Cargando…

The Electronic Asthma Management System (eAMS) improves primary care asthma management

A high prevalence of suboptimal asthma control is attributable to known evidence–practice gaps. We developed a computerised clinical decision support system (the Electronic Asthma Management System (eAMS)) to address major care gaps and sought to measure its impact on care in adults with asthma. Thi...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Gupta, Samir, Price, Courtney, Agarwal, Gina, Chan, David, Goel, Sanjeev, Boulet, Louis-Philippe, Kaplan, Alan G., Lebovic, Gerald, Mamdani, Muhammad, Straus, Sharon E.
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: European Respiratory Society 2019
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6482383/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/30765503
http://dx.doi.org/10.1183/13993003.02241-2018
Descripción
Sumario:A high prevalence of suboptimal asthma control is attributable to known evidence–practice gaps. We developed a computerised clinical decision support system (the Electronic Asthma Management System (eAMS)) to address major care gaps and sought to measure its impact on care in adults with asthma. This was a 2-year interrupted time-series study of usual care (year 1) versus eAMS (year 2) at three Canadian primary care sites. We included asthma patients aged ≥16 years receiving an asthma medication within the last 12 months. The eAMS consisted of a touch tablet patient questionnaire completed in the waiting room, with real-time data processing producing electronic medical record-integrated clinician decision support. Action plan delivery (primary outcome) improved from zero out of 412 (0%) to 79 out of 443 (17.8%) eligible patients (absolute increase 0.18 (95% CI 0.14–0.22)). Time-series analysis indicated a 30.5% increase in physician visits with action plan delivery with the intervention (p<0.0001). Assessment of asthma control level increased from 173 out of 3497 (4.9%) to 849 out of 3062 (27.7%) eligible visits (adjusted OR 8.62 (95% CI 5.14–12.45)). Clinicians escalated controller therapy in 108 out of 3422 (3.2%) baseline visits versus 126 out of 3240 (3.9%) intervention visits (p=0.12). At baseline, a short-acting β-agonist alone was added in 62 visits and a controller added in 54 visits; with the intervention, this occurred in 33 and 229 visits, respectively (p<0.001). The eAMS improved asthma quality of care in real-world primary care settings. Strategies to further increase clinician uptake and a randomised controlled trial to assess impact on patient outcomes are now required.