Interprofessional Pulmocheck care pathway: An innovative approach to managing pediatric asthma care in the Netherlands.

OBJECTIVES: Under-diagnosis and suboptimal asthma control in children persists. An innovative care pathway was developed by a hospital department of pediatrics with the aim to detect pulmonary problems in children and provide appropriate treatment possibilities through systematic feedback towards the referring primary care physician. Primary care physicians can use this pathway to refer children with asthma-like symptoms for a one-day assessment. Goals are to measure the usage of the pathway by primary care general practitioners (GPs), the outcomes in terms of new diagnoses of asthma, the reduction in regular referrals, generated recommendations/therapy and the adequacy of asthma follow-up. METHODS: We collected all feedback letters sent to the GP concerning children who underwent the Pulmocheck in 2010, 2011 and 2012. Furthermore, all GPs, who had referred a child to the Pulmocheck in this period and that subsequently was diagnosed with asthma and was further managed in primary care, were sent a follow-up questionnaire in 2014. RESULTS: There were 121 referrals from 51 GPs in 3 years to this pathway. In 59.5% of these referrals a new diagnosis of asthma was established. In 90.9% one or more changes in clinical management were advised. The response rate to the follow-up questionnaires was 65.7% of which 4.8% of the children with new established asthma were reviewed four times or more in the follow-up period, 17.4% two times, 65.2% once, and in 8.7% were not followed. CONCLUSIONS: The specialty pediatric asthma care pathway revealed a high number of children with newly diagnosed asthma, but was also helpful to exclude this diagnosis. However, the referral rate of GPs to this pathway was low, but in the children, that were referred several changes in the clinical management were advised and the frequency of monitoring of the children with diagnosed asthma was not in accordance with the asthma guidelines.

Introduction of a new paediatric asthma guideline: Effects on asthma control levels.

BACKGROUND: In 2008, a new national paediatric asthma management guideline based on the international Global Initiative for Asthma (GINA) guideline was launched in the Netherlands. We studied whether asthma control and treatment regimens improved after introduction of the guideline by comparing survey data before and after the guideline introduction. METHODS: Two comparable groups of children (6-16 years) with asthma were included before (2004) and after (2013) the introduction of the guideline. Children, parents and paediatricians completed questionnaires about asthma symptoms, medication and healthcare use. Spirometry was performed. RESULTS: Data of 209 patients were analysed. Level of asthma control did not improve between 2004 and 2013 with a proportion of (partly) controlled asthmatics of 51% in 2004 and 59% in 2013 (p = 0.28). In 2013, paediatricians characterized 76% of children as (partly) controlled, while 59% of children was (partly) controlled according to GINA criteria (p < 0.05). Step-down treatment in controlled patients was more applied by paediatricians in 2013 compared to 2004 (from 8 to 40%, p < 0.05). Step-up treatment in uncontrolled patients did not improve. CONCLUSIONS: Asthma control did not improve after the introduction of the new guideline. Compared to 2004, an improvement was observed in step-down treatment in patients with controlled disease.

Breath condenser coatings affect measurement of biomarkers in exhaled breath condensate.

Exhaled breath condensate collection is not yet standardised and biomarker measurements are often close to lower detection limits. In the current study, it was hypothesised that adhesive properties of different condenser coatings interfere with measurements of eicosanoids and proteins in breath condensate. In vitro, condensate was derived from a collection model using two test solutions (8-isoprostane and albumin) and five condenser coatings (silicone, glass, aluminium, polypropylene and Teflon). In vivo, condensate was collected using these five coatings and the EcoScreen condenser to measure 8-isoprostane, and three coatings (silicone, glass, EcoScreen) to measure albumin. In vitro, silicone and glass coatings had significantly higher albumin recovery compared with the other coatings. A similar trend was observed for 8-isoprostane recovery. In vivo, median (interquartile range) 8-isoprostane concentrations were significantly higher using silicone (9.2 (18.8) pg.mL(-1)) or glass (3.0 (4.5) pg.mL(-1)) coating, compared with aluminium (0.5 (2.4) pg.mL(-1)), polypropylene (0.5 (0.5) pg.mL(-1)), Teflon (0.5 (0.0) pg.mL(-1)), and EcoScreen (0.5 (2.0) pg.mL(-1)). Albumin in vivo was mainly detectable using glass coating. In conclusion, a condenser with silicone or glass coating is more efficient for measurement of 8-isoprostane or albumin in exhaled breath condensate, than EcoScreen, aluminium, polypropylene or Teflon. Guidelines for exhaled breath condensate standardisation should include the most valid condenser coating to measure a specific biomarker.

Comparison of handling and acceptability of two spacer devices in young children with asthma.

UNLABELLED: This study compared parents' preference for two spacer devices, NebuChamber and Babyhaler for the treatment of young children with asthma. In this open, cross-over study 141 patients (aged 5-57 mo) who used inhaled steroids via a spacer device were randomized to budesonide via NebuChamber or beclomethasone dipropionate via Babyhaler. Both treatments were given by the parents twice daily for 2 wk. At the final visit parents completed a questionnaire on preference in general and for a given set of features. Acceptability and handling were scored in a diary. Diary scores on acceptability by the child and handling of both spacer devices were comparable. In the preference questionnaire, 68% of parents preferred NebuChamber [95% confidence interval (CI) 60-76] and 25% Babyhaler (95% CI 18-33). The preference was independent of the type of spacer used before the study and was also apparent in the different features: acceptability by child, carrying around, cleaning, close fitting of face mask, assembling and disassembling, damage resistance and size. These differences were statistically significant for all features, except for acceptability by the child. CONCLUSION: Two-thirds of parents prefer NebuChamber over Babyhaler for the treatment of their young asthmatic children.