Asthma Programme in Finland: High consensus between general practitioners and pulmonologists on the contents of an asthma referral letter

Tuomisto, Leena E.; Erhola, Marina; Kaila, Minna; Brander, Pirkko; Puolijoki, Hannu; Kauppinen, Ritva; Koskela, Kaj

doi:10.1016/j.pcrj.2004.04.001

Cited by 11 publications

(12 citation statements)

References 5 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The first European National Asthma Programme was the Finnish 10-year programme (1994)(1995)(1996)(1997)(1998)(1999)(2000)(2001)(2002)(2003)(2004), which has been the model for other European and non-European programmes. Results and several follow-up reports of the Finnish programme have been published previously [52][53][54][55][56][57][58][59]. Apart from the Finnish programme, results have only been published from the Polish [14,15] and Portuguese [17] programmes.…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

National and regional asthma programmes in Europe

Selroos¹,

et al. 2015

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This review presents seven national asthma programmes to support the European Asthma Research and Innovation Partnership in developing strategies to reduce asthma mortality and morbidity across Europe. From published data it appears that in order to influence asthma care, national/regional asthma programmes are more effective than conventional treatment guidelines. An asthma programme should start with the universal commitments of stakeholders at all levels and the programme has to be endorsed by political and governmental bodies. When the national problems have been identified, the goals of the programme have to be clearly defined with measures to evaluate progress. An action plan has to be developed, including defined re-allocation of patients and existing resources, if necessary, between primary care and specialised healthcare units or hospital centres. Patients should be involved in guided self-management education and structured follow-up in relation to disease severity. The three evaluated programmes show that, thanks to rigorous efforts, it is possible to improve patients' quality of life and reduce hospitalisation, asthma mortality, sick leave and disability pensions. The direct and indirect costs, both for the individual patient and for society, can be significantly reduced. The results can form the basis for development of further programme activities in Europe. @ERSpublications Current asthma programmes confirm patients' quality of life can be improved while significantly reducing costs

show abstract

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

National and regional asthma programmes in Europe

Selroos¹,

et al. 2015

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…These 22 referrals together with the characteristics of the referral letters, provide the basic information required for a protocol to identify suitable referrals and to inform GPs on the necessary information to include in a referral letter -for example, a recent chest radiograph report. A recent study on asthma referrals [10] has shown that it is possible to obtain…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

The proportion of general practitioner referrals to a hospital Respiratory Medicine clinic suitable to be seen in a GPwSI Respiratory Clinic

Gilbert¹,

Franks

Watkin

2005

Primary Care Respiratory Journal

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

SummaryAims: The purpose of this study was to examine the proportion of general practitioner (GP) referrals to a hospital Respiratory Medicine clinic which might be suitable for a General Practitioner with a Special Interest (GPwSI) Respiratory Clinic. Method: All GP referral letters to the Respiratory Medicine Department of a teaching hospital, apart from urgent cancer referrals, were identified from two two-week periods. All patient and practice identifications were removed. Two GPs and one Consultant Respiratory Physician assessed each of the anonymised referral letters to determine the patient's suitability to be seen in a GPwSI Respiratory Clinic, assuming such a clinic had a predetermined range of investigative facilities. Results: Out of 96 referrals covering a wide range of respiratory conditions apart from lung cancer, 22 (23%) were considered by all assessors to be suitable for a GPwSI clinic, and there was full agreement that 40 referrals (42%) were unsuitable. The other 34 referrals (35%) had varying degrees of agreement on suitability. The largest groups of patient referrals considered suitable for a GPwSI clinic were those with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) or cough as the main presenting clinical problem. The commonest groups considered unsuitable were referrals of patients with an abnormal chest radiograph, haemoptysis, or possible interstitial lung disease. * Corresponding author. Tel.: +44 (0) 1603 443300; fax: +44 (0) C o p y r ig h t G e n e r a l P r a c t ic e A ir w a y s G r o u p R e p r o d u c t io n p r o h ib it e dThe proportion of general practitioner referrals to a hospital Respiratory Medicine clinic 315Conclusion: This small study has shown that at least a fifth of GP referrals to a hospital Respiratory Medicine clinic could be seen in a suitably resourced GPwSI clinic, with consequent reductions in hospital outpatient waiting lists and improved accessibility for patients. This finding will be of interest to potential commissioners of GPwSI services especially with the advent of Practice-based Commissioning.

show abstract

“…Based on previous literature, consulting other specialists, and discussion within the group, the maximal acceptable standard of inadequacy (MAS standard) developed by Williamson [10] was set to 30%, which means that the study group was prepared to accept the maximum of 30% of the referral letters to be of poor quality. As criteria, the 14 previously derived [9] asthma‐specific criteria (Table 1) were used. An auditing manual was prepared.…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…In our previous study we presented systematic development of quality criteria for an asthma referral letter [9]. These criteria were derived from three components: evidence from the literature, consensus‐seeking panel discussions, and a national review.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%