Assessment and management of asthma and chronic obstructive pulmonary disease in Australian general practice.

Q3 Medicine

Australian family physician Pub Date : 2017-06-01

Helen K Reddel, Lisa Valenti, Kylie L Easton, Julie Gordon, Clare Bayram, Graeme C Miller

{"title":"Assessment and management of asthma and chronic obstructive pulmonary disease in Australian general practice.","authors":"Helen K Reddel, Lisa Valenti, Kylie L Easton, Julie Gordon, Clare Bayram, Graeme C Miller","doi":"","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Background: Dispensing data suggest potential issues with the quality use of medicines for airways disease.Objective: The objective of this article was to describe the management of asthma and chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) in general practice, and investigate the appropriateness of prescribing.Methods: The method used for this study consisted of a national cross‑sectional survey of 91 Australian general practitioners (GPs) participating in the Bettering the Evaluation and Care of Health (BEACH) program.Results: Data were available for 2589 patients (288 asthma; 135 COPD). For the patients with asthma, GPs classified asthma as well controlled in 76.4%; 54.3% were prescribed inhaled corticosteroids (ICS), mostly (84.9%) as combination therapy, and mostly at moderate-high dose; only 26.3% had a written action plan. GPs classified COPD as mild for 42.9%. Most patients with COPD (60.9%) were prescribed combination ICS therapy and 36.7% were prescribed triple therapy.Discussion: There were substantial differences between guideline-based and GP- recorded assessment and prescription for asthma and COPD. Further research is needed to improve care and optimise patient outcomes with scarce health resources.","PeriodicalId":8653,"journal":{"name":"Australian family physician","volume":"46 6","pages":"413-419"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2017-06-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Australian family physician","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"Medicine","Score":null,"Total":0}

引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: Dispensing data suggest potential issues with the quality use of medicines for airways disease.

Objective: The objective of this article was to describe the management of asthma and chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) in general practice, and investigate the appropriateness of prescribing.

Methods: The method used for this study consisted of a national cross‑sectional survey of 91 Australian general practitioners (GPs) participating in the Bettering the Evaluation and Care of Health (BEACH) program.

Results: Data were available for 2589 patients (288 asthma; 135 COPD). For the patients with asthma, GPs classified asthma as well controlled in 76.4%; 54.3% were prescribed inhaled corticosteroids (ICS), mostly (84.9%) as combination therapy, and mostly at moderate-high dose; only 26.3% had a written action plan. GPs classified COPD as mild for 42.9%. Most patients with COPD (60.9%) were prescribed combination ICS therapy and 36.7% were prescribed triple therapy.

Discussion: There were substantial differences between guideline-based and GP- recorded assessment and prescription for asthma and COPD. Further research is needed to improve care and optimise patient outcomes with scarce health resources.

本刊更多论文

评估和管理哮喘和慢性阻塞性肺疾病在澳大利亚的一般做法。

背景:配药数据提示呼吸道疾病药物的质量使用存在潜在问题。目的:本文的目的是描述哮喘和慢性阻塞性肺疾病(COPD)的一般做法的管理，并探讨处方的适当性。方法:本研究采用的方法包括对参与改善健康评估和护理(BEACH)计划的91名澳大利亚全科医生(gp)进行全国性横断面调查。结果:2589例患者(哮喘288例;135慢性阻塞性肺病)。在哮喘患者中，76.4%的全科医生认为哮喘控制良好;54.3%的患者接受吸入皮质类固醇(ICS)治疗，其中大部分(84.9%)为联合治疗，且多为中、高剂量;只有26.3%的人有书面的行动计划。42.9%的全科医生将COPD归为轻度。大多数COPD患者(60.9%)采用联合ICS治疗，36.7%采用三联治疗。讨论:基于指南和全科医生记录的哮喘和慢性阻塞性肺病的评估和处方之间存在实质性差异。在卫生资源匮乏的情况下，需要进一步的研究来改善护理和优化患者的预后。

本文章由计算机程序翻译，如有差异，请以英文原文为准。

求助全文

约1分钟内获得全文求助全文

来源期刊

Australian family physician 医学-医学：内科

CiteScore

0.61

自引率

0.00%

发文量

审稿时长

4-8 weeks

期刊介绍： The Australian Journal of General Practice (AJGP) aims to provide relevant, evidence-based, clearly articulated information to Australian GPs to assist them in providing the highest quality patient care, applicable to the varied geographic and social contexts in which GPs work and to all GP roles as clinician, researcher, educator, practice team member and opinion leader. All articles are subject to a peer-review process before they are accepted for publication. The journal is indexed in MEDLINE, Index Medicus and Science Citation Index Expanded.