Home > Interventions to Modify Health Care...

PubMed Health. A service of the National Library of Medicine, National Institutes of Health.

  • This publication is provided for historical reference only and the information may be out of date.

This publication is provided for historical reference only and the information may be out of date.

Cover of Interventions to Modify Health Care Provider Adherence to Asthma Guidelines

Interventions to Modify Health Care Provider Adherence to Asthma Guidelines

Comparative Effectiveness Reviews, No. 95

Investigators: Sande O Okelo, MD, PhD, Arlene M Butz, ScD, RN, CRNP, Ritu Sharma, BSc, Gregory B Diette, MD, MHS, Samantha I Pitts, MD, MPH, Tracy M King, MD, MPH, Shauna T Linn, BA, Manisha Reuben, BS, Yohalakshmi Chelladurai, MBBS, MPH, and Karen A Robinson, PhD.

Johns Hopkins University Evidence-based Practice Center
Rockville (MD): Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality (US); 2013 May.
Report No.: 13-EHC022-EF
Copyright and Permissions

Structured Abstract

Objectives:

To synthesize the published literature on the effect of interventions designed to improve health care providers' adherence to asthma guidelines on: (1) health care process outcomes (Key Question 1); (2) clinical outcomes (Key Question 2); (3) health care processes that subsequently impact clinical outcomes (Key Question 3).

Data sources:

Reports of studies from MEDLINE®, Embase®, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature (CINAHL®), Educational Resources Information Center (ERICsm), PsycINFO®, and Research and Development Resource Base in Continuing Medical Education (RDRB/CME), up to July 2012.

Review methods:

Paired investigators independently reviewed each title, abstract, and full-text article to assess eligibility. Only comparative studies were eligible. Investigators abstracted data sequentially and independently graded the evidence.

Results:

A total of 73 studies were eligible for review. A slight majority of studies were conducted in the U.S. (n=38). We classified studies as assessing eight types of interventions: decision support, organizational change, feedback and audit, clinical pharmacy support, education only, quality improvement (QI)/pay-for-performance, multicomponent, and information only. Half of the studies were randomized trials (n=34), 29 were pre-post, and the remaining 10 were a variety of nonrandomized study designs. The studies took place exclusively in primary care settings. The most frequently cited health care process outcome was prescription of asthma controller medication (n=41), followed by provision of an asthma action plan (n=18), prescription of a peak flow meter (n=17), and self-management education (n=12). Common clinical outcomes included emergency department (ED) visits (n=30) and hospitalizations (n=27), followed by use of short-acting β2 agonists (n=9), missed school days (n=8), lung function tests (n=6), symptom days (n=6), quality of life (n=5), and urgent doctor visits (n=5). We identified 4 critical outcomes for which 68 studies provided information. There was moderate evidence for increased prescriptions of asthma controller medications using decision support, feedback and audit, and clinical pharmacy support interventions and low grade evidence for organizational change, multicomponent interventions. Moderate evidence supports the use of decision support and clinical pharmacy interventions to increase provision of patient self-education/asthma action plans; for the same outcome, low grade evidence supports the use of organizational change, feedback and audit, education only, quality improvement, and multicomponent interventions. Moderate grade evidence supports use of decision support tools to reduce ED visits/hospitalizations while low grade evidence suggests there is no benefit associated with organizational change, education only, and QI/pay-for-performance. Organizational change interventions provided no benefit for lost days of work/school. The evidence for the remainder of interventions was insufficient or low in strength.

Conclusions:

There is low to moderate evidence to support the use of decision support tools, feedback and audit, and clinical pharmacy support to improve the adherence of health care providers to asthma guidelines, as measured through health care process outcomes, and to improve clinical outcomes. There is a need to further evaluate health care provider-targeted interventions with a focus on standardized measures of outcomes and more rigorous study designs.

Contents

Prepared for: Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality, U.S. Department of Health and Human Services1, Contract No. 290-2007-10061-I. Prepared by: Johns Hopkins University Evidence-based Practice Center, Baltimore, MD

Suggested citation:

Okelo SO, Butz AM, Sharma R, Diette GB, Pitts SI, King TM, Linn ST, Reuben M, Chelladurai Y, Robinson KA. Interventions To Modify Health Care Provider Adherence to Asthma Guidelines. Comparative Effectiveness Review No. 95. (Prepared by Johns Hopkins University Evidence-based Practice Center under Contract No. 290-2007-10061-I.) AHRQ Publication No. 13-EHC022-EF. Rockville, MD: Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality. www.effectivehealthcare.ahrq.gov/reports/final.cfm. May 2013.

This report is based on research conducted by the Johns Hopkins University Evidence-based Practice Center (EPC) under contract to the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality (AHRQ), Rockville, MD (Contract No. 290-2007-10061-I). The findings and conclusions in this document are those of the authors, who are responsible for its contents; the findings and conclusions do not necessarily represent the views of AHRQ. Therefore, no statement in this report should be construed as an official position of AHRQ or of the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services.

The information in this report is intended to help health care decisionmakers—patients and clinicians, health system leaders, and policymakers, among others—make well-informed decisions and thereby improve the quality of health care services. This report is not intended to be a substitute for the application of clinical judgment. Anyone who makes decisions concerning the provision of clinical care should consider this report in the same way as any medical reference and in conjunction with all other pertinent information, i.e., in the context of available resources and circumstances presented by individual patients.

This report may be used, in whole or in part, as the basis for development of clinical practice guidelines and other quality enhancement tools, or as a basis for reimbursement and coverage policies. AHRQ or U.S. Department of Health and Human Services endorsement of such derivative products may not be stated or implied.

None of the investigators have any affiliations or financial involvement that conflicts with the material presented in this report.

1

540 Gaither Road, Rockville, MD 20850; www​.ahrq.gov

AHRQ (US Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality)

PubMed Health Blog...

read all...

Recent Activity

Your browsing activity is empty.

Activity recording is turned off.

Turn recording back on

See more...