Environmental management of asthma in clinical practice: Results from the 2012 National Ambulatory Medical Care Survey.

Background: The National Asthma Education and Prevention Program guidelines emphasize environmental control as an integral part of asthma management; however, limited national-level data exist on how clinicians implement environmental control recommendations. Objective: We analyzed data on clinicians' self-reported use of recommended environmental control practices in a nationally representative sample (n = 1645) of primary care physicians, asthma specialists, and advanced practice providers from the National Asthma Survey of Physicians, a supplemental questionnaire to the 2012 National Ambulatory Medical Care Survey. Methods: We examined clinician and practice characteristics as well as clinicians' decisions and strategies regarding environmental trigger assessment and environmental control across provider groups. Regression modeling was used to identify clinician and practice characteristics associated with implementation of guideline recommendations. Results: A higher percentage of specialists assessed asthma triggers at home, school, and/or work than primary care or advanced practice providers (almost always: 53.6% vs 29.4% and 23.7%, respectively, P < .001). Almost all clinicians (>93%) recommended avoidance of secondhand tobacco smoke, whereas recommendations regarding cooking appliances (eg, proper ventilation) were infrequent. Although assessment and recommendation practices differed between clinician groups, modeling results showed that clinicians who reported almost always assessing asthma control were 5- to 6-fold more likely to assess environmental asthma triggers. Use of asthma action plans was also strongly associated with implementation of environmental control recommendations. Conclusions: Environmental assessment and recommendations to patients varied among asthma care providers. High adherence to other key guideline components, such as assessing asthma control, was associated with environmental assessment and recommendation practices on environmental control.

Use of National Asthma Guidelines by Allergists and Pulmonologists: A National Survey.

BACKGROUND: Little is known about specialist-specific variations in guideline agreement and adoption. OBJECTIVE: To assess similarities and differences between allergists and pulmonologists in adherence to cornerstone components of the National Asthma Education and Prevention Program's Third Expert Panel Report. METHODS: Self-reported guideline agreement, self-efficacy, and adherence were assessed in allergists (n = 134) and pulmonologists (n = 99) in the 2012 National Asthma Survey of Physicians. Multivariate models were used to assess if physician and practice characteristics explained bivariate associations between specialty and "almost always" adhering to recommendations (ie, ≥75% of the time). RESULTS: Allergists and pulmonologists reported high guideline self-efficacy and moderate guideline agreement. Both groups "almost always" assessed asthma control (66.2%, standard error [SE] 4.3), assessed school/work asthma triggers (71.3%, SE, 3.9), and endorsed inhaled corticosteroids use (95.5%, SE 2.0). Repeated assessment of the inhaler technique, use of asthma action/treatment plans, and spirometry were lower (39.7%, SE 4.0; 30.6%, SE 3.6; 44.7%, SE 4.1, respectively). Compared with pulmonologists, more allergists almost always performed spirometry (56.6% vs 38.6%, P = .06), asked about nighttime awakening (91.9% vs 76.5%, P = .03) and emergency department visits (92.2% vs 76.5%, P = .03), assessed home triggers (70.5% vs 52.6%, P = .06), and performed allergy testing (61.8% vs 21.3%, P < .001). In multivariate analyses, practice-specific characteristics explained differences except for allergy testing. CONCLUSIONS: Overall, allergists and pulmonologists adhere to the asthma guidelines with notable exceptions, including asthma action plan use and inhaler technique assessment. Recommendations with low implementation offer opportunities for further exploration and could serve as targets for increasing guideline uptake.

Primary care clinician adherence with asthma guidelines: the National Asthma Survey of Physicians.

Background and objectives: Although primary care clinicians provide >60% of U.S. asthma care, no nationally representative study has examined variation in adherence among primary care groups to four cornerstone domains of the Expert Panel Report-3 asthma guidelines: assessment/monitoring, patient education, environmental assessment, and medications. We used the 2012 National Asthma Survey of Physicians: National Ambulatory Medical Care Survey to compare adherence by family/general medicine practitioners (FM/GM), internists, pediatricians and Community Health Center mid-level clinicians (CHC). Methods: Adherence was self-reported (n = 1355 clinicians). Adjusted odds of almost always adhering to each recommendation (≥75% of the time) were estimated controlling for clinician/practice characteristics, and agreement and self-efficacy with guideline recommendations. Results: A higher percentage of pediatricians adhered to most assessment/monitoring recommendations compared to FM/GM and other groups (e.g. 71.6% [SE 4.0] almost always assessed daytime symptoms versus 50.6% [SE 5.1]-51.1% [SE 5.8], t-test p < 0.05) but low percentages from all groups almost always performed spirometry (6.8% [SE 2.0]-16.8% [SE 4.7]). Pediatricians were more likely to provide asthma action/treatment plans than FM/GM and internists. Internists were more likely to assess school/work triggers than pediatricians and CHC (environmental assessment). All groups prescribed inhaled corticosteroids for daily control (84.0% [SE 3.7]-90.7% [SE 2.5]) (medications). In adjusted analyses, pediatric specialty, high self-efficacy and frequent specialist referral were associated with high adherence. Conclusions: Pediatricians were more likely to report high adherence than other clinicians. Self- efficacy and frequent referral were also associated with adherence. Adherence was higher for history-taking recommendations and lower for recommendations involving patient education, equipment and expertise.

Clinician Agreement, Self-Efficacy, and Adherence with the Guidelines for the Diagnosis and Management of Asthma.

BACKGROUND: The 2007 Guidelines for the Diagnosis and Management of Asthma provide evidence-based recommendations to improve asthma care. Limited national-level data are available about clinician agreement and adherence to these guidelines. OBJECTIVE: To assess clinician-reported adherence with specific guideline recommendations, as well as agreement with and self-efficacy to implement guidelines. METHODS: We analyzed 2012 National Asthma Survey of Physicians data for 1412 primary care clinicians and 233 asthma specialists about 4 cornerstone guideline domains: asthma control, patient education, environmental control, and pharmacologic treatment. Agreement and self-efficacy were measured using Likert scales; 2 overall indices of agreement and self-efficacy were compiled. Adherence was compared between primary care clinicians and asthma specialists. Logistic regression models assessed the association of agreement and self-efficacy indices with adherence. RESULTS: Asthma specialists expressed stronger agreement, higher self-efficacy, and greater adherence with guideline recommendations than did primary care clinicians. Adherence was low among both groups for specific core recommendations, including written asthma action plan (30.6% and 16.4%, respectively; P < .001); home peak flow monitoring, (12.8% and 11.2%; P = .34); spirometry testing (44.7% and 10.8%; P < .001); and repeated assessment of inhaler technique (39.7% and 16.8%; P < .001). Among primary care clinicians, greater self-efficacy was associated with greater adherence. For specialists, self-efficacy was associated only with increased odds of spirometry testing. Guideline agreement was generally not associated with adherence. CONCLUSIONS: Agreement with and adherence to asthma guidelines was higher for specialists than for primary care clinicians, but was low in both groups for several key recommendations. Self-efficacy was a good predictor of guideline adherence among primary care clinicians but not among specialists.