A Patient-Centered Description of Severe Asthma:Patient Understanding Leading to Assessment for a Severe Asthma Referral (PULSAR)

BACKGROUND: Although severe asthma can be life-threatening, many patients are unaware they have this condition. OBJECTIVES: Patient Understanding Leading to Assessment for a Severe Asthma Referral (PULSAR) is a novel, multidisciplinary working group aiming to develop and disseminate a global, patient-centered description of severe asthma to improve patient understanding of severe asthma and effect a change in patient behavior whereby patients are encouraged to visit their healthcare professional, when appropriate. METHODS: Current definitions from patient organization websites, asthma guidelines, and medication information for key asthma drugs were assessed and informed a multidisciplinary working group, convened to identify common concepts and terminology used to define severe asthma. A patient-centered description of severe asthma and patient checklist were drafted based on working-group discussions and reviewed by an external behavioral scientist for patient understanding and relevance. These were tested using an online US/Canadian survey. RESULTS: The patient-centered description of severe asthma and patient checklist were reviewed and re-drafted by the authors. The text was simplified following the behavioral-scientist review. The survey (n = 153) included 105 patients with severe asthma. Of those with severe asthma, 92.2% of patients reported that the description was consistent with their experiences of severe asthma and 92.6% of patients reported that the PULSAR initiative would encourage them to visit their healthcare provider. CONCLUSION: A patient-centered description of severe asthma has been developed and tested using patients with severe asthma; this description will allow patients to assess whether they might have severe asthma and prompt them to visit their healthcare provider, if appropriate

A charter to improve patient care in severe asthma

Severe asthma is a subtype of asthma that is difficult to treat and control. By conservative estimates, severe asthma affects approximately 5-10% of patients with asthma worldwide. Severe asthma impairs patients' health-related quality of life, and patients are at risk of life-threatening asthma attacks. Severe asthma also accounts for the majority of health care expenditures associated with asthma. Guidelines recommend that patients with severe asthma be referred to a specialist respiratory team for correct diagnosis and expert management. This is particularly important to ensure that they have access to newly available biologic treatments. However, many patients with severe asthma can suffer multiple asthma attacks and wait several years before they are referred for specialist care. As global patient advocates, we believe it is essential to raise awareness and understanding for patients, caregivers, health care professionals, and the public about the substantial impact of severe asthma and to create opportunities for improving patient care. Patients should be empowered to live a life free of symptoms and the adverse effects of traditional medications (e.g., oral corticosteroids), reducing hospital visits and emergency care, the loss of school and work days, and the constraints placed on their daily lives. Here we provide a Patient Charter for severe asthma, consisting of six core principles, to mobilize national governments, health care providers, payer policymakers, lung health industry partners, and patients/caregivers to address the unmet need and burden in severe asthma and ultimately work together to deliver meaningful improvements in care.Funding for this study, the article processing charges, and the open access charge was provided by AstraZeneca

Management of asthma in childhood: study protocol of a systematic evidence update by the Paediatric Asthma in Real Life (PeARL) Think Tank

IntroductionClinical recommendations for childhood asthma are often based on data extrapolated from studies conducted in adults, despite significant differences in mechanisms and response to treatments. The Paediatric Asthma in Real Life (PeARL) Think Tank aspires to develop recommendations based on the best available evidence from studies in children. An overview of systematic reviews (SRs) on paediatric asthma maintenance management and an SR of treatments for acute asthma attacks in children, requiring an emergency presentation with/without hospital admission will be conducted.Methods and analysisStandard methodology recommended by Cochrane will be followed. Maintenance pharmacotherapy of childhood asthma will be evaluated in an overview of SRs published after 2005 and including clinical trials or real-life studies. For evaluating pharmacotherapy of acute asthma attacks leading to an emergency presentation with/without hospital admission, we opted to conduct de novo synthesis in the absence of adequate up-to-date published SRs. For the SR of acute asthma pharmacotherapy, we will consider eligible SRs, clinical trials or real-life studies without time restrictions. Our evidence updates will be based on broad searches of Pubmed/Medline and the Cochrane Library. We will use A MeaSurement Tool to Assess systematic Reviews, V.2, Cochrane risk of bias 2 and REal Life EVidence AssessmeNt Tool to evaluate the methodological quality of SRs, controlled clinical trials and real-life studies, respectively. Next, we will further assess interventions for acute severe asthma attacks with positive clinical results in meta-analyses. We will include both controlled clinical trials and observational studies and will assess their quality using the previously mentioned tools. We will employ random effect models for conducting meta-analyses, and Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation methodology to assess certainty in the body of evidence.Ethics and disseminationEthics approval is not required for SRs. Our findings will be published in peer reviewed journals and will inform clinical recommendations being developed by the PeARL Think Tank.PROSPERO registration numbers CRD42020132990, CRD42020171624.</p

Real-world use and perceptions of shared decision-making for allergy and asthma care in a US population

Background: Shared decision-making (SDM), the process of engaging patients in their healthcare decisions, is an integral component of personalized medicine. The use of SDM in real-world allergy and asthma care in the United States (US) is unknown. Cross-sectional surveys of allergists and patients in a US population were conducted to assess the use and perceptions of SDM and SDM tools in real-world allergy and asthma care. Methods: Allergists (N = 101) who were members of the American College of Allergy Asthma &amp; Immunology (ACAAI) and who were also Dynata (a marketing research firm) research partners or in the Allergy &amp; Asthma Network customer database completed an online survey from February–March 2022. Adult patients (N = 110) with asthma, allergy, and/or eczema in the United States who were participants of online research panels hosted by Dynata completed on online survey from February 1–7, 2022. Results: Based on their own definition, 98% of the allergists reported familiarity with SDM, and 79% reported using it frequently. Allergists reported using SDM with an average of 44% of their patients. The most commonly used tool was the Immunotherapy SDM toolkit (40%); 43% had not used any SDM tool. Among allergists not using SDM or using it infrequently (n = 19), 42% considered it too time-consuming and 37% believed their patients have low health literacy. Of the surveyed patients, 25% reported their provider used SDM “frequently” or “occasionally” when being treated for allergies, asthma, or eczema, and 22% reported using SDM tools with their provider at some point. The most commonly used tool was the Asthma and Allergy Symptom Test (60%). Among patients whose allergists used SDM infrequently or never (n = 56), 70% reported they would be likely to ask their allergist to use SDM more often. Conclusion: Survey responses revealed a disconnect between allergists and patients regarding SDM use. Barriers to SDM are consistent with those across the healthcare industry. Patients clearly expressed their desire for SDM

Quality Standard Position Statements for Health System Policy Changes in Diagnosis and Management of COPD : A Global Perspective

Funding AstraZeneca funded the development of this manuscript, including open access fees.Peer reviewedPublisher PD

CONQUEST : a quality improvement program for defining and optimizing standards of care for modifiable high-risk COPD patients

Funding This study was conducted by Optimum Patient Care Global and the Observational and Pragmatic Research Institute (OPRI) Pte Ltd and was co-funded by Optimum Patient Care Global and AstraZeneca. No funding was received by the Observational & Pragmatic Research Institute Pte Ltd (OPRI) for its contribution. Acknowledgements Hana Muellerova, Patrick Darken, Paul Dorinsky, Frank Trudo, and Alex De Giorgio-Miller of AstraZeneca are acknowledged for their contribution to protocol development. Writing, editorial support, and/or formatting assistance in the development of this manuscript was provided by Shilpa Suresh, MSc, of the Observational and Pragmatic Research Institute, Singapore. Professor Dave Singh is supported by the National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) Manchester Biomedical Research Centre (BRC).Peer reviewedPublisher PD

Extrapolating Evidence Based Medicine of AIT into Clinical Practice in the US

Allergy/immunology specialists in the US prescribing allergy immunotherapy (AIT) have placed a heavy value on practical experience and anecdotal evidence rather than research-based evidence. With the extensive research on AIT conducted in the last few decades, the time has come to better implement evidence-based medicine (EBM) for AIT. The goal of this review was to critically assess EBM for debated concepts in US AIT practice for respiratory allergies in the context and quality of today\u27s regulatory standards. Debated topics reviewed were the efficacy and safety of AIT in various subgroups (e.g., polyallergic patients, older patients, patients with asthma, pregnant women), diagnosis topics (e.g., skin prick test vs allergen-specific serum IgE, factors affecting skin prick tests, use of nasal or conjunctival allergen challenges, and telemedicine for diagnosis), and dosing topics (e.g., optimal dosing for subcutaneous immunotherapy and sublingual immunotherapy tablets, US liquid allergen extract history, duration of treatment, biomarkers of efficacy). In addition, EBM for patient-centered AIT issues (e.g., adherence, use of practice guidelines, pharmacoeconomics) and the approach to implementation of AIT EBM in future clinical practice was also addressed. The EBM for each concept was briefly summarized, and when possible, a practical, concise recommendation was given