Health technology assessment of asthma disease management programs

Purpose of review: To provide a critical opinion on the extent to which asthma disease management programs currently improve the effectiveness and efficiency of care and directions for future policy and research. Recent findings: The methodological quality of health technology assessment of asthma disease management programs remains moderate. Asthma disease management programs are predominantly educational and organizational in nature and focus either on children or on adults. Paediatric disease management programs make more effort to outreach into patients' living environments and show higher participation rates than those targeting adults. Reductions in asthma-related hospitalization, emergency department, and unplanned clinic visits range from 0 to 85%, 87% and 71%, respectively. Aspects of self-management and organization of care improved after the implementation of disease management programs. Almost no impact on asthma symptoms, lung function or the use of long-term control medication was found. Summary: There is accumulating ‘circumstantial’ evidence that disease management programs reduce resource utilization. The analytical rigor and uniformity of health technology assessment of asthma disease management programs has improved, but the generalizability of results remains uncertain. Practical, multicentre, clinical trials including broad representative study samples should be performed in different settings to increase methodological quality and substantiate current findings

A systematic review of integrated use of disease-management interventions in asthma and COPD

SummaryBackgroundThe effectiveness of multiple interventions in asthma and chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) is unclear.ObjectiveTo examine the effectiveness of multiple interventions as compared to single interventions or usual care on health outcomes and health care utilisation within the context of integrated disease management in asthma and COPD.MethodsMEDLINE and the Cochrane Library (1995–May 2008) were searched for controlled trials. Two reviewers independently extracted data and assessed study quality. Meta-analyses were performed on quality of life and health care utilisation data. Furthermore, the effects of multiple interventions versus single interventions and usual care were assessed qualitatively.ResultsOf the 36 studies included, 17 targeted double interventions (patient-related and organisational interventions); 19 studies performed triple interventions (patient-related, professional-directed and organisational interventions). They were heterogeneous in terms of (combinations of) interventions, outcomes measured, study design and setting. Pooled data showed that studied disease management programmes significantly improved quality of life on several domains. Patients within triple intervention programmes had less chance of at least one hospital admission compared with usual care. No significant effects were found in number of emergency department visits. Qualitative analyses revealed positive trends on process improvements and satisfaction. Inconclusive results were reported on symptoms; no effects were found in lung function.ConclusionIn spite of the heterogeneity of disease management studies in asthma and COPD care, this review showed promising improvements in quality of life and reductions in hospitalisations, especially for triple intervention programmes