Megan E MacGillivray1, Michael P Flavin2. 1. Queen's University, School of Medicine, Kingston, Ontario; 2. Pediatrics, Queen's University, Kingston, Ontario.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: While written action plans are standard in the treatment and management of asthma, significant variability exists in the content and format among plans. This variability results in inconsistent educational messages that lend themselves to patient confusion and suboptimal health outcomes. OBJECTIVES: To assess the content of Canadian paediatric written action plans for consistency in format, layout, zone-defining symptoms, suggested treatment options and adherence to current Canadian asthma care guidelines. METHODS: Written action plans were sought from Canadian paediatric hospitals, major teaching hospitals associated with academic centres and three national organizations, for a total of 17 plans. An analysis was performed to assess the similarities and differences among plans. RESULTS: Of all the Canadian paediatric written action plans, 76% were found to consist of three zones and 82% incorporated a traffic light-style design. The plans were divided between symptom-based (59%) and combined symptom- and peak-flow rate approaches (41%). Nominal concordance with the 2012 Canadian Thoracic Society guidelines existed with respect to inhaled corticosteroid and oral corticosteroid therapy. Considerable variability existed among the symptom descriptors that defined each zone. Greater consistency existed among treatment strategies, although the suggested treatment was often difficult to ascertain from the plan templates. CONCLUSION: Canadian written action plans would be improved by nationally clarifying the symptom descriptors for each zone, adding asthma trigger information to the plans, increasing the emphasis of the common cold as a potential harbinger of worsening asthma symptoms and further incorporating national guideline recommendations.
BACKGROUND: While written action plans are standard in the treatment and management of asthma, significant variability exists in the content and format among plans. This variability results in inconsistent educational messages that lend themselves to patient confusion and suboptimal health outcomes. OBJECTIVES: To assess the content of Canadian paediatric written action plans for consistency in format, layout, zone-defining symptoms, suggested treatment options and adherence to current Canadian asthma care guidelines. METHODS: Written action plans were sought from Canadian paediatric hospitals, major teaching hospitals associated with academic centres and three national organizations, for a total of 17 plans. An analysis was performed to assess the similarities and differences among plans. RESULTS: Of all the Canadian paediatric written action plans, 76% were found to consist of three zones and 82% incorporated a traffic light-style design. The plans were divided between symptom-based (59%) and combined symptom- and peak-flow rate approaches (41%). Nominal concordance with the 2012 Canadian Thoracic Society guidelines existed with respect to inhaled corticosteroid and oral corticosteroid therapy. Considerable variability existed among the symptom descriptors that defined each zone. Greater consistency existed among treatment strategies, although the suggested treatment was often difficult to ascertain from the plan templates. CONCLUSION: Canadian written action plans would be improved by nationally clarifying the symptom descriptors for each zone, adding asthma trigger information to the plans, increasing the emphasis of the common cold as a potential harbinger of worsening asthma symptoms and further incorporating national guideline recommendations.
Entities:
Keywords:
Asthma; Disease management; Practice guidelines; Written action plans
Authors: Persijn J Honkoop; D Robin Taylor; Andrew D Smith; Jiska B Snoeck-Stroband; Jacob K Sont Journal: Eur Respir J Date: 2012-05-31 Impact factor: 16.671
Authors: S Gupta; F T Wan; F M Ducharme; M H Chignell; M D Lougheed; S E Straus Journal: Ann Allergy Asthma Immunol Date: 2012-02-23 Impact factor: 6.347
Authors: H K Reddel; C Jenkins; S Quirce; M R Sears; E D Bateman; P M O'Byrne; M Humbert; R Buhl; T Harrison; G G Brusselle; A Thorén; U Sjöbring; S Peterson; O Ostlund; G S Eriksson Journal: Eur Respir J Date: 2011-03-15 Impact factor: 16.671
Authors: Michael D Cabana; Kathryn K Slish; Toby C Lewis; Randall W Brown; Bin Nan; Xihong Lin; Noreen M Clark Journal: J Allergy Clin Immunol Date: 2004-08 Impact factor: 10.793
Authors: Wayne J Morgan; Ellen F Crain; Rebecca S Gruchalla; George T O'Connor; Meyer Kattan; Richard Evans; James Stout; George Malindzak; Ernestine Smartt; Marshall Plaut; Michelle Walter; Benjamin Vaughn; Herman Mitchell Journal: N Engl J Med Date: 2004-09-09 Impact factor: 91.245
Authors: Telford Y Yeung; Christopher Ewing; Anna Malanowska; Peter Zuberbuhler; Michelle Balcom; Janny Liu; Israel Amirav Journal: Pulm Ther Date: 2018-08-31
Authors: Jonathan Gilleland; David Bayfield; Ann Bayliss; Karen Dryden-Palmer; Joelle Fawcett-Arsenault; Michelle Gordon; Dawn Hartfield; Anthony Iacolucci; Melissa Jones; Lisa Ladouceur; Martin McNamara; Kristen Middaugh; Gregory Moore; Sean Murray; Joanna Noble; Simran Singh; Jane Stuart-Minaret; Carla Williams; Christopher S Parshuram Journal: BMJ Open Qual Date: 2019-11-27