4.7 Article

Shared Treatment Decision Making Improves Adherence and Outcomes in Poorly Controlled Asthma

Journal

Publisher

AMER THORACIC SOC
DOI: 10.1164/rccm.200906-0907OC

Keywords

randomized controlled trial; asthma control; patient-clinician communication

Funding

  1. National Institutes of Health [R01 HL69358, R18 HL67092]
  2. Asthmatx, Inc.
  3. GlaxoSmithKline
  4. AstraZeneca
  5. Merck
  6. Sepracor
  7. Schering Plough
  8. Pfizer, Inc.
  9. Palo Alto Medical Foundation Research Institute
  10. Novartis
  11. Boheringer Ingelheim

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Rationale: Poor adherence to asthma controller medications results in poor treatment outcomes. Objectives: To compare controller medication adherence and clinical outcomes in 612 adults with poorly controlled asthma randomized to one of two different treatment decision-making models or to usual care. Methods: In shared decision making (SDM), nonphysician clinicians and patients negotiated a treatment regimen that accommodated patient goals and preferences. In clinician decision making, treatment was prescribed without specifically eliciting patient goals/preferences. The otherwise identical intervention protocols both provided asthma education and involved two in-person and three brief phone encounters. Measurements and Main Results: Refill adherence was measured using continuous medication acquisition (CMA) indices the total days' supply acquired per year divided by 365 days. Cumulative controller medication dose was measured in beclomethasone canister equivalents. In follow-up Year 1, compared with usual care, SDM resulted in: significantly better controller adherence (CMA, 0.67 vs. 0.46; P < 0.0001) and long-acting p-agonist adherence (CMA, 0.51 vs. 0.40; P = 0.0225); higher cumulative controller medication dose (canister equivalent, 10.9 vs. 5.2; P < 0.0001); significantly better clinical outcomes (asthma-related quality of life, health care use, rescue medication use, asthma control, and lung function). In Year 2, compared with usual care, SDM resulted in significantly lower rescue medication use, the sole clinical outcome available for that year. Compared with clinician decision making, SDM resulted in: significantly better controller adherence (CMA, 0.67 vs. 0.59; P = 0.03) and long-acting beta-agonist adherence (CMA, 0.51 vs. 0.41; P = 0.0143); higher cumulative controller dose (CMA, 10.9 vs. 9.1; P = 0.005); and quantitatively, but not significantly, better outcomes on all clinical measures. Conclusions: Negotiating patients' treatment decisions significantly improves adherence to asthma pharmacotherapy and clinical outcomes.

Authors

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

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.7
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available