Dataset Information

Developing novel evidence-based interventions to promote asthma action plan use: a cross-study synthesis of evidence from randomised controlled trials and qualitative studies.

ABSTRACT: BACKGROUND:Long-standing randomised controlled trial (RCT) evidence indicates that asthma action plans can improve patient outcomes. Internationally, however, these plans are seldom issued by professionals or used by patients/carers. To understand how the benefits of such plans might be realised clinically, we previously investigated barriers and facilitators to their implementation in a systematic review of relevant RCTs and synthesised qualitative studies exploring professional and patient/carer views. Our final step was to integrate these two separate studies. METHODS:First, a theoretical model of action plan implementation was proposed, derived from our synthesis of 19 qualitative studies, identifying elements which, if incorporated into future interventions, could promote their use. Second, 14 RCTs included in the quantitative synthesis were re-analysed to assess the extent to which these elements were present within their interventions (that is, 'strong', 'weak' or 'no' presence) and with what effect. Matrices charted each element's presence and strength, facilitating analysis of element presence and action plan implementation. RESULTS:Four elements (professional education, patient/carer education, (patient/carer and professional) partnership working and communication) were identified in our model as likely to promote asthma plan use. Thirteen interventions reporting increased action plan implementation contained all four elements, with two or more strongly present. One intervention reporting no effect on action plan implementation contained only weakly present elements. Intervention effectiveness was reported using a narrow range of criteria which did not fully reflect the four elements. For example, no study assessed whether jointly developed action plans increased use. Whilst important from the professional and patient/carer perspectives, the integral role of these elements in intervention delivery and their effect on study outcomes was under-acknowledged in these RCTs. CONCLUSIONS:Our novel approach provides an evidence-base for future action plan interventions. Such interventions need to ensure all elements in our implementation model (patient/carer and professional education to support development of effective partnership working and communication) are strongly present within them and a wider range of criteria better reflecting the realities of clinical practice and living with asthma are used to measure their effectiveness. We now intend to test such a complex intervention using a cluster trial design.

SUBMITTER: Ring N

PROVIDER: S-EPMC3561124 | biostudies-literature | 2012 Nov

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Developing novel evidence-based interventions to promote asthma action plan use: a cross-study synthesis of evidence from randomised controlled trials and qualitative studies.

Ring Nicola N Jepson Ruth R Pinnock Hilary H Wilson Caroline C Hoskins Gaylor G Wyke Sally S Sheikh Aziz A

Trials 20121120

<h4>Background</h4>Long-standing randomised controlled trial (RCT) evidence indicates that asthma action plans can improve patient outcomes. Internationally, however, these plans are seldom issued by professionals or used by patients/carers. To understand how the benefits of such plans might be realised clinically, we previously investigated barriers and facilitators to their implementation in a systematic review of relevant RCTs and synthesised qualitative studies exploring professional and pat ...[more]

PMID: 23164151

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundA written action plan (WAP) for managing asthma exacerbations is recommended.ObjectiveWe aimed to compare the effect on unscheduled medical contacts (UMCs) of a digital action plan (DAP) accessed via a smartphone web app combined with a WAP on paper versus that of the same WAP alone.MethodsThis randomized, unblinded, multicenter (offline recruitment in private offices and public hospitals), and parallel-group trial included children (aged 6-12 years) or adults (aged 18-60 years) with asthma who had experienced at least 1 severe exacerbation in the previous year. They were randomized to a WAP or DAP+WAP group in a 1:1 ratio. The DAP (fully automated) provided treatment advice according to the severity and previous pharmacotherapy of the exacerbation. The DAP was an algorithm that recorded 3 to 9 clinical descriptors. In the app, the participant first assessed the severity of their current symptoms on a 10-point scale and then entered the symptom descriptors. Before the trial, the wordings and ordering of these descriptors were validated by 50 parents of children with asthma and 50 adults with asthma; the app was not modified during the trial. Participants were interviewed at 3, 6, 9, and 12 months to record exacerbations, UMCs, and WAP and DAP use, including the subjective evaluation (availability and usefulness) of the action plans, by a research nurse.ResultsOverall, 280 participants were randomized, of whom 33 (11.8%) were excluded because of the absence of follow-up data after randomization, leaving 247 (88.2%) participants (children: n=93, 37.7%; adults: n=154, 62.3%). The WAP group had 49.8% (123/247) of participants (children: n=45, 36.6%; mean age 8.3, SD 2.0 years; adults: n=78, 63.4%; mean age 36.3, SD 12.7 years), and the DAP+WAP group had 50.2% (124/247) of participants (children: n=48, 38.7%; mean age 9.0, SD 1.9 years; adults: n=76, 61.3%; mean age 34.5, SD 11.3 years). Overall, the annual severe exacerbation rate was 0.53 and not different between the 2 groups of participants. The mean number of UMCs per year was 0.31 (SD 0.62) in the WAP group and 0.37 (SD 0.82) in the DAP+WAP group (mean difference 0.06, 95% CI -0.12 to 0.24; P=.82). Use per patient with at least 1 moderate or severe exacerbation was higher for the WAP (33/65, 51% vs 15/63, 24% for the DAP; P=.002). Thus, participants were more likely to use the WAP than the DAP despite the nonsignificant difference between the action plans in the subjective evaluation. Median symptom severity of the self-evaluated exacerbation was 4 out of 10 and not significantly different from the symptom severity assessed by the app.ConclusionsThe DAP was used less often than the WAP and did not decrease the number of UMCs compared with the WAP alone.Trial registrationClinicalTrials.gov NCT02869958; https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT02869958.

Project description:ObjectivesTo systematically review published pretrial qualitative research studies and explore how their findings were used to inform recruitment and retention processes in full-scale trials.DesignQualitative evidence synthesis using thematic analysis.Data sources and eligibility criteriaWe conducted a comprehensive search of databases; Dissertation Abstracts International, CINAHL, Embase, MEDLINE, Sociological Abstracts and PsycINFO. We included all reports of pretrial qualitative data on recruitment and retention in clinical trials up to March 2018.Data extraction and synthesisTwo authors independently extracted data using a predefined data extraction form that captured study aims, design, methodological approach and main findings, including barriers and facilitators to recruitment and or retention. The synthesis was undertaken using Thomas and Harden's thematic synthesis method and reported following the Enhancing Transparency in Reporting the Synthesis of Qualitative Research guidelines. Confidence was assessed using Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation-Confidence in the Evidence from Reviews of Qualitative research approach.ResultsThirty-five papers (connected to 31 feasibility studies) from three different countries, published between 2010 and 2017 were included. All studies were embedded in pilot or feasibility studies to inform design aspects in preparation for a subsequent full-scale trial. Twelve themes were identified as recruitment barriers and three as recruitment facilitators. Two themes were identified as barriers for retention and none as retention facilitators. The findings from qualitative research in feasibility or pilot trials are often not explicitly linked to proposed changes to the recruitment and retention strategies to be used in the future or planned full-scale trial.ConclusionsMany trial teams do pretrial qualitative work with the aim of improving recruitment and retention in future full-scale trials. Just over half of all reports of such work do not clearly show how their findings will change the recruitment and retention strategy of the future trial. The scope of pretrial work needs to expand beyond looking for problems and also look for what might help and spend more time on retention.

Project description:Supported self-management reduces asthma-related morbidity and mortality. This paper is on a feasibility study, and observing the change in clinical and cost outcomes of pictorial action plan use is part of assessing feasibility as it will help us decide on outcome measures for a fully powered RCT. We conducted a pre-post feasibility study among adults with physician-diagnosed asthma on inhaled corticosteroids at a public primary-care clinic in Malaysia. We adapted an existing pictorial asthma action plan. The primary outcome was asthma control, assessed at 1, 3 and 6 months. Secondary outcomes included reliever use, controller medication adherence, asthma exacerbations, emergency visits, hospitalisations, days lost from work/daily activities and action plan use. We estimated potential cost savings on asthma-related care following plan use. About 84% (n = 59/70) completed the 6-months follow-up. The proportion achieving good asthma control increased from 18 (30.4%) at baseline to 38 (64.4%) at 6-month follow-up. The proportion of at least one acute exacerbation (3 months: % difference -19.7; 95% CI -34.7 to -3.1; 6 months: % difference -20.3; 95% CI -5.8 to -3.2), one or more emergency visit (1 month: % difference -28.6; 95% CI -41.2 to -15.5; 3 months: % difference -18.0; 95% CI -32.2 to -3.0; 6 months: % difference -20.3; 95% CI -34.9 to -4.6), and one or more asthma admission (1 month: % difference -14.3; 95% CI -25.2 to -5.3; 6 months: % difference -11.9; 95% CI -23.2 to -1.8) improved over time. Estimated savings for the 59 patients at 6-months follow-up and for each patient over the 6 months were RM 15,866.22 (USD3755.36) and RM268.92 (USD63.65), respectively. Supported self-management with a pictorial asthma action plan was associated with an improvement in asthma control and potential cost savings in Malaysian primary-care patients.Trial registration number: ISRCTN87128530; prospectively registered: September 5, 2019, http://www.isrctn.com/ISRCTN87128530 .

Dataset Information

Developing novel evidence-based interventions to promote asthma action plan use: a cross-study synthesis of evidence from randomised controlled trials and qualitative studies.

Publications

Developing novel evidence-based interventions to promote asthma action plan use: a cross-study synthesis of evidence from randomised controlled trials and qualitative studies.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets