Clinician views on how clinical decision support systems can help diagnose asthma in primary care: a qualitative study.

OBJECTIVE: Asthma can be difficult to diagnose in primary care. Clinical decision support systems (CDSS) can assist clinicians when making diagnostic decisions, but the perspectives of intended users need to be incorporated into the software if the CDSS is to be clinically useful. Therefore, we aimed to understand health professional views on the value of an asthma diagnosis CDSS and the barriers and facilitators for use in UK primary care. METHODS: We recruited doctors and nurses working in UK primary care who had experience of assessing respiratory symptoms and diagnosing asthma. Qualitative interviews were used to explore clinicians' experiences of making a diagnosis of asthma and understand views on a CDSS to support asthma diagnosis. Interviews were audio-recorded, transcribed verbatim and analyzed thematically. RESULTS: 16 clinicians (nine doctors, seven nurses) including 13 participants with over 10 years experience, contributed interviews. Participants saw the potential for a CDSS to support asthma diagnosis in primary care by structuring consultations, identifying relevant information from health records, and having visuals to communicate findings to patients. Being evidence based, regularly updated, integrated with software, quick and easy to use were considered important for a CDSS to be successfully implemented. Experienced clinicians were unsure a CDSS would help their routine practice, particularly in straightforward diagnostic scenarios, but thought a CDSS would be useful for trainees or less experienced colleagues. CONCLUSIONS: To be adopted into clinical practice, clinicians were clear that a CDSS must be validated, integrated with existing software, and quick and easy to use.

Patient views on asthma diagnosis and how a clinical decision support system could help: A qualitative study.

INTRODUCTION: Making a diagnosis of asthma can be challenging for clinicians and patients. A clinical decision support system (CDSS) for use in primary care including a patient-facing mode, could change how information is shared between patients and healthcare professionals and improve the diagnostic process. METHODS: Participants diagnosed with asthma within the last 5 years were recruited from general practices across four UK regions. In-depth interviews were used to explore patient experiences relating to their asthma diagnosis and to understand how a CDSS could be used to improve the diagnostic process for patients. Interviews were audio recorded, transcribed verbatim and analysed using a thematic approach. RESULTS: Seventeen participants (12 female) undertook interviews, including 14 individuals and 3 parents of children with asthma. Being diagnosed with asthma was generally considered an uncertain process. Participants felt a lack of consultation time and poor communication affected their understanding of asthma and what to expect. Had the nature of asthma and the steps required to make a diagnosis been explained more clearly, patients felt their understanding and engagement in asthma self-management could have been improved. Participants considered that a CDSS could provide resources to support the diagnostic process, prompt dialogue, aid understanding and support shared decision-making. CONCLUSION: Undergoing an asthma diagnosis was uncertain for patients if their ideas and concerns were not addressed by clinicians and were influenced by a lack of consultation time and limitations in communication. An asthma diagnosis CDSS could provide structure and an interface to prompt dialogue, provide visuals about asthma to aid understanding and encourage patient involvement. PATIENT AND PUBLIC CONTRIBUTION: Prespecified semistructured interview topic guides (young person and adult versions) were developed by the research team and piloted with members of the Asthma UK Centre for Applied Research Patient and Public Involvement (PPI) group. Findings were regularly discussed within the research group and with PPI colleagues to aid the interpretation of data.

COPD exacerbation frequency, pharmacotherapy and resource use: an observational study in UK primary care.

Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease (COPD) management represents a significant health resource use burden. Understanding of current resource use, treatment strategies and outcomes can improve future COPD management, for patient benefit and to aid efficient service delivery. This study aimed to describe exacerbation frequency, pharmacotherapy and health resource use in COPD management in routine UK primary care. A retrospective, observational study using routine clinical records of 511 patients with COPD, was undertaken in 10 General Practices in England. Up to 3 years' patient data were collected and analysed. 75% (234/314) patients with mild-moderate COPD (≥50% predicted FEV1) received inhaled corticosteroids (ICS). 11% of patients (54/511) received ICS monotherapy. Mean (standard deviation) annual exacerbation frequency was 1.1 (1.2) in mild-moderate, 1.7 (1.6) in severe (30-49% predicted FEV1) and 2.2 (2.0) in very severe (<30% predicted FEV1) COPD. 14% patients (69/511) had a mean exacerbation frequency of ≥3/year ('frequent-exacerbators'); 9% (27/314) of patients with mild-moderate, 19% (27/145) with severe and 29% (15/52) with very severe COPD. 14% (10/69) of frequent-exacerbators failed to receive inhaled long-acting beta agonists (LABA), 25% (17/69) inhaled long-acting muscarinic antagonists (LAMA), and 12% (`/69) ICS. Frequent-exacerbators had a median of 6.67 primary care contacts/year, 1.0 secondary care visits/year and 21% were hospitalised for COPD/year. Inhaled therapy was frequently inappropriate, with over-use of ICS in patients with mild-moderate COPD. COPD exacerbations were associated with high health resource use and occurred at all levels of disease severity. COPD management strategies should encompass risk-stratification for both exacerbation frequency and physiological impairment.

Measuring airway inflammation using the fraction of exhaled nitric oxide.

Although asthma is a common respiratory condition, there is no standardised definition of the type, severity or frequency of symptoms, nor of the findings on investigation. Therefore, it is not possible to make evidence-based recommendations on how to diagnose patients with asthma. This article describes the use of the fraction of exhaled nitric oxide (FeNO) as a biomarker of airway inflammation, thereby assisting diagnosis of asthma in clinical practice. FeNO can also be used to monitor adherence to inhaled corticosteroid therapy.

Use of exhaled nitric oxide in asthma care.

Nitric oxide in exhaled breath is a biomarker of continuing inflammatory process in the airways, and its measurement can be used to predict responsiveness to steroid treatment in patients with asthma. This article describes the range of uses of exhaled nitric oxide measurements in respiratory care, particularly in primary care settings, and reviews evidence on this non-invasive test.

Reducing carbon footprint of inhalers: analysis of climate and clinical implications of different scenarios in five European countries.

BACKGROUND: Inhaled therapies are key components of asthma and chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) treatments. Although the use of pressurised metered-dose inhalers (pMDIs) accounts for <0.1% of global greenhouse gas emissions, their contribution to global warming has been debated and efforts are underway to reduce the carbon footprint of pMDIs. Our aim was to establish the extent to which different scenarios led to reductions in greenhouse gas emissions associated with inhaler use, and their clinical implications. METHODS: We conducted a series of scenario analyses using asthma and COPD inhaler usage data from 2019 to model carbon dioxide equivalent (CO2e) emissions reductions over a 10-year period (2020-2030) in the UK, Italy, France, Germany and Spain: switching propellant-driven pMDIs for propellant-free dry-powder inhalers (DPIs)/soft mist inhalers (SMIs); transitioning to low global warming potential (GWP) propellant (hydrofluoroalkane (HFA)-152a) pMDIs; reducing short-acting ß2-agonist (SABA) use; and inhaler recycling. RESULTS: Transition to low-GWP pMDIs and forced switching to DPI/SMIs (excluding SABA inhalers) would reduce annual CO2e emissions by 68%-84% and 64%-71%, respectively, but with different clinical implications. Emission reductions would be greatest (82%-89%) with transition of both maintenance and SABA inhalers to low-GWP propellant. Only minimising SABA inhaler use would reduce CO2e emissions by 17%-48%. Although significant greenhouse gas emission reductions would be achieved with high rates of end-of-life recycling (81%-87% of the inhalers), transition to a low-GWP propellant would still result in greater reductions. CONCLUSIONS: While the absolute contribution of pMDIs to global warming is very small, substantial reductions in the carbon footprint of pMDIs can be achieved with transition to low-GWP propellant (HFA-152a) inhalers. This approach outperforms the substitution of pMDIs with DPI/SMIs while preserving patient access and choice, which are essential for optimising treatment and outcomes. These findings require confirmation in independent studies.

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.

Assessing asthma control in routine clinical practice: use of the Royal College of Physicians '3 questions'.

AIMS: To evaluate the Royal College of Physicians (RCP) '3 questions' in the assessment of asthma control. METHODS: This was a prospective observational study. Subjects (20 adults and 15 children) were assessed 2-weekly over 12 weeks, with data collection on RCP scores (yes/no for each question, 0-3), lung function, asthma control questionnaire (ACQ), asthma quality of life questionnaires (AQLQ), bronchodilator use, and exhaled nitric oxide level. RESULTS: Between-subject analysis showed that the RCP score correlated strongly with the ACQ (correlation coefficient 0.79, p<0.001), AQLQ (-0.71, p=0.001) and bronchodilator use (0.52, p=0.02) in adults, although in children the correlations were weaker and nonsignificant. Within-subject analysis showed strong correlations between changes in the RCP score and ACQ score in adults (0.67, p<0.001) and children (0.61, p<0.001), between quality of life scores in adults (-0.67, p<0.001) and children (-0.69, p<0.001), and changes in bronchodilator use in adults (0.49, p<0.001) and children (0.48, p<0.001). Weaker or absent correlations existed with lung function and no correlations with exhaled nitric oxide levels. An RCP score of 1 or more identified 89% of occasions when the ACQ was >1. CONCLUSIONS: The RCP 3 questions reliably quantify current asthma control in this dataset, with a negative response to all 3 questions indicating good control. These data support the use of the 3 questions, but larger validation studies are needed.

Evaluation of the current landscape of respiratory nurse specialists in the UK: planning for the future needs of patients.

INTRODUCTION: The National Health Service currently faces significant challenges and must optimise effective workforce planning and management. There are increasing concerns regarding poor workforce planning for respiratory medicine; a greater understanding of the role of respiratory nurse specialists will inform better workforce planning and management. METHODS: This was a survey study. Two surveys were administered: an organisational-level survey and an individual respiratory nurse survey. RESULTS: There were 148 and 457 respondents to the organisational and individual nurse survey, respectively. Four main themes are presented: (1) breadth of service provided; (2) patient care; (3) work environment; and (4) succession planning. The majority of work conducted by respiratory nurse specialists relates to patient care outside the secondary care setting including supporting self-management in the home, supporting patients on home oxygen, providing hospital-at-home services and facilitating early discharge from acute care environments. Yet, most respiratory nursing teams are employed by secondary care trusts and located within acute environments. There was evidence of multidisciplinary working, although integrated care was not prominent in the free-text responses. High workload was reported with one-quarter of nursing teams short-staffed. Respiratory nurses reported working unpaid extra hours and a lack of administrative support that often took them away from providing direct patient care. Nearly half of the present sample either plan to retire or are eligible for retirement within 10 years. CONCLUSIONS: This survey report provides a current snapshot of the respiratory nurse specialist workforce in the UK. This workforce is an ageing population; the results from this survey can be used to inform succession planning and to ensure a viable respiratory nurse specialist workforce in future.

A randomised open-label cross-over study of inhaler errors, preference and time to achieve correct inhaler use in patients with COPD or asthma: comparison of ELLIPTA with other inhaler devices.

Errors in the use of different inhalers were investigated in patients naive to the devices under investigation in a multicentre, single-visit, randomised, open-label, cross-over study. Patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) or asthma were assigned to ELLIPTA vs DISKUS (Accuhaler), metered-dose inhaler (MDI) or Turbuhaler. Patients with COPD were also assigned to ELLIPTA vs Handihaler or Breezhaler. Patients demonstrated inhaler use after reading the patient information leaflet (PIL). A trained investigator assessed critical errors (i.e., those likely to result in the inhalation of significantly reduced, minimal or no medication). If the patient made errors, the investigator demonstrated the correct use of the inhaler, and the patient demonstrated inhaler use again. Fewer COPD patients made critical errors with ELLIPTA after reading the PIL vs: DISKUS, 9/171 (5%) vs 75/171 (44%); MDI, 10/80 (13%) vs 48/80 (60%); Turbuhaler, 8/100 (8%) vs 44/100 (44%); Handihaler, 17/118 (14%) vs 57/118 (48%); Breezhaler, 13/98 (13%) vs 45/98 (46%; all P<0.001). Most patients (57-70%) made no errors using ELLIPTA and did not require investigator instruction. Instruction was required for DISKUS (65%), MDI (85%), Turbuhaler (71%), Handihaler (62%) and Breezhaler (56%). Fewer asthma patients made critical errors with ELLIPTA after reading the PIL vs: DISKUS (3/70 (4%) vs 9/70 (13%), P=0.221); MDI (2/32 (6%) vs 8/32 (25%), P=0.074) and significantly fewer vs Turbuhaler (3/60 (5%) vs 20/60 (33%), P<0.001). More asthma and COPD patients preferred ELLIPTA over the other devices (all P⩽0.002). Significantly, fewer COPD patients using ELLIPTA made critical errors after reading the PIL vs other inhalers. More asthma and COPD patients preferred ELLIPTA over comparator inhalers.

The use of exhaled nitric oxide monitoring in primary care asthma clinics: a pilot study.

AIM: Although asthma is defined as a chronic inflammatory disease, inflammation is rarely assessed. The fraction of exhaled nitric oxide (FeNO) is a biomarker of airways inflammation. We assessed the feasibility of FeNO monitoring in general practice. METHODS: Prospective observational study of volunteers attending primary care asthma clinics. Consenting subjects were seen at their own surgery for 2-weekly reviews over 12 weeks, with assessment of FeNO, lung function, symptoms and health status. RESULTS: 22 adults and 15 children provided informed consent. Two subjects were unable to perform the FeNO expiratory manoeuvre. In the remaining subjects, measurements conforming to highest ERS/ATS recommendations were made on 211 of 236 occasions, and on 21 further occasions acceptable readings were made. Acceptability was high to subjects and staff. Correlations between FeNO readings and other parameters were weak and non-significant except for statistically significant correlation between longitudinal FeNO changes and changes in lung function (r= -0.33, p<0.001) and health status (r= -0.22, p=0.022). CONCLUSIONS: Exhaled nitric oxide monitoring is technically feasible and acceptable to staff and patients within the context of a primary care asthma clinic.