'SIMPLES': a structured primary care approach to adults with difficult asthma

Current technological advancement in asthma care

INTRODUCTION

Asthma is a common chronic respiratory disease affecting 262 million people globally, causing half a million deaths each year. Poor asthma outcomes are frequently due to non-adherence to medication, poor engagement with asthma services, and a lack of objective diagnostic tests. In recent years, technologies have been developed to improve diagnosis, monitoring, and care.

AREAS COVERED

Technology has impacted asthma care with the potential to improve patient outcomes, reduce healthcare costs, and provide personalized management. We focus on current evidence on home diagnostics and monitoring, remote asthma reviews, and digital smart inhalers. PubMed, Ovid/Embase, Cochrane Library, Scopus and Google Scholar were searched in November 2023 with no limit by year of publication.

EXPERT OPINION

Advanced diagnostic technologies have enabled early asthma detection and personalized treatment plans. Mobile applications and digital therapeutics empower patients to manage their condition and improve adherence to treatments. Telemedicine platforms and remote monitoring devices have the potential to streamline asthma care. AI algorithms can analyze patient data and predict exacerbations in proof-of-concept studies. Technology can potentially provide precision medicine to a wider patient group in the future, but further development is essential for implementation into routine care which in itself will be a major challenge.

Asthma medication adherence and exacerbations and lung function in children managed in Leicester primary care

Poor adherence to asthma preventer medication is associated with life-threatening asthma attacks. The quality and outcomes framework mandated primary care annual asthma review does not include adherence monitoring and the effect of poor adherence on lung function in paediatric primary care patients is unknown. The aim was to investigate the link between inhaled corticosteroid (ICS) adherence and spirometry, fraction of exhaled nitric oxide (FeNO) and asthma control in asthmatic school-age children in this cross-sectional observational study involving three Leicestershire general practices. Children 5-16 years on the practice's asthma registers, were invited for a routine annual asthma review between August 2018 and August 2019. Prescription and clinical data were extracted from practice databases. Spirometry, bronchodilator reversibility (BDR) and FeNO testing were performed as part of the review. 130 of 205 eligible children (63.4%) attended their review. Mean adherence to ICS was 36.2% (SEM 2.1%) and only 14.6% of children had good adherence (≥75% prescriptions issued). We found no differences in asthma exacerbations in the preceding 12 months between the adherence quartiles. 28.6% of children in the lowest and 5.6% in the highest adherence quartile had BDR ≥ 12% but this was not statistically significant (p = 0.55). A single high FeNO value did not predict adherence to ICS. Adherence to ICS in children with asthma in primary care is poor. The link between adherence to ICS and asthma exacerbations, spirometry and FeNO is complex but knowledge of adherence to ICS is critical in the management of children with asthma.

Social Inequalities: Do They Matter in Asthma, Bronchitis, and Respiratory Symptoms in Children?

Background: Social inequalities (e.g., poverty and low level of education) generate inequalities in health. Aim: The aim of the study was to determine the relationships between indicators of social inequalities and the frequency of respiratory symptoms, asthma, and bronchitis in children. Material and Methods: In 2019, an epidemiological cross-sectional study on 3237 students from elementary schools in Silesia Voivodships (South Poland) was conducted. The students' parents completed a questionnaire based on the International Study on Asthma and Allergies in Childhood (ISAAC). Social inequalities in the children's families were determined according to parents' education and professional status (working vs. unemployed), self-assessment of economic status, and housing conditions. To determine the influence of social factors on the occurrence of asthma, bronchitis, and respiratory symptoms, the odds ratio (OR) was calculated. Results: Children living in apartments with traces of mold had a higher risk of developing asthma (OR = 1.5, 95%CI: 1.17-1.96; p = 0.002) or bronchitis (OR = 1.4, 95%CI: 1.13-1.72; p = 0.002), wheezing attacks at nights (OR = 1.4; 95%CI: 1.01-1.93), wheezy in the last 12 months (OR = 1.6; 95%CI:1.24-2.08; p < 0.001), and chronic cough (OR = 1.9; 95%CI: 1.49-2.46; p < 0.001). Exposure to environmental tobacco smoke (ETS) was associated with higher risk of cough (OR = 1.5 95%CI: 1.22-1.96; p < 0.001) and dyspnea in the last 12 months (OR = 1.4; 95%CI: 1.04-2.00; p = 0.02). Low socioeconomic status (SES) was associated with increased risk of chronic cough (OR = 1.5; 95%CI: 1.09-2.03; p = 0.009) and increased risk of wheezy in the last 12 months (OR = 1.4; 95%CI: 1.06-1.97; p = 0.008). Asthma and bronchitis were not dependent on parents' education or professional status. Conclusions: Social inequalities have significant impacts on the occurrence of respiratory symptoms, bronchitis, and asthma in children. Interventions aimed at preventing bronchitis and childhood asthma should also focus on social health determinants.

Prevalence and Characterisation of Patients with Asthma According to Disease Severity in Portugal: Findings from the EPI-ASTHMA Pilot Study

Objective

To assess the feasibility of the procedures of EPI-ASTHMA. EPI-ASTHMA is a population-based multicentre stepwise study about the prevalence and characterisation of patients with asthma based on disease severity in Portugal.

Methods

A pilot study of EPI-ASTHMA was conducted with adults from three primary care centres. We followed a stepwise approach comprising 4 stages: stage 0-invitation phone call (n ~1316); stage 1-telephone interview (n ~658); stage 2-clinical assessment with physical examination, diagnostic tests, and patient-reported outcome measures, to confirm the diagnosis of those with possible asthma at stage 1 (n ~160); stage 3-characterization of a subgroup of asthma patients by collecting data through a telephone interview, patient file review and CARATm app (n ~40), after 3-months. The frequency of asthma was calculated in relation to the entire study population (stage 1) and the frequency of difficult-to-treat/severe asthma in relation to the number of asthma patients (stage 3).

Results

From 1305 adults invited, 892 (68%) accepted to participate (stage 0) and 574 (64%; 53[42-67] y; 43% male) were interviewed (stage 1). From those, 148 (26%; 60[46-68] y; 43% male) were assessed at stage 2, and 46 (31%; 51[39-67] y; 44% male) were diagnosed with asthma. Half of these patients (n = 23) accepted to install the app. Stage 3 was completed by 41 (93%) patients, of whom 31 (83%) had asthma confirmed by their file review. A total of 8% of participants had asthma, of those 17% had difficult-to-treat and 5% severe asthma.

Conclusion

Attained recruitment rates and the quality of the results confirmed the feasibility of the EPI-ASTHMA stepwise approach. This pilot study provided insight into the improvement of the procedures to be generalized across the country.

EPI-ASTHMA study protocol: a population-based multicentre stepwise study on the prevalence and characterisation of patients with asthma according to disease severity in Portugal

INTRODUCTION

In Portugal as in other countries, data on the epidemiology of asthma are mainly grounded in questionnaire studies. Additionally, the detailed characterisation of asthma in terms of disease severity, control and phenotypes remain scarce. Studies assessing the prevalence of asthma and its subgroups using accurate methods are needed. This study aims to determine the prevalence of asthma, difficult-to-treat asthma and severe asthma, and to evaluate sociodemographic and clinical characteristics of those patients, in mainland Portugal.

METHODS AND ANALYSIS

A population-based nationwide study with a multicentre stepwise approach will be conducted between 2021 and 2023 in 38 primary care centres of the Portuguese National Health Service. The stepwise approach will comprise four stages: Stage 0-telephone call invitation to adult subjects (≥18 years) randomly selected (n~15 000); stage 1-telephone screening interview assessing the participants' respiratory symptoms (n~7500); stage 2-diagnostic visit, including physical examination, diagnostic tests (eg, spirometry, fraction of exhaled nitric oxide, blood eosinophil count) and patient-reported outcome measures for diagnostic confirmation of those identified with possible asthma at stage 1 (n~1800); stage 3-further evaluation of patients with asthma and of patients with difficult-to-treat asthma and severe asthma, after 3 months (n~460). At stage 3, data will be collected from a review of the patient's electronic health records, a follow-up telephone call and the CARATm (Caracteristicas Auto-reportadas de Asma em Tecnologias Móveis) app database. The prevalence of asthma, difficult-to-treat asthma and severe asthma will be determined as the percentage of patients with asthma confirmed from the overall population (stage 1). For the analysis of factors associated with asthma, difficult-to-treat asthma and severe asthma, logistic regression models will be explored.

ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION

Ethical approvals for the study were obtained from the ethics committee of the local health unit of Matosinhos, Porto (38/CES/JAS), Alto Minho (38/2021/CES) and the regional health administration of Lisbon-Vale do Tejo (035/CES/INV/2021). Results will be published in peer-reviewed journals.

TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER

NCT05169619.

Multimorbidity in Difficult Asthma: The Need for Personalised and Non-Pharmacological Approaches to Address a Difficult Breathing Syndrome

Three to ten percent of people living with asthma have difficult-to-treat asthma that remains poorly controlled despite maximum levels of guideline-based pharmacotherapy. This may result from a combination of multiple adverse health issues including aggravating comorbidities, inadequate treatment, suboptimal inhaler technique and/or poor adherence that may individually or collectively contribute to poor asthma control. Many of these are potentially "treatable traits" that can be pulmonary, extrapulmonary, behavioural or environmental factors. Whilst evidence-based guidelines lead clinicians in pharmacological treatment of pulmonary and many extrapulmonary traits, multiple comorbidities increase the burden of polypharmacy for the patient with asthma. Many of the treatable traits can be addressed with non-pharmacological approaches. In the current healthcare model, these are delivered by separate and often disjointed specialist services. This leaves the patients feeling lost in a fragmented healthcare system where clinical outcomes remain suboptimal even with the best current practice applied in each discipline. Our review aims to address this challenge calling for a paradigm change to conceptualise difficult-to-treat asthma as a multimorbid condition of a "Difficult Breathing Syndrome" that consequently needs a holistic personalised care attitude by combining pharmacotherapy with the non-pharmacological approaches. Therefore, we propose a roadmap for an evidence-based multi-disciplinary stepped care model to deliver this.

Using a knowledge translation framework to identify health care professionals’ perceived barriers and enablers for personalised severe asthma care

Background

Whilst multidimensional assessment enables the detection of treatable traits in severe asthma and has the potential to improve patient outcomes, healthcare disparities exist, and little is known about the factors influencing optimal management in severe asthma. This study aimed to explore perceived barriers, and enablers to implementing personalised care in severe asthma, from the healthcare professionals’ perspective.

Methods

A descriptive, qualitative study involving a single focus group (n = 7) and semi-structured interviews (n = 33) with multidisciplinary healthcare professionals involved in severe asthma care was conducted. A hybrid thematic and content analysis was undertaken to identify themes, which were then deductively mapped to the Theoretical Domains Framework (TDF).

Results

Overall, three emergent themes were identified: (1) Barriers- (2) Enablers- to optimal management; (3) Desired model of care. Across all TDF domains, 6 constructs influenced development and implementation of optimal care: (1) belief about consequences, (2) environmental context and resources, (3) belief about capabilities, (4) social/professional role and identity, (5) goals and (6) knowledge.

Conclusion

Implementation of personalised care in severe asthma is complex and non-linear. The use of a theory-based approach effectively demonstrated how a variety of behaviours could be targeted to optimise and promote personalised care in different clinical setting.

A Renewed Charter: Key Principles to Improve Patient Care in Severe Asthma

Asthma is a heterogenous respiratory disease, usually associated with chronic airway inflammation and hyper-responsiveness, which affects an estimated 339 million people worldwide. Severe asthma affects approximately 5-10% of patients with asthma, approximately 17-34 million people globally, more than half of whom have uncontrolled disease. Severe asthma carries a substantial burden of disease, including unpredictable symptoms and potentially life-threatening flare-ups. Furthermore, severe asthma has a substantial burden on health care systems and economies worldwide. In 2018, a group of experts from the clinical community, patient support groups, and professional organisations joined together to develop the Severe Asthma Patient Charter, which set out six principles to define what patients should expect for the management of their severe asthma and what should constitute a basic standard of care. Since the publication of that original Charter in 2018, several important changes have occurred, including an improved understanding of asthma and effective asthma management; several new therapies have become available; and finally, the COVID-19 pandemic has placed a spotlight on respiratory conditions, the workforces that treat them, and the fundamental importance of health care system resilience. With those developments in mind, we, representatives of the academic, clinical, and patient advocacy group communities, have updated the Charter to Improve Patient Care in Severe Asthma with a focus on six principles: (1) I deserve a timely, comprehensive assessment of my asthma and its severity; (2) I deserve a timely, straightforward referral to an appropriate specialist for my asthma when it is not well controlled; (3) I deserve to understand what makes my asthma worse; (4) I deserve access to treatment and care that reduces the impact of asthma on my daily life; (5) I deserve not to be reliant on systemic corticosteroids; (6) I deserve to be involved in decisions about my treatment and care.

Managing asthma in primary healthcare

Asthma brings considerable challenges for family doctors because of its variety of shapes, different levels of severity, a wide age range, and the fact that in the last decades clinicians are able to offer much better treatment options with a better level of disease control and a higher quality of life. The objectives of the current review article are to provide an up-to-date review by primary care respiratory leaders from different countries of the most significant challenges regarding asthma diagnosis and management, the importance of team work and the problems in recognizing and dealing with difficult-to-manage and severe asthma in primary care. The article provides a short review of the main challenges faced by family physicians and other primary health care professionals in supporting their patients in the management of asthma, such as asthma diagnosis, promoting access to spirometry, the importance of a multiprofessional team for the management of asthma, how to organize an asthma review, the promotion of patient autonomy and shared decision-making, improving the use of inhalers, the importance of the personalized asthma action plan, dealing with difficult-to-manage and severe asthma in primary care and choosing when, where and how to refer patients with severe asthma. The article also discusses the development of an integrated approach to asthma care in the community and the promotion of Asthma Right Care.

Prevention and Treatment of Asthma Exacerbations in Adults

Asthma exacerbations are major contributors to disease morbidity in patients of all ages. To develop strategies that reduce the disease burden from exacerbations, it is helpful to review current concepts about the risk factors for asthma attacks and current approaches for prevention and treatment. Multiple factors contribute as risks and to the development of asthma exacerbations, including allergic and infectious processes. Viral respiratory infections, primarily from rhinoviruses, are the dominant exacerbating cause for most asthma patients. Allergic sensitization and allergen exposure contribute directly and enhance susceptibility for respiratory viral infections. Respiratory viruses infect airway epithelium to promote underlying type 2 inflammation with eosinophils, the predominant cellular component of increased inflammation. Deficiencies of antiviral interferon responses and generation have been identified that increase susceptibility to viral infections in asthma. Exacerbation treatment focuses on reducing airflow obstruction and suppressing inflammation, followed by improving long-term asthma control. Increasing concern exists regarding the side effects associated with frequent systemic corticosteroid use. A major advance has been the selective use of biologics to prevent exacerbations, primarily in patients with existing type 2 inflammation. Future research to prevent exacerbations is being directed toward antiviral activity and a more encompassing regulation of underlying airway inflammation.

Socioeconomic biases in asthma control and specialist referral of possible severe asthma

BACKGROUND

Although socioeconomic impact on asthma control has been investigated, little is known about its relation to specialist referral of patients with possible severe asthma, especially in a public healthcare setting. The present study aims to identify socioeconomic patterns in disease control and referral of patients with asthma in a nationwide cohort of adult patients treated with inhaled corticosteroid (ICS).

METHODS

Asthma patients fulfilling the following: aged 18-45 and redeeming ≥2 prescriptions of ICS during 2014-18 based on data from Danish national registers were included. Possible severe asthma was defined as GINA 2020 Step 4 (with either ≥2 courses of systemic steroids or ≥1 hospitalisation) or Step 5 treatment. Findings presented as odds ratio (OR) (95% confidence intervals).

RESULTS

Of 60 534 patients (median age 34, 55% female), 3275 (5.7%) were deemed as having possible severe asthma, of whom 61% were managed in primary care alone.Odds of specialist management for possible severe asthma decreased with age (OR 0.66 (0.51-0.85)), 36-45 versus 18-25 years), male sex (OR 0.75 (0.64-0.87)), residence outside the Capital Region (OR 0.70 (0.59-0.82)) and with receiving unemployment or disability benefits OR 0.75 (0.59-0.95)).Having completed higher education increased odds of specialist referral (OR 1.28 (1.03-1.59)), when compared to patients with basic education.

CONCLUSION

Even in settings with nationally available free access to specialist care, the majority of patients with possible severe asthma are managed in primary care. Referral of at-risk asthma patients differs across socioeconomic parameters, calling for initiatives to identify and actively refer these patients.

Clinical and economic burden of severe asthma among US patients treated with biologic therapies

BACKGROUND

Patients with severe asthma may remain uncontrolled despite biologic therapy in addition to standard therapy, but this disease burden has not been quantified.

OBJECTIVE

To estimate the clinical and economic burden in a US national sample.

METHODS

Patients who have severe asthma with indicated biologic treatment (earliest use = index date) were selected from the MarketScan database between January 1, 2013, and June 30, 2018. Inclusion criteria were continuous enrollment for 12 months postindex with a minimum of 2 biologic fills, greater than or equal to 12 years of age, evidence of medium- to high-dose inhaled corticosteroids and long-acting β-agonist combination before the index, and absence of other respiratory diagnoses and malignancies. Disease exacerbations (used to classify asthma control), health care costs, and treatment characteristics were reported during the 12-month postindex period.

RESULTS

The sample included 3262 biologic patients; 88% with anti-immunoglobulin E therapy (omalizumab) and 12% non-anti-immunoglobulin E (reslizumab, mepolizumab, benralizumab). The mean age was 49 (±15) years; 64% were women. Prescriptions included inhaled corticosteroids and long-acting β-agonist (82%), systemic corticosteroids (76%), and leukotriene receptor antagonists (68%). Notably, 63% of patients presented greater than or equal to 1 asthma exacerbation (mean 1.3 per patient/year). Furthermore, 35% of patients were categorized as having controlled asthma, whereas 28% were suboptimally controlled and 29% were uncontrolled. Patients with uncontrolled disease had higher all-cause and asthma-related costs ($69,206 and $45,693, respectively) than patients with suboptimally controlled ($59,407 and $40,793, respectively) or controlled disease ($53,083 and $38,393, respectively). Furthermore, 62% of newly treated patients were persistent with their index biologic.

CONCLUSION

Biologic therapies are effective in reducing exacerbations, but a substantial proportion of patients with severe asthma treated with current biologics continue to experience uncontrolled disease, highlighting a remaining unmet need for patients with severe uncontrolled asthma.

Potential Severe Asthma Hidden in UK Primary Care

BACKGROUND

Severe asthma may be underrecognized in primary care.

OBJECTIVE

Identify and quantify patients with potential severe asthma (PSA) in UK primary care, the proportion not referred, and compare primary care patients with PSA with patients with confirmed severe asthma from UK tertiary care.

METHODS

This was a historical cohort study including patients from the Optimum Patient Care Research Database (aged ≥16 years, active asthma diagnosis pre-2014) and UK patients in the International Severe Asthma Registry (UK-ISAR aged ≥18 years, confirmed severe asthma in tertiary care). In the OPCRD, PSA was defined as Global INitiative for Asthma 2018 step 4 treatment and 2 or more exacerbations/y or at Global INitiative for Asthma step 5. The proportion of these patients and their referral status in the last year were quantified. Demographic and clinical characteristics of groups were compared.

RESULTS

Of 207,557 Optimum Patient Care Research Database patients with asthma, 16,409 (8%) had PSA. Of these, 72% had no referral/specialist review in the past year. Referred patients with PSA tended to have greater prevalence of inhaled corticosteroid/long-acting β₂-agonist add-ons (54.1 vs 39.8%), and experienced significantly (P < .001) more exacerbations per year (median, 3 vs 2/y), worse asthma control, and worse lung function (% predicted postbronchodilator FEV₁/forced vital capacity, 0.69 vs 0.72) versus nonreferred patients. Confirmed patients with severe asthma (ie, UK patients in the International Severe Asthma Registry) were younger (51 vs 65 years; P < .001), and significantly (P < .001) more likely to have uncontrolled asthma (91.4% vs 62.5%), a higher exacerbation rate (4/y [initial assessment] vs 3/y), use inhaled corticosteroid/long-acting β₂-agonist add-ons (67.7% vs 54.1%), and have nasal polyposis (24.2% vs 6.8) than referred patients with PSA.

CONCLUSIONS

Large numbers of patients with PSA in the United Kingdom are underrecognized in primary care. These patients would benefit from a more systematic assessment in primary care and possible specialist referral.

Improving primary care management of asthma: do we know what really works?

Asthma imposes a substantial burden on individuals and societies. Patients with asthma need high-quality primary care management; however, evidence suggests the quality of this care can be highly variable. Here we identify and report factors contributing to high-quality management. Twelve primary care global asthma experts, representing nine countries, identified key factors. A literature review (past 10 years) was performed to validate or refute the expert viewpoint. Key driving factors identified were: policy, clinical guidelines, rewards for performance, practice organisation and workforce. Further analysis established the relevant factor components. Review evidence supported the validity of each driver; however, impact on patient outcomes was uncertain. Single interventions (e.g. healthcare practitioner education) showed little effect; interventions driven by national policy (e.g. incentive schemes and teamworking) were more effective. The panel's opinion, supported by literature review, concluded that multiple primary care interventions offer greater benefit than any single intervention in asthma management.

Bringing asthma care into the twenty-first century

Despite access to diagnostic tests and effective therapies, asthma often remains misdiagnosed and/or poorly controlled or uncontrolled. In this review, we address the key issues of asthma diagnosis and management, recent evidence for levels of asthma control, the consequences of poor control and, in line with that, explore the potential reasons for poor asthma control and acute exacerbations. Based on recent evidence and current guidelines, we also aim to provide practical answers to the key questions of how to improve asthma management, with the best possible prevention of exacerbations, addressing the basics-adherence, inhaler misuse, obesity and smoking-and how to facilitate a new era of asthma care in the twenty-first century. We hope this review will be useful to busy primary care clinicians in their future interactions with their patients with both suspected and proven asthma.

A worldwide charter for all children with asthma

Childhood asthma is a huge global health burden. The spectrum of disease, diagnosis, and management vary depending on where children live in the world and how their community can care for them. Global improvement in diagnosis and management has been unsatisfactory, despite ever more evidence-based guidelines. Guidelines alone are insufficient and need supplementing by government support, changes in policy, access to diagnosis and effective therapy for all children, with research to improve implementation. We propose a worldwide charter for all children with asthma, a roadmap to better education and training which can be adapted for local use. It includes access to effective basic asthma medications. It is not about new expensive medications and biologics as much can be achieved without these. If implemented carefully, the overall cost of care is likely to fall and the global future health and life chance of children with asthma will greatly improve. The key to success will be community involvement together with the local and national development of asthma champions. We call on governments, institutions, and healthcare services to support its implementation.

Systematic Assessment of Difficult-to-Treat Asthma: Principles and Perspectives

Difficult-to-treat asthma affects a minority of adults and children with asthma but represents a challenging mix of misdiagnosis, multimorbidity, inadequate self-management, severe airway pathobiology, and treatment complications. Management of these patients extends beyond asthma pharmacotherapy, because multiple other patient-related domains need to be addressed as well. Such complexity can hinder adequate clinical assessment even when performed in specialist practice. Systematic assessment undertaken by specialized multidisciplinary teams brings a broad range of resources to bear on patients with difficult-to-treat asthma. Although the concept of systematic assessment is not new, practices vary considerably and implementation is not universal. Nevertheless, assessment protocols are already in place in several institutions worldwide, and outcomes after such assessments have been highly encouraging. This review discusses the rationale, components, and benefits of systematic assessment, outlining its clinical utility and the available evidence for improved outcomes. It describes a range of service configurations and assessment approaches, drawing examples from severe asthma centers around the world to highlight common essential elements. It also provides a framework for establishing such services and discusses practical considerations for implementation.

Observational cohort study to investigate the unmet need and time waiting for referral for specialist opinion in adult asthma in England (UNTWIST asthma)

OBJECTIVES

This study aimed to estimate how many patients with asthma in England met the referral eligibility criteria using national asthma guidelines, identify what proportion were referred and determine the average waiting time to referral.

DESIGN

This is an observational cohort study.

SETTING/DATA SOURCES

Routinely collected healthcare data were provided by Clinical Practice Research Datalink records and Hospital Episode Statistics records from January 2007 to December 2015.

PARTICIPANTS

Patients with asthma aged 18-80 years participated in this study.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

Eligibility for referral by the British Thoracic Society/Scottish Intercollegiate Guidelines Network (BTS/SIGN) 2016 guidelines, determined after a 3-month pharmacological therapy exposure assessment, was classed by either 'high-dose therapies', 'continuous or frequent use of oral steroids' or 'incident eligibility' during follow-up (continuous oral corticosteroids for more than 3 months, or ≥800 µg/day inhaled corticosteroids/long-acting β₂-agonist (or three controllers) and ≥2 asthma attacks/year).

RESULTS

From the final cohort (n=23293), 19837 patients were eligible for specialist referral during follow-up based on the BTS/SIGN guideline recommendations. Among eligible patients without any previously recorded referral, 4% were referred during follow-up, with a median waiting time of 880 days (IQR=1428 days) between eligibility and referral.

CONCLUSIONS

A large number of patients with asthma were eligible for specialist referral, of which a small proportion were referred, and many experienced a long waiting time before referral. The results indicate a major unmet need in asthma referral, which is a potential source of preventable harm and are likely to have implications regarding how services are organised to address this unmet need.

Approaches to the assessment of severe asthma: barriers and strategies

Asthma is a chronic condition with great variability. It is characterized by intermittent episodes of wheeze, cough, chest tightness, dyspnea and backed by variable airflow limitation, airway inflammation and airway hyper-responsiveness. Asthma severity varies uniquely between individuals and may change over time. Stratification of asthma severity is an integral part of asthma management linking appropriate treatment to establish asthma control. Precision assessment of severe asthma is crucial for monitoring the health of people with this disease. The literature suggests multiple factors that impede the assessment of severe asthma, these can be grouped into health care professional, patient and organizational related barriers. These barriers do not exist in isolation but interact and influence one another. Recognition of these barriers is necessary to promote precision in the assessment and management of severe asthma in the era of targeted therapy. In this review, we discuss the current knowledge of the barriers that impede assessment in severe asthma and recommend potential strategies for overcoming these barriers. We highlight the relevance of multidimensional assessment as an ideal approach to the assessment and management of severe asthma.

A Charter to Improve Patient Care in Severe Asthma

Severe asthma is a subtype of asthma that is difficult to treat and control. By conservative estimates, severe asthma affects approximately 5–10% of patients with asthma worldwide. Severe asthma impairs patients’ health-related quality of life, and patients are at risk of life-threatening asthma attacks. Severe asthma also accounts for the majority of health care expenditures associated with asthma. Guidelines recommend that patients with severe asthma be referred to a specialist respiratory team for correct diagnosis and expert management. This is particularly important to ensure that they have access to newly available biologic treatments. However, many patients with severe asthma can suffer multiple asthma attacks and wait several years before they are referred for specialist care. As global patient advocates, we believe it is essential to raise awareness and understanding for patients, caregivers, health care professionals, and the public about the substantial impact of severe asthma and to create opportunities for improving patient care. Patients should be empowered to live a life free of symptoms and the adverse effects of traditional medications (e.g., oral corticosteroids), reducing hospital visits and emergency care, the loss of school and work days, and the constraints placed on their daily lives. Here we provide a Patient Charter for severe asthma, consisting of six core principles, to mobilize national governments, health care providers, payer policymakers, lung health industry partners, and patients/caregivers to address the unmet need and burden in severe asthma and ultimately work together to deliver meaningful improvements in care.

Funding: AstraZeneca.

Insights into frequent asthma exacerbations from a primary care perspective and the implications of UK National Review of Asthma Deaths recommendations

The United Kingdom National Review of Asthma Deaths (NRAD) recommends that patients who require ≥3 courses of oral corticosteroids (OCS) for exacerbations in the past year or those on British Thoracic Society (BTS) Step 4/5 treatment must be referred to a specialist asthma service. The aim of the study was to identify the proportion of asthma patients in primary care that fulfil NRAD criteria for specialist referral and factors associated with frequent exacerbations. A total of 2639 adult asthma patients from 10 primary care practices in Glasgow, UK were retrospectively studied between 2014 and 2015. Frequent exacerbators and short-acting β2-agonist (SABA) over-users were identified if they received ≥2 confirmed OCS courses for asthma and ≥13 SABA inhalers in the past year, respectively. Community dispensing data were used to assess treatment adherence defined as taking ≥75% of prescribed inhaled corticosteroid (ICS) dose. The study population included 185 (7%) frequent exacerbators, 137 (5%) SABA over-users, and 319 (12%) patients on BTS Step 4/5 treatment. Among frequent exacerbators, 41% required BTS Step 4/5 treatment, 46% had suboptimal ICS adherence, 42% had not attended an asthma review in the past year and 42% had no previous input from a specialist asthma service. Older age, female gender, BTS Step 4/5, SABA over-use and co-existing COPD diagnosis increased the risk of frequent exacerbations independently. Fourteen per 100 asthma patients would fulfil the NRAD criteria for specialist referral. Better collaboration between primary and secondary care asthma services is needed to improve chronic asthma care.

Development and Validation of Personalized Prediction to Estimate Future Risk of Severe Exacerbations and Uncontrolled Asthma in Patients with Asthma, Using Clinical Parameters and Early Treatment Response

BACKGROUND

Current level of asthma control can be easily assessed by validated instruments, but it is currently difficult to assess individuals' level of future risk.

OBJECTIVE

Develop, and validate, a risk prediction score for level of future risk, including patient characteristics and information on early treatment response.

METHODS

We used data of 304 adult patients with asthma from a 12-month primary care randomized controlled trial with 3-monthly assessments. With logistic regression we modeled the association between the level of future risk and patient characteristics including early treatment response. Future risk was defined as Asthma Control Questionnaire (ACQ) score of 1.5 or more at 12 months or the experience of at least 1 exacerbation during the final 6 months. We developed a risk prediction score on the basis of regression coefficients.

RESULTS

Performance of the risk prediction score improved, taking into account data on early treatment response (area under receiver-operating curve [AUROC] = 0.84) compared with a model containing only baseline characteristics (AUROC = 0.78). The score includes 6 easy-to-obtain predictors: sex, ACQ score and exacerbations in the previous year at baseline and at first follow-up, and smoking status and exacerbations in the previous 3 months (indicating early treatment response). External validation yielded an AUROC of 0.77. The risk prediction score classified patients into 3 risk groups: low (absolute risk, 11.7%), intermediate (47.0%), and high (72.7%).

CONCLUSIONS

We developed and externally validated a risk prediction score, quantifying both level of current asthma control and the guideline-defined future risk. Patients' individual risk can now be estimated in an easy way, as proposed but not specified, by asthma management guidelines.

[Helping smoking cessation in COPD, asthma, lung cancer, operated smokers]

Smoking is the cause of addictive behavior. Tobacco addiction is a chronic disease that makes difficult to stop smoking and leads to further use. Smoking is a risk factor for COPD, asthma and lung cancer; it may be the cause of severe perioperative complications. This finding justifies that smokers benefit from advice of stopping smoking and smoking cessation assistance. Helping patients to stop smoking increases the chances of quitting, improves the prognosis of tobacco-related diseases, the effectiveness of their treatments and the quality of life of the patients. This article updates the modalities of smoking cessation assistance in smokers with COPD, asthma and lung cancer in operated patients. The goal of the management must be the complete cessation of tobacco smoke intoxication, which alone reduces tobacco mortality.

The Seven Stages of Man: The Role of Developmental Stage on Medication Adherence in Respiratory Diseases

The circumstances and drivers of the decision to initiate, implement, or persist with a medication differ for individuals at each developmental stage. For school-age children with asthma, the social environment of their family's cultural beliefs and the influence of peer networks and school policies are strong determinants of medication adherence. The stage of adolescence can be a particularly challenging time because there is a reduction in parental supervision of asthma management as the young person strives to become more autonomous. To illustrate the importance of such factors, adherence interventions in children and young adults with asthma have used peer-based supports and social supports, particularly social media platforms. In older patients, it is internal rather than external factors and age-related decline that pose challenges to medication adherence. Seniors face the challenges of polypharmacy, reduced social support, increased isolation, and loss of cognitive function. Strategies to promote adherence must be tailored to the developmental stage and respective behavioral determinants of the target group. This review considers the different attitudes toward medication and the different adherence behaviors in young and elderly patients with chronic respiratory conditions, specifically asthma and chronic obstructive pulmonary disease. Opportunities to intervene to optimize adherence are suggested.

Enhancing Respiratory Medication Adherence: The Role of Health Care Professionals and Cost-Effectiveness Considerations

Adherence to medication comprises a multiphased temporal process involving (1) initiation of prescribed therapy, (2) implementation as prescribed, and (3) subsequent persistence. Medication adherence remains suboptimal in most patients with long-term respiratory conditions such as asthma and chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD). Interventions have been shown to effectively improve treatment initiation, implementation, and persistence when delivered at the health care professional level or the system level, but demonstration of the cost-effectiveness of these interventions is necessary to ensure their widespread use. This review summarizes how health care professionals can intervene to improve medication adherence in patients with asthma and COPD, provides some examples of effective primary care interventions, and illustrates some of the challenges to optimal implementation arising from cost-effectiveness modeling. Improving adherence is shown to be an economically viable treatment option for patients with asthma and COPD, but there are differences in the health economics pertaining to each condition and setting that can affect whether an intervention is considered cost-effective. Targeting adherence interventions at patients with the greatest to gain, and tailoring them to individual patient needs, may help to optimize cost-effectiveness ratios and improve the probability of positive reimbursement decisions, systemwide implementation, and resultant health benefits.

Lack of asthma and rhinitis control in general practitioner-managed patients prescribed fixed-dose combination therapy in Australia

OBJECTIVES

The first aim of the study (i) assess the current asthma status of general-practitioner-managed patients receiving regular fixed-dose combination inhaled corticosteroid and long-acting beta₂ agonist (FDC ICS/LABA) therapy and (ii) explore patients' perceptions of asthma control and attitudes/behaviors regarding preventer inhaler use.

METHODS

A cross-sectional observational study of Australian adults with a current physician diagnosis of asthma receiving ≥2 prescriptions of FDC ICS/LABA therapy in the previous year, who were recruited through general practice to receive a structured in-depth asthma review between May 2012 and January 2014. Descriptive statistics and Chi-Square tests for independence were used for associations across asthma control levels.

RESULTS

Only 11.5% of the patients had controlled asthma based on guideline-defined criteria. Contrarily, 66.5% of the patients considered their asthma to be well controlled. Incidence of acute asthma exacerbations in the previous year was 26.5% and 45.6% of the patients were without a diagnosis of rhinitis. Asthma medication use and inhaler technique were sub-optimal; only 41.0% of the preventer users reported everyday use. The side effects of medication were common and more frequently reported among uncontrolled and partially controlled patients.

CONCLUSIONS

The study revealed the extent to which asthma management needs to be improved in this patient cohort and the numerous unmet needs regarding the current state of asthma care. Not only there is a need for continuous education of patients, but also education of health care practitioners to better understand the way in which patient's perceptions impact on asthma management practices, incorporating these findings into clinical decision making.

Adaptation of a difficult-to-manage asthma programme for implementation in the Dutch context: a modified e-Delphi

Patients with difficult-to-manage asthma represent a heterogeneous subgroup of asthma patients who require extensive assessment and tailored management. The International Primary Care Respiratory Group approach emphasises the importance of differentiating patients with asthma that is difficult to manage from those with severe disease. Local adaptation of this approach, however, is required to ensure an appropriate strategy for implementation in the Dutch context. We used a modified three-round e-Delphi approach to assess the opinion of all relevant stakeholders (general practitioners, pulmonologists, practice nurses, pulmonary nurses and people with asthma). In the first round, the participants were asked to provide potentially relevant items for a difficult-to-manage asthma programme, which resulted in 67 items. In the second round, we asked participants to rate the relevance of specific items on a seven-point Likert scale, and 46 items were selected as relevant. In the third round, the selected items were categorised and items were ranked within the categories according to relevance. Finally, we created the alphabet acronym for the categories ‘the A–I of difficult-to-manage asthma’ to resonate with an established Dutch ‘A–E acronym for determining asthma control’. This should facilitate implementation of this programme within the existing structure of educational material on asthma and chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) in primary care, with potential for improving management of difficult-to-manage asthma. Other countries could use a similar approach to create a locally adapted version of such a programme.

Personalising care of adults with asthma from Asia: a modified e-Dephi consensus study to inform management tailored to attitude and control profiles

REALISE Asia—an online questionnaire-based study of Asian asthma patients—identified five patient clusters defined in terms of their control status and attitude towards their asthma (categorised as: ‘Well-adjusted and at least partly controlled’; ‘In denial about symptoms’; ‘Tolerating with poor control’; ‘Adrift and poorly controlled’; ‘Worried with multiple symptoms’). We developed consensus recommendations for tailoring management of these attitudinal–control clusters. An expert panel undertook a three-round electronic Delphi (e-Delphi): Round 1: panellists received descriptions of the attitudinal–control clusters and provided free text recommendations for their assessment and management. Round 2: panellists prioritised Round 1 recommendations and met (or joined a teleconference) to consolidate the recommendations. Round 3: panellists voted and prioritised the remaining recommendations. Consensus was defined as Round 3 recommendations endorsed by >50% of panellists. Highest priority recommendations were those receiving the highest score. The multidisciplinary panellists (9 clinicians, 1 pharmacist and 1 health social scientist; 7 from Asia) identified consensus recommendations for all clusters. Recommended pharmacological (e.g., step-up/down; self-management; simplified regimen) and non-pharmacological approaches (e.g., trigger management, education, social support; inhaler technique) varied substantially according to each cluster’s attitude to asthma and associated psychosocial drivers of behaviour. The attitudinal–control clusters defined by REALISE Asia resonated with the international panel. Consensus was reached on appropriate tailored management approaches for all clusters. Summarised and incorporated into a structured management pathway, these recommendations could facilitate personalised care. Generalisability of these patient clusters should be assessed in other socio-economic, cultural and literacy groups and nationalities in Asia.

Inappropriate asthma therapy-a tale of two countries: a parallel population-based cohort study

Against recurrent controversies around the safety of short- and long-acting β₂-agonists (SABA and LABA), and the National Review of Asthma Deaths inquiry in the United Kingdom, we investigated the prevalence of inappropriate therapy in asthma. Our study aimed to determine the prevalence of inappropriate use of asthma therapy in the United Kingdom and in France. Two interval, parallel, population-based cohorts (2007 and 2013) were developed in each country by using the UK OPCRD and the French EGB databases. Patients aged 6-40 years were studied over the 12-month period following inclusion, regarding overuse (⩾12 units) of SABA, use of LABA without inhaled corticosteroids (ICS) and ⩾2-fold higher use of LABA compared with that of ICS. Overall, 39,743 UK and 4,910 French patients were included in 2007, and 14,036 and 5,657 patients, respectively, were included in 2013. UK adults were more frequently exposed to SABA overuse compared with those in France in both periods, with an upward trend in the United Kingdom (P<0.05). In 2013, LABA use without ICS occurred in 0.1% and 1.5% of United Kingdom and French adults, respectively. Unbalanced use of LABA relative to ICS became marginal in both countries in 2013. Inappropriate use of therapy was less marked, but present, in children. Inappropriate therapy remains a common issue in asthma. Based on our figures, it may be estimated that >210,000 British and >190,000 French asthmatics aged 6-40 years were inappropriately treated in 2013.

A multidisciplinary team case management approach reduces the burden of frequent asthma admissions

Up to 10% of asthmatics have “difficult asthma”; however, they account for 80% of asthma-related expenditure and run the highest risk of acute severe exacerbations. An estimated 75% of admissions for asthma are avoidable. Guidelines advise that these patients be managed by an experienced specialist multidisciplinary team (MDT). We aimed to assess the impact of a case management strategy delivered via specialist MDTs on acute healthcare utilisation of patients with frequent asthma admissions.

An MDT (consultant, specialist nurse, physiotherapist and psychologist) case management strategy was introduced in 2010 at University Hospital Southampton Foundation Trust (Southampton, UK) to support patients with frequent asthma admissions during admission and then in clinic. To assess efficacy, we systematically searched the hospital database for patients acutely admitted for asthma on two or more occasions in 2010, 2011 and 2012. Data were collected retrospectively covering patient demographics, admission details, asthma severity and comorbidity.

From 2010 to 2012, 84 patients were admitted on two or more occasions per year (80% female, mean body mass index 31 kg·m⁻² and 55% psychological comorbidity). After introducing an MDT approach repeat asthma admissions fell by 33% from 127 in 2010 to 84 in 2012 (p=0.0004). In addition, bed days fell by 52% from 895 in 2010 to 430 in 2010 (p=0.015).

An MDT case management approach significantly reduces hospitalisation in difficult asthma patients with prior frequent admission.

MDT case management approach significantly reduces hospitalisation in asthma patients with prior frequent admissionhttp://ow.ly/7iOI3016277

Budesonide inhaler device switch patterns in an asthma population in Swedish clinical practice (ASSURE)

BACKGROUND

Dry powder inhaler (DPI) device switch in asthma treatment could potentially increase with the entrance of new devices. We examined the switch patterns of budesonide (BUD) DPI analogues available in Sweden.

METHODS

This observational real-life study linked primary healthcare medical records data from the Västra Götaland region to national Swedish registries, and included asthma patients (ICD-10-CM J45) prescribed BUD in a multidose DPI. Index date: first dispense of BUD DPI. Switch date: prescription of another BUD DPI device. Study outcomes (switch vs. non-switch) were exacerbations and prescription of short-acting β2 -agonists. Study period was 1 July 2005 to 31 October 2013.

RESULTS

Overall, 15,169 asthma patients were on treatment with BUD DPI; 1178 (7.35%) switched to another BUD DPI during the study. Pair-wise 1:1 matching of switchers vs. non-switchers resulted in two groups of 463 patients each (mean age 36 years, 55% female patients). A 25% higher exacerbation rate was seen postswitch (0.40 vs. 0.32; p = 0.047). Switchers were 4.5 year younger and had lower medication possession rate than non-switchers. Switch without primary healthcare visit did not differ between groups regarding consultations and exacerbations (no visit 4.96 and 0.90; visit 4.29 and 0.77, respectively). However, patients without primary healthcare visit at switch had significantly more outpatient hospital visits (2.01 vs. 0.81; p < 0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

Considering the low switch rate, asthma patients and physicians in Swedish general practice seem reluctant to switch to another BUD DPI device. Switch, especially without primary healthcare visit, was associated with decreased asthma control resulting in higher exacerbation rate and more outpatient hospital visits.

A repeated short educational intervention improves asthma control and quality of life

We assessed the effectiveness of an asthma educational programme based on a repeated short intervention (AEP-RSI) to improve asthma control (symptom control and future risk) and quality of life. A total of 230 adults with mild-to-moderate persistent uncontrolled asthma participated in a 1-year cluster randomised controlled multicentre study. The AEP-RSI was given in four face-to-face sessions at 3-month intervals, and included administration of a written personalised action plan and training on inhaler technique. Centres were randomised to the AEP-RSI (intervention) group or usual clinical practice group. Specialised centres using a standard educational programme were the gold standard group. A significant improvement in the Asthma Control Test score was observed in all three groups (p<0.001), but improvements were higher in the intervention and gold standard groups than in the usual clinical practice group (p=0.042), which also showed fewer exacerbations (mean±sd; 1.20±2.02 and 0.56±1.5 versus 2.04±2.72, respectively) and greater increases in the Mini Asthma Quality of Life Questionnaire scores (0.95±1.04 and 0.89±0.84 versus 0.52±0.97, respectively). The AEP-RSI was effective in improving asthma symptom control, future risk and quality of life.

Salmeterol/fluticasone through breath-actuated inhaler versus pMDI: a randomized, double-blind, 12 weeks study

OBJECTIVE

Salmeterol/fluticasone combination (SFC) formulated in a breath-actuated inhaler (BAI) overcomes the co-ordination problem associated with the pressurized-metered dose inhaler (pMDIs). Our aim was to compare the efficacy and the safety of SFC given through the BAI versus the conventional pMDI in moderate-to-severe asthmatics.

METHODS

In this randomized, double-blind, double-dummy, prospective, active-controlled, parallel group, multicenter, 12 weeks study, 150 asthmatics were randomized to receive SFC (25/125 mcg) through either BAI or pMDI. The primary efficacy endpoint was mean change in pre-dose morning PEFR value at 12 weeks and the secondary efficacy endpoints included, mean change in FEV(1), pre-bronchodilator FVC, pre-dose morning and evening PEFR, symptom scores at 2, 4, 8, and 12 weeks. Patient preferences for device and safety were also assessed.

RESULTS

At 12 weeks, the mean change in pre-dose morning PEFR in BAI and pMDI groups was 50.72 L/min and 48.82 L/min, respectively (p < 0.0001; both groups) and the difference between the two groups was not significant. Both the treatment groups showed a statistically significant improvement in secondary endpoints at all-time points compared with baseline. The usability questionnaire assessment results showed that the BAI device was preferred by 75% of patients as compared with 25% preferring pMDI. SFC in both BAI and pMDI devices was found to be safe and well tolerated.

CONCLUSION

This is the first study to demonstrate that SFC given through the BAI produces comparable efficacy and safety endpoints as pMDI. Additionally, BAI was the preferred inhaler by patients compared to conventional pMDI.

Towards tailored and targeted adherence assessment to optimise asthma management

In this paper, we aim to emphasise the need for a more comprehensive and tailored approach to manage the broad nature of non-adherence, to personalise current asthma management. Although currently several methods are available to measure the extent of asthma patients' adherence, the vast majority do not incorporate confirmation of the actual inhalation, dose and inhalation technique. Moreover, most current measures lack detailed information on the individual consequences of non-adherence and on when and how to take action if non-adherence is identified. Notably, one has to realise there are several forms of non-adherence (erratic non-adherence, intelligent non-adherence and unwitting non-adherence), each requiring a different approach. To improve asthma management, more accurate methods are needed that integrate measures of non-adherence, asthma disease control and patient preferences. Integrating information from the latest inhaler devices and patient-reported outcomes using mobile monitoring- and feedback systems ('mHealth') is considered a promising strategy, but requires careful implementation. Key issues to be considered before large-scale implementation include patient preferences, large heterogeneity in patient and disease characteristics, economic consequences, and long-term persistence with new digital technologies.

Practical guidance on the recognition of uncontrolled asthma and its management

PURPOSE

To highlight the significance of asthma in primary care and offer a practitioner-friendly interpretation of the asthma guidelines for the busy provider, while introducing new treatment options currently in clinical trials, such as the once-daily long-acting anticholinergic bronchodilator tiotropium Respimat.

DATA SOURCES

Articles with relevant adult data published between 2004 and 2015 were identified via PubMed. Additional references were obtained by reviewing bibliographies from selected articles.

CONCLUSIONS

In the United States, uncontrolled or symptomatic asthma is common, with rates of 46%-78% in primary care. Uncontrolled asthma has a substantial impact on patients' quality of life and represents a significant healthcare burden. Nurse practitioners can improve patients' asthma control through education, monitoring, assessment, and treatment. Although asthma management guidelines are readily available, the authors recognize that nurse practitioners see patients with multiple comorbidities, all of which have treatment guidelines of their own.

IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE

Nurse practitioners have a compelling opportunity as frontline caregivers and patient educators to recognize and assess uncontrolled asthma, along with determining the steps necessary to help patients gain and maintain symptom control.