Use of electronic medical records and biomarkers to manage risk and resource efficiencies

Peer reviewedPublisher PD

Are pharmacological randomised controlled clinical trials relevant to real-life asthma populations? A protocol for an UNLOCK study from the IPCRG

[Excerpt] Introduction: Asthma has a high prevalence worldwide with a high incidence in primary care settings in many countries.1 It is by definition a variable disease with a broad spectrum of clinical phenotypes, in which management and treatment can be difficult.2–8 The aim of asthma treatment is optimal control of the disease, which according to Global Initiative for Asthma (GINA) guidelines implies both symptom control and prevention of exacerbations.1 Despite several treatment options, studies show that about half of the patients have poor asthma control.2,3 When asthma is not controlled, it decreases the quality of life, increases the risk of exacerbations and premature death and is a high cost for the society.2,3 [...]The IPCRG provided funding for this research project as an UNLOCK Group study for which the funding was obtained through an unrestricted grant by Novartis AG, Basel, Switzerland. Novartis has no role in study design, data collection and analysis, decision to publish or preparation of the manuscript. This study will include data from the Optimum Patient Care Research Database and is undertaken in collaboration with Optimum Patient Care and the Respiratory Effectiveness Group.info:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersio

The prevalence of comorbidities in COPD patients, and their impact on health status and COPD symptoms in primary care patients: a protocol for an UNLOCK study from the IPCRG

[Abstract] Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) is an important cause of morbidity and mortality with high social and economic costs. The prevalence of COPD has been reported to vary between 6 and 26.1% worldwide.1 COPD has also been associated with a high prevalence of one or more comorbid conditions, which have an impact on health status and mortality.2–5 Although several diseases have been studied as COPD comorbidities6,7 few studies have looked at the issue of multimorbidity in COPD.8–10 COPD, like other chronic disorders, has been associated with comorbidities that increase in number and severity with age, and are more prevalent among deprived social groups.5,8 There is evidence that comorbidities increase the risk for exacerbations, reduce health status, and increase the risk of mortality.5,8 COPD guidelines (e.g., GOLD recommendations) still consider the diagnosis and management of comorbidities from an individual disease point of view.11 Consequently, health services focus on individual diseases rather than multimorbidity.10–13 A better knowledge of the prevalence and impact of multimorbidity facing COPD patients in primary care would help to evaluate whether a different approach (i.e., multimorbidity) should be taken. [...]The IPCRG provided funding for this research project as an UNLOCK Group study for which the funding was obtained through an unrestricted grant by Novartis AG, Basel, Switzerland. Novartis has no role in the study design, data collection and analysis, decision to publish, or preparation of the manuscript. This study will include data from the Optimum Patient Care Research Database, and is undertaken in collaboration with Optimum Patient Care and the Respiratory Effectiveness Group, which will provide the data for this initiative without charge to the UNLOCK Group.info:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersio

Primary Care COPD Patients Compared with Large Pharmaceutically-Sponsored COPD Studies:An UNLOCK Validation Study

Background: Guideline recommendations for chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) are based on the results of large pharmaceutically-sponsored COPD studies (LPCS). There is a paucity of data on disease characteristics at the primary care level, while the majority of COPD patients are treated in primary care.Objective: We aimed to evaluate the external validity of six LPCS (ISOLDE, TRISTAN, TORCH, UPLIFT, ECLIPSE, POET-COPD) on which current guidelines are based, in relation to primary care COPD patients, in order to inform future clinical practice guidelines and trials.Methods: Baseline data of seven primary care databases (n = 3508) from Europe were compared to baseline data of the LPCS. In addition, we examined the proportion of primary care patients eligible to participate in the LPCS, based on inclusion criteria.Results: Overall, patients included in the LPCS were younger (mean difference (MD)-2.4; p = 0.03), predominantly male (MD 12.4; p = 0.1) with worse lung function (FEV1% MD -16.4; p &lt;0.01) and worse quality of life scores (SGRQ MD 15.8; p = 0.01). There were large differences in GOLD stage distribution compared to primary care patients. Mean exacerbation rates were higher in LPCS, with an overrepresentation of patients with &gt;= 1 and &gt;= 2 exacerbations, although results were not statistically significant. Our findings add to the literature, as we revealed hitherto unknown GOLD I exacerbation characteristics, showing 34% of mild patients had &gt;= 1 exacerbations per year and 12% had &gt;= 2 exacerbations per year. The proportion of primary care patients eligible for inclusion in LPCS ranged from 17% (TRISTAN) to 42% (ECLIPSE, UPLIFT).Conclusion: Primary care COPD patients stand out from patients enrolled in LPCS in terms of gender, lung function, quality of life and exacerbations. More research is needed to determine the effect of pharmacological treatment in mild to moderate patients. We encourage future guideline makers to involve primary care populations in their recommendations.</p

Characteristics of patients making serious inhaler errors with a dry powder inhaler and association with asthma-related events in a primary care setting

Acknowledgements The iHARP database was funded by unrestricted grants from Mundipharma International Ltd and Research in Real-Life Ltd; these analyses were funded by an unrestricted grant from Teva Pharmaceuticals. Mundipharma and Teva played no role in study conduct or analysis and did not modify or approve the manuscript. The authors wish to direct a special appreciation to all the participants of the iHARP group who contributed data to this study and to Mundipharma, sponsors of the iHARP group. In addition, we thank Julie von Ziegenweidt for assistance with data extraction and Anna Gilchrist and Valerie L. Ashton, PhD, for editorial assistance. Elizabeth V. Hillyer, DVM, provided editorial and writing support, funded by Research in Real-Life, Ltd.Peer reviewedPublisher PD

The Burden of Self-Reported Rhinitis and Associated Risk for Exacerbations with Moderate-Severe Asthma in Primary Care Patients

Acknowledgments: The iHARP database was funded by unrestricted grants from Mundipharma International Limited and Optimum Patient Care Global Ltd, which is a social enterprise that focuses on quality improvement in clinical practice. The sponsor was not involved in data analysis or the interpretation of the results.Peer reviewedPublisher PD

A multinational observational study identifying primary care patients at risk of overestimation of asthma control

The International Primary Care Respiratory Group (IPCRG) has facilitated the publication of this paper. The iHARP database was funded by unrestricted grants from Mundipharma International Limited and Optimum Patient Care Global Ltd, which is a social enterprise that focuses on quality improvement in clinical practice. The sponsor was not involved in data analysis or the interpretation of the results.Peer reviewedPublisher PD

Organisation of Asthma in Primary Care, Quality of Life and Sex-related Aspects in Asthma Outcomes

Objectives: To investigate the organisation of asthma care in primary care and evaluate outcomes for patients attending primary care centres with and without asthma clinics. Other objectives were to study the association between quality of life and asthma control in patients in primary care and to analyse sex differences regarding asthma outcomes related to menopausal status. Material and methods: Cross-sectional surveys and a patient record study. Results: Of all the primary health care centres, 77% had a spirometer and 53% an asthma clinic. At centres with asthma clinics 77% of the patients reported sufficient knowledge of asthma as compared with 65% at centres without asthma clinics (p&lt;0.001). With more time allocated for the nurse, 44% of patients achieved asthma control as compared with 27% at asthma clinics with less time (p&lt;0.003). Patients using short-acting beta-2 agonists more than twice in the last week had clinically significant lower MiniAQLQ scores (5.17 versus 5.91). This finding also held for night awakenings during the previous week (4.42 versus 5.86), courses of oral corticosteroids (5.26 versus 5.64) and reported emergency consultations during the last six months (4.85 versus 5.71). Premenopausal women had significantly lower total MiniAQLQ scores than men in the same age group (5.44 versus 5.89, p&lt;0.001), while no difference was found between postmenopausal women and men of similar ages. The adjusted odds for premenopausal women for asthma exacerbations was 2.0 (95%CI 1.22-3.43) as compared with men in the same age group. No differences were found when comparing postmenopausal women with men of similar ages. Conclusions: Half the primary health care centres had an asthma clinic and the majority had access to a spirometer. Patients at primary health care centres with asthma clinics reported better knowledge of their disease, and asthma control is more often achieved if the nurse is allocated more time. Achieving asthma control is associated with better quality of life in patients in primary care. Premenopausal women had lower quality of life and less often asthma control then men of the same ages, while no corresponding difference was found between postmenopausal women and men of similar ages

Prioritising primary care respiratory research needs : results from the 2020 International Primary Care Respiratory Group (IPCRG) global e-Delphi exercise

Respiratory diseases remain a significant cause of global morbidity and mortality and primary care plays a central role in their prevention, diagnosis and management. An e-Delphi process was employed to identify and prioritise the current respiratory research needs of primary care health professionals worldwide. One hundred and twelve community-based physicians, nurses and other healthcare professionals from 27 high-, middle- and low-income countries suggested 608 initial research questions, reduced after evidence review by 27 academic experts to 176 questions covering diagnosis, management, monitoring, self-management and prognosis of asthma, COPD and other respiratory conditions (including infections, lung cancer, tobacco control, sleep apnoea). Forty-nine questions reached 80% consensus for importance. Cross-cutting themes identified were: a need for more effective training of primary care clinicians; evidence and guidelines specifically relevant to primary care, adaption for local and low-resource settings; empowerment of patients to improve self-management; and the role of the multidisciplinary healthcare team

Availability of pulmonary rehabilitation in primary care for patients with COPD : a cross-sectional study in Sweden

BACKGROUND: Pulmonary rehabilitation (PR) is an important, evidence-based component for the management of individuals with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD). In daily practice, the majority of COPD patients are treated in primary care. However, information about the availability of PR in primary care in Sweden is lacking. The aim was to investigate the availability of rehabilitation resources in primary care settings for patients with COPD in Sweden. METHODS: A cross-sectional descriptive design was applied, using web-based questionnaires sent to all primary care centres in four regions, comprising more than half of the 9.6 million inhabitants of Sweden. The main questionnaire included questions about the content and availability of rehabilitation resources for COPD patients. PR was defined as exercise training and one or more of the following activities: education, nutritional intervention, energy conservation techniques or psychosocial support. RESULTS: A total of 381 (55.9%) of the 682 primary care centres answered the main questionnaire. In addition to physicians and nurses, availability of healthcare professionals for rehabilitation in primary care settings was physiotherapists 92.0%, occupational therapists 91.9%, dieticians 83.9% and social workers or psychologists 98.4%. At 23.7% of all centres, PR was not available to COPD patients - neither in primary care nor at hospitals. CONCLUSION: Despite high availability of professionals for rehabilitation in primary care settings, about one-quarter of managers at primary care centres stated that their COPD patients had no access to PR. This indicates a need to structure resources for rehabilitation and to present and communicate the available resources within the healthcare system