4.6 Article

Community Health Worker Asthma Interventions for Children: Results From a Clinically Integrated Randomized Comparative Effectiveness Trial (2016-2019)

Journal

AMERICAN JOURNAL OF PUBLIC HEALTH
Volume 111, Issue 7, Pages 1328-1337

Publisher

AMER PUBLIC HEALTH ASSOC INC
DOI: 10.2105/AJPH.2021.306272)

Keywords

-

Funding

  1. National Institutes of Health, National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute [R01HL123797]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

This study compared the impact of community health workers and certified asthma educators on asthma control in children, with the results showing that the services provided by community health workers had a greater positive effect.
Objectives. To compare asthma control for children receiving either community health worker (CHW) or certified asthma educator (AE-C) services. Methods. The Asthma Action at Erie Trial is a comparative effectiveness trial that ran from 2016 to 2019 in Cook County, Illinois. Participants (aged 5-16 years with uncontrolled asthma) were randomized to 10 home visits from clinically integrated asthma CHWs or 2 in-clinic sessions from an AE-C. Results. Participants (n = 223) were mainly Hispanic (85%) and low-income. Both intervention groups showed significant improvement in asthma control scores over time. Asthma control was maintained after interventions ended. The CHW group experienced a greater improvement in asthma control scores. One year after intervention cessation, the CHW group had a 42% reduction in days of activity limitation relative to the AE-C group (b = 0.58; 95% confidence interval = 0.35, 0.96). Conclusions. Both interventions were associated with meaningful improvements in asthma control. Improvements continued for 1 year after intervention cessation and were stronger with the CHW intervention. Public Health Implications. Clinically integrated asthma CHW and AE-C services that do not provide home environmental remediation equipment may improve and sustain asthma control. (Am J Public

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.6
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available