Asthma insights from Jordan: cross-sectional observational study.

OBJECTIVE: The burden of uncontrolled asthma on patients in Jordan is largely unknown. This study assessed different aspects of asthma clinical features: the level of asthma control, its correlation with quality of life, and possible predictors of asthma control. METHODS: Face-to-face interviews with asthmatic patients (≥16 years old) in north Jordan from 2013 to 2014 were conducted. Outcomes measures were assessed using the asthma control test (ACT), the mini asthma quality of life questionnaire (mini-AQLQ), and the Generic health-related quality of life (EQ-5D). The relationship between asthma control and quality of life was examined using Spearman's correlation coefficient. Predictors of asthma control were determined using multivariable logistic regression adjusted for confounders. RESULTS: A total of 255 patients were recruited (mean age 45.16 years, 74.5% female). Approximately one-third of subjects (30.6%; n = 78) had controlled asthma (ACT ≥ 20). A strong correlation between asthma control and both mini-AQLQ and EQ-5D scores was identified (p < 0.001). Subjects who required to step-up treatment (OR = 0.12, 95% CI: 0.02-0.63, p = 0.01) and with acute asthma exacerbation (OR = 0.32, 95% CI: 0.18-0.58, p < 0.001) were independently associated with poor asthma control. CONCLUSIONS: Most of the recruited patients have not achieved optimal asthma control and was associated with low quality of life. The study highlights that even in low-income countries, a simple assessment tool such as the ACT can be utilized to screen and categorize asthma control. This approach would facilitate a better treatment plan and eventually improve asthma control and quality of life in asthma patients.

A study of a multi-level intervention to improve non-adherence in difficult to control asthma.

BACKGROUND: Difficult to control asthma accounts for significant morbidity and healthcare cost, and non-adherence to medication is a common cause. It remains unclear if targeting non-adherence in this population improves healthcare outcomes. METHODS: All subjects were referred to a Specialist Difficult Asthma Service (60% from Respiratory physicians); poor adherence was identified using prescription refill records for inhaled combination therapy. A sequential 2 phase study examined the effect of identifying and targeting non-adherence to inhaled long-acting ß-agonist/inhaled steroid combination therapy; phase 1 - an observational study utilising objective measures of non-adherence to facilitate a medical concordance discussion followed by phase 2, a 12 month prospective single blind randomised controlled trial where subjects with persistent poor adherence were randomised to a nurse-led menu driven intervention. RESULTS: A total of 239 patients were assessed; 31 of 83 subjects (37%) who were initially non-adherent, significantly improved adherence after concordance interview, with reduced prescribed daily dose of ICS (data p<0.001), rescue prednisolone courses (data, p<0.001) and hospital admissions (data, p=0.006). With the menu driven intervention, adherence also improved (intervention 37.6% to 61.9%, control group 31.7% to 28.8%) with reduced maintenance oral steroid dose in subjects on maintenance steroids. CONCLUSION: Poor adherence in difficult-to control asthma is common, but when identified and targeted can be improved and this is associated with large improvements in important healthcare outcomes. Previous nihilism towards non-adherence in this population is not supported by this study.

The prevalence of nonadherence in difficult asthma.

RATIONALE: With the advent of new and expensive therapies for severe refractory asthma, targeting the appropriate patients is important. An important issue is identifying nonadherence with current therapies. The extent of nonadherence in a population with difficult asthma has not been previously reported. OBJECTIVES: To examine the prevalence of nonadherence to corticosteroid medication in a population with difficult asthma referred to a Specialist Clinic and to examine the relationship of poor adherence to asthma outcome. METHODS: General practitioner prescription refill records for the previous 6 months for inhaled combination therapy and short-acting beta-agonists were compared with initial prescriptions and expressed as a percentage. Blood plasma prednisolone and cortisol assay levels were used to examine the utility of these measures in assessing adherence to oral prednisolone. Patient demographics, hospital admissions, lung function, oral prednisolone courses, and quality of life data were analyzed to indentify the variables associated with reduced medication adherence. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: A total of 182 patients were assessed. Sixty-three patients (35%) filled 50% or fewer inhaled medication prescriptions; 88% admitted poor adherence with inhaled therapy after initial denial. Twenty-one percent of patients filled more than 100% of presciptions, and 45% of subjects filled between 51 and 100% of prescriptions. Twenty-three of 51 patients (45%) prescribed oral steroids were found to be nonadherent. CONCLUSIONS: A significant proportion of patients with difficult-to-control asthma remained nonadherent to corticosteroid therapy. Objective surrogate and direct measures of adherence should be performed as part of a difficult asthma assessment and are important before prescibing expensive novel biological therapies.

Difficult asthma: people's perspectives on taking corticosteroid therapy.

AIMS AND OBJECTIVES: This study aimed to explore the experiences of patients with difficult asthma, who take corticosteroid therapy, and provide insight into why some patients comply with therapy, whilst others do not. BACKGROUND: Asthma is growing in prevalence and affects more than 100 million people worldwide. Corticosteroids are the mainstay treatment but, despite considerable risk to the individual in terms of morbidity and mortality, compliance is low. Previous research has been mainly quantitative and analysed variables associated with compliance, doing little to increase professional understanding of the patient's perspective on taking corticosteroid treatment. METHODS: A hermeneutic phenomenological approach was selected as most appropriate for this study. Unstructured interviews were undertaken with a purposive sample of 10 participants. Interviews were taped, transcribed and the data were analysed using a multi-step technique described by Holloway. FINDINGS: Fear of side effects was the strongest theme to emerge; illustrated by the negative images participants described such as weight gain, anxiety, irritability and depression. Participants related control and power over their condition to knowledge and information. They wanted more information, but believed that health professionals assumed they were already well informed. Costs and benefits of treatment were weighed up before decisions were made. Participants described feelings of 'not being themselves' and personality changes resulting in the loss of their role within relationships. Routine, time and opinions of significant others, also impacted on taking steroids. CONCLUSION: Decision-making was a complex process, involving evaluation of the personal costs and benefits of treatment; fear of side effects was the dominant concern. Compliance with treatment saves lives in this population. RELEVANCE TO CLINICAL PRACTICE: This study uncovers issues participants consider when making decisions regarding adherence and highlights the importance of the nurse's role in eliciting patients' concerns and the providing appropriate information to allay fears and misconceptions.