Management of chronic childhood asthma in the primary care office

Primary care based clinics for asthma

BACKGROUND

Asthma is defined as the presence of variable airflow obstruction with symptoms (more than one of wheeze, breathlessness, chest tightness, cough). It is becoming increasingly common worldwide and this is especially true in higher income countries. In several of these countries there has been a move towards delivery of asthma care via primary care based asthma clinics. Such clinics deliver proactive asthma care sited within primary care, via regular, dedicated sessions which are usually nurse led and doctor supported. They include organised recall of patients on an asthma register and care usually comprises education, symptom review and guideline-based management. Despite the proliferation of such clinics, especially in countries such as the United Kingdom (UK), there is a paucity of evidence to support their use. This review sets out to look at the evidence for the effectiveness of asthma clinics.

OBJECTIVES

To determine the effectiveness of organised asthma care delivered via primary care based asthma clinics.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Airways Group Specialised Register of trials (last search December 2011) and reviewed reference lists of all primary studies for additional references.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included randomised controlled trials of primary care based asthma clinics with a parallel group design, where clinics took place within dedicated time slots and included face-to-face interaction with doctor or nurse and control groups received usual clinical practice care by a general practitioner.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently assessed the trials for inclusion and conducted all data extraction and analysis. All disagreements were resolved by discussion.

MAIN RESULTS

A total of three studies involving 466 participants were included. There was no statistically significant difference between the asthma clinic group and the control group for most outcomes (primary outcomes: asthma exacerbations leading to hospitalisation or accident and emergency (A&E) visit, use of reliever and preventer medication, quality of life; secondary outcomes: symptoms, time lost from work and withdrawals from the intervention or usual care). However, the confidence intervals were wide for all outcomes and there was substantial heterogeneity between the studies for both A&E visits and time lost from work. One study (101 patients) looked at nocturnal awakenings due to asthma and found a statistically significant reduction in the number of patients reporting this symptom in the asthma clinic group compared to the usual care group (OR 0.31; 95% CI 0.12 to 0.77). There were no studies looking at the secondary outcome of exacerbations requiring oral steroids.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

There is limited evidence of efficacy for primary care based asthma clinics, and firm conclusions cannot be formed until more good quality trials have been carried out.

Improved asthma care after enrollment in the State Children's Health Insurance Program in New York

BACKGROUND

Uninsured children with asthma are known to face barriers to asthma care, but little is known about the impact of health insurance on asthma care.

OBJECTIVES

We sought to assess the impact of New York's State Children's Health Insurance Program (SCHIP) on health care for children with asthma.

DESIGN

Parents of a stratified random sample of new enrollees in New York's SCHIP were interviewed by telephone shortly after enrollment (baseline, n = 2644 [74% of eligible children]) and 1 year later (follow-up, n = 2310 [87%]). Asthma was defined by parent report using questions based on National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute criteria. A comparison group (n = 401) who enrolled in SCHIP 1 year later was interviewed as a test for secular trends.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

Access (having a usual source of care [USC], unmet health needs, problems receiving acute asthma care), asthma-related medical visits, quality (continuity of care at the USC, problems receiving chronic asthma care, use of antiinflammatory medications), and asthma outcomes (change in asthma care or severity) were the main outcome measures used. Bivariate and multivariate analyses compared measures at baseline (year before SCHIP) versus follow-up (year during SCHIP).

RESULTS

Three-hundred eighty-three children (14%) had asthma at baseline, and 364 had asthma at follow-up (16%). No secular trends were detected between the baseline study group and the comparison group. After enrollment in SCHIP, improvements were noted in access: lacking a USC (decrease from 5% to 1%), unmet health needs (48% to 21%), and problems getting to the USC for asthma (13 to 4%). Children had fewer asthma-related attacks and medical visits after SCHIP (mean number of attacks: 9.5 to 3.8: mean number of asthma visits: 3.0 to 1.5; hospitalizations: 11% to 3%). Quality of asthma care improved for general measures (most/all visits to USC: 53% to 94%; mean rating of provider: 7.9 to 8.8 of 10) and asthma-specific measures (problems getting to the USC for asthma care when child was well: 13% to 1%). More than two thirds of the parents at follow-up reported that both quality of asthma care and asthma severity were "better or much better" than at baseline, generally because of insurance coverage or lower costs of medications and medical care.

CONCLUSIONS

Enrollment in New York's SCHIP was associated with improvements in access to asthma care, quality of asthma care, and asthma-specific outcomes. These findings suggest that health insurance improves the health of children with asthma.

Asthma management across the life span: the child with asthma

Childhood asthma has an adverse impact on children, families, and society. Treatment of asthma presents special challenges related to diagnosis, ongoing symptom monitoring, and treatment when the patient is a child. To be effective, treatment needs to be medically sound and developmentally appropriate.

Asthma management, Part II: Pharmacologic management

Part I of this two-part series described the pathophysiology, types, and risk factors associated with asthma. The role of the school nurse in the development, implementation, and evaluation of a comprehensive asthma management plan was outlined, as was the role of the school nurse in controlling factors that precipitate asthma symptoms or exacerbations. Part II reviews specific school nursing responsibilities associated with current pharmacologic therapy for the child with asthma. Issues related to nutritional supplements as well as complementary and alternative treatments used in asthma management are covered. Other topics discussed include issues related to access of asthma medication in the school setting by the student, involvement of the school team in the care of the child with asthma, and health education strategies for children with asthma and their families.

Primary care based clinics for asthma

BACKGROUND

Primary care clinics for asthma have been encouraged and are becoming widespread in some countries, particularly in the UK.

OBJECTIVES

To determine the effectiveness of organised asthma care via primary care based asthma clinics.

SEARCH STRATEGY

A search of the Cochrane Airways Group register and Cochrane Controlled Trials Register using the following search strategy: clinic* OR general pract* OR family pract* or primary care. Separate and additional searches were also conducted using MEDLINE, CINAHL and EMBASE databases.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Trials had to be performed in primary care and be restricted to patients with asthma. Care could be delivered by doctor or nurse. Two reviewers independently ascertained the relevance of trials from titles and abstracts obtained from the searches. Relevant full text articles were retrieved with two reviewers assessing each study for inclusion.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two reviewers independently conducted all data abstraction and analysis and all disagreements were resolved by discussion. For the dichotomous variables, odds ratio (OR) or relative risks (RR) with 95% Confidence Interval (95%CI) were calculated for individual outcomes.

MAIN RESULTS

Only one trial met the criteria for inclusion in the review. This trial provided 11 outcome measures of which two showed a significant effect of the intervention. More patients in the intervention group had peak flow meters (RR 1.30; 95%CI 1.05,1.61) and fewer patients in the intervention group were likely to wake up at nights due to their asthma (RR 0.30; 95%CI 0.16, 0.81).

REVIEWER'S CONCLUSIONS

There is limited evidence of benefit for primary care based asthma clinics, but firm conclusions cannot be formed until more good quality trials have been carried out.

Asthma therapy in the observation unit

The management of asthma is a commonly encountered clinical problem. There have been major advances in the treatment of asthma, including an increase in the drugs available for treatment, as well as in knowledge of the pathophysiology of the disease. Despite these advances, however, the prevalence, morbidity, and mortality for asthma have shown a disturbing upward trend over the past few decades. Experience with the OU management of asthma has shown many advantages: decreased inpatient hospitalization, better quality of life for patients, higher patient satisfaction, cost-effectiveness, and effective patient care. It is estimated that 60% to 70% of asthmatic patients could be treated in an ED observation unit instead of in an inpatient hospital ward. There is a tremendous opportunity for the OU management of asthma to improve patient care, as well as decrease costs, thereby reducing asthma morbidity and mortality.