Asthma self-management model: randomized controlled trial

Abstract

Information for patients provided by the pharmacist is reflected in adhesion to treatment, clinical results and patient quality of life. The objective of this study was to assess an asthma self-management model for rational medicine use. This was a randomized controlled trial with 60 asthmatic patients assigned to attend five modules presented by a pharmacist (intervention group) and 59 patients in the control group. Data collection was performed before and after this 4-month intervention and included an evaluation of asthma knowledge, lifestyle, inhaler techniques, adhesion to treatment, pulmonary function and quality of life. An economic viability analysis was also performed. The intervention group obtained an increase in asthma knowledge scores of 58.3-79.5% (P < 0.001). In this group, there was also an increase in the number of individuals who practiced physical exercise (36-43%), in the number of correct replies regarding the use of inhalers, in the percentage of adherent patients, and in quality of life scores for all domains. We concluded that this asthma self-management model was effective in improving the quality of life of asthma patients.

Pharmacists and medication adherence in asthma: a systematic review and meta-analysis

“…Primary reasons for exclusion were: same participant sample, not asthma patients, not RCT, author non-response to request for information, no adherence measure, not pharmacist-led, no usual care control group and unpublished studies (figure 2). We included 11 studies in the narrative synthesis [23][24][25][26][27][28][29][30][31][32][33] and nine studies in the meta-analysis [23-26, 28, 30-33]. Authors of eight included studies provided further information upon request [23-25, 28, 29, 31-33].…”

“…All studies met the criteria for a usual pharmacist care control group. However, three of these studies (27%) were delivered through clinical settings (hospitals and federal health clinics) with a possibly better quality of usual care [30,32,33]. One study (9%) gave control participants an educational asthma booklet [24] and one study (9%) provided inhaler technique training [32].…”

“…However, three of these studies (27%) were delivered through clinical settings (hospitals and federal health clinics) with a possibly better quality of usual care [30,32,33]. One study (9%) gave control participants an educational asthma booklet [24] and one study (9%) provided inhaler technique training [32]. Studies had a follow-up period of four [32], six [23,24,26,28,30,31,33], 5.3 [29], nine [27] and 12 months [25].…”

“…One study (9%) gave control participants an educational asthma booklet [24] and one study (9%) provided inhaler technique training [32]. Studies had a follow-up period of four [32], six [23,24,26,28,30,31,33], 5.3 [29], nine [27] and 12 months [25]. Studies were conducted in Australia [23], Canada [24], Malta [25], Spain [26], Italy [27], Belgium [28], Taiwan [30], Malaysia [31], Brazil [32] and the USA [29,33].…”

“…Most interventions (64%) were delivered in community pharmacies. Two interventions (18%) were delivered in outpatient clinics [30,32]. One intervention (9%) was delivered completely over the telephone [33].…”