Helen K Reddel, Lisa Valenti, Kylie L Easton, Julie Gordon, Clare Bayram, Graeme C Miller
{"title":"评估和管理哮喘和慢性阻塞性肺疾病在澳大利亚的一般做法。","authors":"Helen K Reddel, Lisa Valenti, Kylie L Easton, Julie Gordon, Clare Bayram, Graeme C Miller","doi":"","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Dispensing data suggest potential issues with the quality use of medicines for airways disease.</p><p><strong>Objective: </strong>The objective of this article was to describe the management of asthma and chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) in general practice, and investigate the appropriateness of prescribing.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>The method used for this study consisted of a national cross‑sectional survey of 91 Australian general practitioners (GPs) participating in the Bettering the Evaluation and Care of Health (BEACH) program.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Data were available for 2589 patients (288 asthma; 135 COPD). For the patients with asthma, GPs classified asthma as well controlled in 76.4%; 54.3% were prescribed inhaled corticosteroids (ICS), mostly (84.9%) as combination therapy, and mostly at moderate-high dose; only 26.3% had a written action plan. GPs classified COPD as mild for 42.9%. Most patients with COPD (60.9%) were prescribed combination ICS therapy and 36.7% were prescribed triple therapy.</p><p><strong>Discussion: </strong>There were substantial differences between guideline-based and GP- recorded assessment and prescription for asthma and COPD. Further research is needed to improve care and optimise patient outcomes with scarce health resources.</p>","PeriodicalId":8653,"journal":{"name":"Australian family physician","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2017-06-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Assessment and management of asthma and chronic obstructive pulmonary disease in Australian general practice.\",\"authors\":\"Helen K Reddel, Lisa Valenti, Kylie L Easton, Julie Gordon, Clare Bayram, Graeme C Miller\",\"doi\":\"\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Dispensing data suggest potential issues with the quality use of medicines for airways disease.</p><p><strong>Objective: </strong>The objective of this article was to describe the management of asthma and chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) in general practice, and investigate the appropriateness of prescribing.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>The method used for this study consisted of a national cross‑sectional survey of 91 Australian general practitioners (GPs) participating in the Bettering the Evaluation and Care of Health (BEACH) program.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Data were available for 2589 patients (288 asthma; 135 COPD). For the patients with asthma, GPs classified asthma as well controlled in 76.4%; 54.3% were prescribed inhaled corticosteroids (ICS), mostly (84.9%) as combination therapy, and mostly at moderate-high dose; only 26.3% had a written action plan. GPs classified COPD as mild for 42.9%. Most patients with COPD (60.9%) were prescribed combination ICS therapy and 36.7% were prescribed triple therapy.</p><p><strong>Discussion: </strong>There were substantial differences between guideline-based and GP- recorded assessment and prescription for asthma and COPD. Further research is needed to improve care and optimise patient outcomes with scarce health resources.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":8653,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Australian family physician\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2017-06-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Australian family physician\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"Medicine\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Australian family physician","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"Medicine","Score":null,"Total":0}
Assessment and management of asthma and chronic obstructive pulmonary disease in Australian general practice.
Background: Dispensing data suggest potential issues with the quality use of medicines for airways disease.
Objective: The objective of this article was to describe the management of asthma and chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) in general practice, and investigate the appropriateness of prescribing.
Methods: The method used for this study consisted of a national cross‑sectional survey of 91 Australian general practitioners (GPs) participating in the Bettering the Evaluation and Care of Health (BEACH) program.
Results: Data were available for 2589 patients (288 asthma; 135 COPD). For the patients with asthma, GPs classified asthma as well controlled in 76.4%; 54.3% were prescribed inhaled corticosteroids (ICS), mostly (84.9%) as combination therapy, and mostly at moderate-high dose; only 26.3% had a written action plan. GPs classified COPD as mild for 42.9%. Most patients with COPD (60.9%) were prescribed combination ICS therapy and 36.7% were prescribed triple therapy.
Discussion: There were substantial differences between guideline-based and GP- recorded assessment and prescription for asthma and COPD. Further research is needed to improve care and optimise patient outcomes with scarce health resources.
期刊介绍：
The Australian Journal of General Practice (AJGP) aims to provide relevant, evidence-based, clearly articulated information to Australian GPs to assist them in providing the highest quality patient care, applicable to the varied geographic and social contexts in which GPs work and to all GP roles as clinician, researcher, educator, practice team member and opinion leader. All articles are subject to a peer-review process before they are accepted for publication. The journal is indexed in MEDLINE, Index Medicus and Science Citation Index Expanded.
分享
京公网安备 11010802042870号
京ICP备2023020795号-1
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：
扫码关注我们
