Parent Experiences With Electronic Medication Monitoring in Pediatric Asthma Management: Qualitative Study

Pharmacoequity in Allergy-Immunology: Disparities in Access to Medications for Allergic Diseases and Proposed Solutions in the United States and Globally

Pharmacoequity is the principle that individuals should have access to high-quality medications regardless of race and ethnicity, socioeconomic status, or availability of resources. In this review, we summarize access to therapeutics for allergic diseases in the United States and other selected countries. We focus on domains of health care access (health insurance coverage, medication availability, and specialist access) as well as system-level factors and clinician- and patient-level factors such as interpersonal racism and cultural beliefs, and how they can affect timely access to appropriate therapy for allergic diseases. Finally, we propose how pharmacoequity in allergy-immunology can be achieved by highlighting solutions to factors limiting access to medications for allergic diseases, and identify potential future research directions.

Recognizing and Tackling Inhaler Technique Decay in Asthma and Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disesase (COPD) Clinical Practice

A poor inhaler technique continues to represent a substantial barrier to effective asthma and chronic obstructive pulmonary disease management. It can result in perceived lack of treatment effectiveness even with apparent adherence to a prescribed regimen of inhaled maintenance therapies, potentially resulting in an unnecessary change or escalation of treatment. Many patients are not trained to inhaler mastery in real-world practice; furthermore, even where mastery is initially achieved, an ongoing assessment and education are seldom maintained. In this review, we present an overview of the evidence for deterioration of the inhaler technique over time after training, investigate the factors that contribute to this deterioration, and explore innovative approaches to addressing the problem. We also propose steps forward drawn from the literature and our clinical insights.

A qualitative process evaluation within a clinical trial that used healthcare technologies for children with asthma-insights and implications

BACKGROUND

Healthcare technologies are becoming more commonplace, however clinical and patient perspectives regarding the use of technology in the management of childhood asthma have yet to be investigated. Within a clinical trial of asthma management in children, we conducted a qualitative process evaluation that provided insights into the experiences and perspectives of healthcare staff and families on (i) the use of smart inhalers to monitor medication adherence and (ii) the use of algorithm generated treatment recommendations.

METHODS

We interviewed trial staff (n = 15) and families (n = 6) who were involved in the trial to gauge perspectives around the use of smart inhalers to monitor adherence and the algorithm to guide clinical decision making.

FINDINGS

Staff and families indicated that there were technical issues associated with the smart inhalers. While staff suggested that the smart inhalers were good for monitoring adherence and enabling communication regarding medication use, parents and children indicated that smart inhaler use increased motivation to adhere to medication and provided the patient (child) with a sense of responsibility for the management of their asthma. Staff were open-minded about the use of the algorithm to guide treatment recommendations, but some were not familiar with its' use in clinical care. There were some concerns expressed regarding treatment step-down decisions generated by the algorithm, and some staff highlighted the importance of using clinical judgement. Families perceived the algorithm to be a useful technology, but indicated that they felt comforted by the clinicians' own judgements.

CONCLUSION

The use of technology and individual data within appointments was considered useful to both staff and families: closer monitoring and the educational impacts were especially highlighted. Utilising an algorithm was broadly acceptable, with caveats around clinicians using the recommendations as a guide only and wariness around extreme step-ups/downs considering contextual factors not taken into account.

Stakeholder perspectives on digital behavioral health applications targeting adolescent depression and suicidality: Policymaker, provider, and community insights

Background

With adolescent depression and suicidality increasing, technology-based interventions may help address mental health needs. The Enhancing Treatment and Utilization for Depression and Emergent Suicidality (ETUDES) Center supports development of technology interventions to help primary care providers target these problems. To successfully develop and integrate such interventions into primary care, iterative engagement of stakeholders is necessary. This paper outlines our stakeholder engagement process, a qualitative analysis of feedback and outcomes, and how feedback was incorporated to develop Center interventions.

Methods

Stakeholder panels represented key end-users of ETUDES Center interventions (adolescents, young adults, parents, and healthcare providers) and their advocates at the organizational/policy level. Meetings were held throughout intervention development and at annual retreats. Detailed meeting notes were collected and summarized by the stakeholder engagement team in real time, after which action items were generated and reviewed by the full research team. Using a content analysis approach, all stakeholder feedback summaries were coded using a prespecified codebook organized by recurring topics. Codes were organized under the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research (CFIR). Anonymous stakeholder feedback surveys assessed relevance of topics, meeting effectiveness, and stakeholder involvement.

Results

Stakeholder meetings provided feedback on topics such as representation, language, access to care, and stigma. Relevant feedback and recommendations were incorporated into subsequent iterations of the interventions and their implementation. Mean stakeholder ratings of meeting proceedings on a 0–3 Likert scale ranged from 1.70 ( SD  =  0.10) for participation to 2.43 ( SD  =  0.08) for effectiveness in addressing meeting agenda.

Conclusions

The iterative engagement approach yielded practical feedback from stakeholders about ETUDES Center interventions. The team organized feedback to identify barriers and facilitators to using Center interventions and to generate action items, which were transposed onto components of an implementation strategy, supplemented by the CFIR-ERIC Implementation Strategy Matching Tool. Stakeholder feedback will direct the future development of an integrated intervention and guide further stakeholder engagement in developing technologies for adolescent mental health. Plain Language Summary: Depression and suicide in teens have been on the rise for the past several years. Primary care may be an ideal place to address these concerns because most teens have a primary care provider (PCP) who can offer a confidential place for both teens and their caregivers. Our Center develops technology-based interventions to help PCPs address teen depression and suicidality. Multiple barriers may hinder PCPs in addressing teen depression and suicidality. This paper describes how we engaged multiple types of stakeholders—or individuals with an interest in adolescent mental health—to ask for their feedback over a series of meetings, to help us improve the fit of our interventions to this population. Stakeholders included providers, community members like parents and mental health advocates, youth, and policymakers. We learned what was most important to them—including concerns about equitable access (e.g., providing broadband internet to families who do not have it so they can still participate) and legal risks or failures for the technology to identify suicidality. In this paper, we describe our process for not only recruiting and engaging stakeholders but also for planning action based on their feedback. Similar processes could be used by other researchers and clinical organizations seeking to incorporate technology into mental health interventions.