inhalational technique; (8) dual bronchodilators were the most common treatment (49.3%) used for patients with frequent exacerbator phenotype, glycopyrronium + indacaterol being the preferred option (44.1%); (9) 41.2% discontinued inhaled corticosteroids treatment (54.7% in the second questionnaire, p < 0.05); (10) for exacerbation admissions, 52% replaced maintenance bronchodilators with short-acting agents and introduced early background treatment (58.8% in the second round, p < 0.05). Few variations occurred in the participants' answers after the meetings.

CONCLUSIONS

The adherence of pulmonologists to clinical practice recommendations for COPD management is suboptimal. As well as face-to-face meetings, more intensive interventions are required to raise awareness on the importance of improving compliance with clinical guidelines.

Short-acting bronchodilators for the management of acute exacerbations of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease in the hospital setting: systematic review

BACKGROUND

Currently, there is a lack of guidelines for the use of short-acting bronchodilators (SABD) in people admitted to hospital for acute exacerbation of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (AECOPD), despite routine use in practice and risk of cardiac adverse events.

AIM

To review the evidence that underpins use and optimal dose, in terms of risk versus benefit, of SABD for inpatient management of AECOPD and collate the results for future guidelines.

METHODS

Medline, Embase, the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, clinicaltrials.gov and International Clinical Trials Registry Platform were searched (inception to November 2017) for published and ongoing studies. Included studies were randomised controlled trials or controlled clinical trials investigating the effect of SABD (β2-agonist and/or ipratropium) on inpatients with a diagnosis of AECOPD. This review was undertaken in accordance with PRISMA guidelines and a pre-defined protocol. Due to heterogeneous methodologies, meta-analysis was not possible so the results were synthesised qualitatively.

RESULTS

Of 1378 studies identified, 10 met inclusion criteria. Narrative synthesis of 10 studies revealed no significant differences in most outcomes of interest relative to dose, delivery via inhaler or nebuliser, and type of β2-agonist used. However, some evidence demonstrated significantly increased cardiac side effects with increased dosage of β2-agonist (45% versus 24%), P<0.05).

CONCLUSION

This review identified a paucity of methodologically rigorous evidence evaluating use of SABD among AECOPD. The available evidence did not identify any additional benefits for participants receiving higher doses of short-acting β2-agonists compared to lower doses, or based on type of delivery method or β2-agonists used. However, there was a small increase in some adverse events for participants using higher doses of β2-agonists.