Tunn Ren Tay1, Joy Lee2, Naghmeh Radhakrishna2, Fiona Hore-Lacy2, Robert Stirling3, Ryan Hoy4, Eli Dabscheck3, Robyn O'Hehir3, Mark Hew4. 1. Allergy, Asthma and Clinical Immunology Service, The Alfred Hospital, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia. Electronic address: tunn_ren_tay@cgh.com.sg. 2. Allergy, Asthma and Clinical Immunology Service, The Alfred Hospital, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia. 3. Allergy, Asthma and Clinical Immunology Service, The Alfred Hospital, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia; Department of Medicine, Monash University, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia. 4. Allergy, Asthma and Clinical Immunology Service, The Alfred Hospital, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia; School of Public Health and Preventive Medicine, Monash University, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Systematic evaluation is advocated for difficult asthma, but how best to deliver such care is unclear and outcome data are scarce. OBJECTIVE: We describe our institution's structured approach to difficult asthma management and report on the outcomes of such an approach. METHODS: Eighty-two consecutive patients with difficult asthma referred to our clinic from respiratory specialists were evaluated in 3 key areas: diagnostic confirmation, comorbidity detection, and inflammatory phenotyping. We then optimized treatment including relevant comorbidity interventions. The outpatient protocol was supported by comorbidity questionnaires, an electronic clinic template, and standardized panel discussion. Asthma outcomes were assessed at 6 months. RESULTS: Sixty-eight patients completed follow-up. Asthma diagnosis was refuted in 3 patients and the remaining 65 patients were included in the study analysis. There was no overall escalation of inhaled or oral corticosteroids. Patients had a median of 3 comorbidities, and a median of 3 comorbidity interventions. Control of chronic rhinosinusitis and dysfunctional breathing improved among patients with these diagnoses (22-item Sino-Nasal Outcome Test score from 47 ± 20 to 37 ± 22, P = .017; Nijmegen score from 32 ± 6 to 25 ± 9, P = .003). There were overall improvements in the Asthma Control Test score (from 14 ± 5 to 16 ± 6, P < .001), the Asthma Quality of Life Questionnaire (from 4.29 ± 1.4 to 4.65 ± 1.5, P = .073), and the frequency of exacerbations over 6 months (from 2 [interquartile range, 0-4] to 0 [interquartile range, 0-2], P < .001). CONCLUSIONS: In patients referred with difficult asthma from respiratory specialists, a structured approach coupled with targeted comorbidity interventions improved control of key comorbidities and enhanced asthma outcomes.
BACKGROUND: Systematic evaluation is advocated for difficult asthma, but how best to deliver such care is unclear and outcome data are scarce. OBJECTIVE: We describe our institution's structured approach to difficult asthma management and report on the outcomes of such an approach. METHODS: Eighty-two consecutive patients with difficult asthma referred to our clinic from respiratory specialists were evaluated in 3 key areas: diagnostic confirmation, comorbidity detection, and inflammatory phenotyping. We then optimized treatment including relevant comorbidity interventions. The outpatient protocol was supported by comorbidity questionnaires, an electronic clinic template, and standardized panel discussion. Asthma outcomes were assessed at 6 months. RESULTS: Sixty-eight patients completed follow-up. Asthma diagnosis was refuted in 3 patients and the remaining 65 patients were included in the study analysis. There was no overall escalation of inhaled or oral corticosteroids. Patients had a median of 3 comorbidities, and a median of 3 comorbidity interventions. Control of chronic rhinosinusitis and dysfunctional breathing improved among patients with these diagnoses (22-item Sino-Nasal Outcome Test score from 47 ± 20 to 37 ± 22, P = .017; Nijmegen score from 32 ± 6 to 25 ± 9, P = .003). There were overall improvements in the Asthma Control Test score (from 14 ± 5 to 16 ± 6, P < .001), the Asthma Quality of Life Questionnaire (from 4.29 ± 1.4 to 4.65 ± 1.5, P = .073), and the frequency of exacerbations over 6 months (from 2 [interquartile range, 0-4] to 0 [interquartile range, 0-2], P < .001). CONCLUSIONS: In patients referred with difficult asthma from respiratory specialists, a structured approach coupled with targeted comorbidity interventions improved control of key comorbidities and enhanced asthma outcomes.
Authors: John Blakey; Li Ping Chung; Vanessa M McDonald; Laurence Ruane; John Gornall; Chris Barton; Sinthia Bosnic-Anticevich; John Harrington; Mark Hew; Anne E Holland; Trudy Hopkins; Lata Jayaram; Helen Reddel; John W Upham; Peter G Gibson; Philip Bardin Journal: Respirology Date: 2021-09-29 Impact factor: 6.175
Authors: Regina Maria de Carvalho-Pinto; José Eduardo Delfini Cançado; Marcia Margaret Menezes Pizzichini; Jussara Fiterman; Adalberto Sperb Rubin; Alcindo Cerci Neto; Álvaro Augusto Cruz; Ana Luisa Godoy Fernandes; Ana Maria Silva Araujo; Daniela Cavalet Blanco; Gediel Cordeiro Junior; Lilian Serrasqueiro Ballini Caetano; Marcelo Fouad Rabahi; Marcelo Bezerra de Menezes; Maria Alenita de Oliveira; Marina Andrade Lima; Paulo Márcio Pitrez Journal: J Bras Pneumol Date: 2021-12-15 Impact factor: 2.624
Authors: Cindy Thamrin; Mark Hew; Joy Lee; Jacqueline Huvanandana; Juliet M Foster; Helen K Reddel; Michael J Abramson Journal: Sci Rep Date: 2021-07-19 Impact factor: 4.379
Authors: Amanda R van Buul; Thomas S Wildschut; Tobias N Bonten; Marise J Kasteleyn; Annelies M Slats; Niels H Chavannes; Christian Taube Journal: Int J Chron Obstruct Pulmon Dis Date: 2018-10-12