Qualitative study of patients experiences and perceptions of stepping down asthma medication in primary care across England.

IF 3.4 3区 医学 Q1 RESPIRATORY SYSTEM BMJ Open Respiratory Research Pub Date : 2025-02-03 DOI:10.1136/bmjresp-2024-002898
Chloe I Bloom, Jack Middleton, Adam Lewis
{"title":"Qualitative study of patients experiences and perceptions of stepping down asthma medication in primary care across England.","authors":"Chloe I Bloom, Jack Middleton, Adam Lewis","doi":"10.1136/bmjresp-2024-002898","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Guidelines recommend that asthma medication should be stepped down to the minimally effective dose that achieves symptom control. Stepping down aims to prevent adverse medication effects and unnecessary costs but is often not implemented in primary care, where most patients with asthma are managed. Little is known about the experiences and views of patients regarding stepping down.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Patients with stable asthma, with regular use of a preventer inhaler, from general practitioner practices across England, participated in a survey and/or semi-structured interview. Questions explored the patient's understanding of their asthma, views and knowledge of preventer inhalers, experiences and perceptions of stepping down asthma medication. Qualitative group-based multidisciplinary thematic analysis by two healthcare professionals and a patient were performed.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>143 patients responded to the survey, 63% were female, between the ages 18-80 years and including geographical areas across the UK, 17 of whom participated in an interview. Half of these patients with stable asthma, most with asthma for more than 10 years, had never had a discussion regarding stepping down asthma medication. Most stepping down that had occurred was related to seasonal changes in asthma control. Four overarching themes from the interviews were identified, (1) experiences of living with asthma and needing inhalers, (2) insufficient education regarding preventer inhalers, (3) stepping down is agreeable and possible and (4) current asthma care is suboptimal.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Patients with stable asthma were able to self-manage their asthma well. They had little awareness of medication adverse effects and minimal experience of having their medication stepped down by a healthcare professional. Most were inclined to step down, if clinically safe to do so, indeed some had reduced their medication doses themselves, without professional guidance.</p>","PeriodicalId":9048,"journal":{"name":"BMJ Open Respiratory Research","volume":"12 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":3.4000,"publicationDate":"2025-02-03","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11795401/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"BMJ Open Respiratory Research","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1136/bmjresp-2024-002898","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"RESPIRATORY SYSTEM","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: Guidelines recommend that asthma medication should be stepped down to the minimally effective dose that achieves symptom control. Stepping down aims to prevent adverse medication effects and unnecessary costs but is often not implemented in primary care, where most patients with asthma are managed. Little is known about the experiences and views of patients regarding stepping down.

Methods: Patients with stable asthma, with regular use of a preventer inhaler, from general practitioner practices across England, participated in a survey and/or semi-structured interview. Questions explored the patient's understanding of their asthma, views and knowledge of preventer inhalers, experiences and perceptions of stepping down asthma medication. Qualitative group-based multidisciplinary thematic analysis by two healthcare professionals and a patient were performed.

Results: 143 patients responded to the survey, 63% were female, between the ages 18-80 years and including geographical areas across the UK, 17 of whom participated in an interview. Half of these patients with stable asthma, most with asthma for more than 10 years, had never had a discussion regarding stepping down asthma medication. Most stepping down that had occurred was related to seasonal changes in asthma control. Four overarching themes from the interviews were identified, (1) experiences of living with asthma and needing inhalers, (2) insufficient education regarding preventer inhalers, (3) stepping down is agreeable and possible and (4) current asthma care is suboptimal.

Conclusion: Patients with stable asthma were able to self-manage their asthma well. They had little awareness of medication adverse effects and minimal experience of having their medication stepped down by a healthcare professional. Most were inclined to step down, if clinically safe to do so, indeed some had reduced their medication doses themselves, without professional guidance.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
病人的经验和看法的定性研究,逐步减少哮喘药物在英格兰的初级保健。
背景:指南建议哮喘药物应逐步减少到达到症状控制的最低有效剂量。降压旨在防止药物不良反应和不必要的费用,但往往没有在初级保健中实施,而大多数哮喘患者都是在初级保健中得到管理的。我们对病人离职的经历和看法知之甚少。方法:来自英格兰全科医生的定期使用预防吸入器的稳定哮喘患者参与了一项调查和/或半结构化访谈。这些问题探讨了患者对自己哮喘的了解、对预防吸入器的看法和知识、减少哮喘药物治疗的经验和看法。由两名医疗保健专业人员和一名患者进行定性分组多学科专题分析。结果:143名患者回应了调查,63%是女性,年龄在18-80岁之间,包括英国各地的地理区域,其中17人参加了采访。在这些稳定型哮喘患者中,有一半(大多数哮喘患者超过10年)从未讨论过停止哮喘药物治疗。大多数已经发生的减量与哮喘控制的季节性变化有关。从访谈中确定了四个主要主题,(1)患有哮喘和需要吸入器的经历,(2)关于预防器吸入器的教育不足,(3)戒烟是令人愉快的和可能的,(4)目前的哮喘治疗不理想。结论:稳定型哮喘患者能较好地自我控制哮喘。他们很少意识到药物的副作用,并且很少有医疗保健专业人员停止用药的经验。大多数人倾向于退出,如果临床安全的话,实际上有些人在没有专业指导的情况下自己减少了药物剂量。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
BMJ Open Respiratory Research
BMJ Open Respiratory Research RESPIRATORY SYSTEM-
CiteScore
6.60
自引率
2.40%
发文量
95
审稿时长
12 weeks
期刊介绍: BMJ Open Respiratory Research is a peer-reviewed, open access journal publishing respiratory and critical care medicine. It is the sister journal to Thorax and co-owned by the British Thoracic Society and BMJ. The journal focuses on robustness of methodology and scientific rigour with less emphasis on novelty or perceived impact. BMJ Open Respiratory Research operates a rapid review process, with continuous publication online, ensuring timely, up-to-date research is available worldwide. The journal publishes review articles and all research study types: Basic science including laboratory based experiments and animal models, Pilot studies or proof of concept, Observational studies, Study protocols, Registries, Clinical trials from phase I to multicentre randomised clinical trials, Systematic reviews and meta-analyses.
期刊最新文献
Respiratory syncytial virus-induced SIGLEC1 upregulation inhibits macrophage autophagy and facilitates inflammatory mediator secretion. Comparing paper Letters in addition to Emailed Audit and feedback in Refining Asthma treatment to Improve clinical and environmental Results in primary care through a cluster randomised controlled trial: the CLEAR AIR study. Respiratory oscillometry identifies disease progression in interstitial lung disease. Improving asthma case detection among children and adolescents through clinic-based screening in primary care health facilities in Uganda: a cluster randomised trial. Incidence, risk factors and viral aetiology of lower respiratory infections among older adults: a 5-year multicentric cohort study in India.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1