D. Burton

Pharmacy Asthma Care Program (PACP) improves outcomes for patients in the community

Background: Despite national disease management plans, optimal asthma management remains a challenge in Australia. Community pharmacists are ideally placed to implement new strategies that aim to ensure asthma care meets current standards of best practice. The impact of the Pharmacy Asthma Care Program (PACP) on asthma control was assessed using a multi-site randomised intervention versus control repeated measures study design. Methods: Fifty Australian pharmacies were randomised into two groups: intervention pharmacies implemented the PACP (an ongoing cycle of assessment, goal setting, monitoring and review) to 191 patients over 6 months, while control pharmacies gave their usual care to 205 control patients. Both groups administered questionnaires and conducted spirometric testing at baseline and 6 months later. The main outcome measure was asthma severity/control status. Results: 186 of 205 control patients (91%) and 165 of 191 intervention patients (86%) completed the study. The intervention resulted in improved asthma control: patients receiving the intervention were 2.7 times more likely to improve from “severe” to “not severe” than control patients (OR 2.68, 95% CI 1.64 to 4.37; p<0.001). The intervention also resulted in improved adherence to preventer medication (OR 1.89, 95% CI 1.08 to 3.30; p = 0.03), decreased mean daily dose of reliever medication (difference −149.11 μg, 95% CI −283.87 to −14.36; p = 0.03), a shift in medication profile from reliever only to a combination of preventer, reliever with or without long-acting β agonist (OR 3.80, 95% CI 1.40 to 10.32; p = 0.01) and improved scores on risk of non-adherence (difference −0.44, 95% CI −0.69 to −0.18; p = 0.04), quality of life (difference −0.23, 95% CI −0.46 to 0.00; p = 0.05), asthma knowledge (difference 1.18, 95% CI 0.73 to 1.63; p<0.01) and perceived control of asthma questionnaires (difference −1.39, 95% CI −2.44 to −0.35; p<0.01). No significant change in spirometric measures occurred in either group. Conclusions: A pharmacist-delivered asthma care programme based on national guidelines improves asthma control. The sustainability and implementation of the programme within the healthcare system remains to be investigated.

The contribution of goal specificity to goal achievement in collaborative goal setting for the management of asthma.

BACKGROUND Goal setting was investigated as part of an implementation trial of an asthma management service (PAMS) conducted in 96 Australian community pharmacies. Patients and pharmacists identified asthma-related issues of concern to the patient and collaboratively set goals to address these. Although goal setting is commonly integrated into disease state management interventions, the nature of goals, and their contribution to goal attainment and health outcomes are not well understood. OBJECTIVES To identify and describe: 1) goals set collaboratively between adult patients with asthma and their pharmacist, 2) goal specificity and goal achievement, and 3) describe the relationships between specificity, achievement, asthma control and asthma-related quality of life. METHODS Measures of goal specificity, and goal achievement were developed and applied to patient data records. Goals set were thematically analyzed into goal domains. Proportions of goals set, goals achieved and their specificity were calculated. Correlational and regression analyses were undertaken to determine the relationships between goal specificity, goal achievement, asthma control and asthma-related quality of life. RESULTS Data were drawn from 498 patient records. Findings showed that patients set a wide range and number of asthma-related goals (N = 1787) and the majority (93%) were either achieved or being working toward by the end of the study. Goal achievement was positively associated with specific and moderately specific goals, but not non-specific goals. However, on closer inspection, an inconsistent pattern of relationships emerged as a function of goal domain. Findings also showed that goal setting was associated with end-of-study asthma control but not to asthma-related quality of life. CONCLUSIONS Pharmacists can help patients to set achievable and specific asthma management goals, and these have the potential to directly impact health outcomes such as asthma control. Goal specificity appears to be an important feature in the achievement of goals, but other factors may also play a role.

Asthma service delivered in community pharmacy provides positive clinical and humanistic outcomes and is cost-effective

Asthma is a chronic, episodic respiratory condition which is primarily managed in the community. Asthma management comprises several components, including asthma education. Traditionally, pharmacists have provided advice and education to patients on an individual basis. Several studies with a range of nonpharmacist educators have shown that providing asthma education in small groups can be effective in improving asthma outcomes and reducing asthmarelated health care utilisation. A group of Danish pharmacists (ISPW, Malta, 2004) demonstrated that group education regarding lipid-lowering agents is feasible, and feedback from patients was very positive. To date, no such small-group asthma education provided by pharmacists in the community pharmacy setting has been implemented and evaluated in Australia.