Evaluating the Impact and Benefits of Fluticasone Furoate/Vilanterol in Individuals with Asthma or COPD: A Mixed-Methods Analysis of Patient Experiences.

INTRODUCTION: This study evaluated patients' experiences with fluticasone furoate/vilanterol (FF/VI) combination therapy in UK patients with asthma or chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD). METHODS: Participants aged ≥ 18 years, with self-reported, physician-diagnosed asthma or COPD (≥ 1 year) who had been receiving FF/VI (≥ 3 months) were recruited from UK primary care. This two-phase, mixed-methods study consisted of a semi-structured, telephone-interview phase (qualitative) and a self-completed online/paper-survey phase (quantitative). RESULTS: The telephone-interview phase included 50 individuals [asthma, n = 25; COPD, n = 25; mean age (SD) 56.7 years (13.3); 50% female]. Of these, 21 with asthma reported that their condition was stable/well controlled and 13 with COPD felt their condition was manageable. Most participants found FF/VI easy to use (asthma, 25; COPD, 23), easy to integrate into their daily routine (asthma, 25; COPD, 24), and able to control symptoms for ≥ 24 h (asthma, 14; COPD, 16). During the survey phase, 199 individuals were recruited [asthma, n = 100; COPD, n = 99; mean age (SD) 63.6 years (15.1); 59.3% female]. Most participants were satisfied/very satisfied with the efficacy of FF/VI in terms of all-day symptom relief (asthma, 84%; COPD, 75%) and found FF/VI easy/very easy to fit into their daily routine (asthma, 99%; COPD, 96%), easy/very easy to use (asthma, 97%; COPD, 92%), and convenient/very convenient to take as instructed (asthma, 95%; COPD, 93%). Significantly more individuals with asthma (87% versus 46%, P < 0.001) and numerically more individuals with COPD (84% versus 76%, P = 0.055) were satisfied/very satisfied with FF/VI compared with their most recent previous maintenance medication. CONCLUSION: The majority of individuals in this study had confidence in FF/VI and were satisfied or very satisfied with various key attributes of the treatment. TRIAL REGISTRATION: GSK study HO-15-15503/204888. FUNDING: GSK.

Accuracy of diagnosis and classification of COPD in primary and specialist nurse-led respiratory care in Rotherham, UK: a cross-sectional study.

BACKGROUND: Studies have suggested that chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) is commonly misdiagnosed and misclassified in primary care, but less is known about the quality of diagnosis in specialist respiratory care. AIMS: To measure the accuracy of COPD diagnosis and classification of airway obstruction in primary care and at a specialist respiratory centre, and to explore associations between misdiagnosis and misclassification and a range of explanatory factors. METHODS: Data were obtained for 1,205 referrals to a specialist respiratory centre between 2007 and 2010. Standard analysis methods were used. RESULTS: The majority of patients were referred for pulmonary rehabilitation (676/1,205, 56%). Of 1,044 patients with a primary care diagnosis of COPD, 211 (20%) had spirometry inconsistent with COPD. In comparison, of 993 specialist centre diagnoses, 65 (6.5%) had inconsistent spirometry. There was poor agreement between the airflow obstruction grade recorded on the referral and that based on spirometry (kappa=0.26, n=448), whereas agreement between the respiratory centre assessment of airflow obstruction and spirometry was good (kappa=0.88, n=1,016). Referral by practice nurse was associated with accuracy of airflow obstruction classification in primary care (OR 1.85, 95% CI 1.33 to 2.57). Males were more likely than females to have an accurate specialist care classification of airway obstruction (OR 1.40, 95% CI 1.01 to 1.93). Grade of airway obstruction changed between referral and assessment in 56% of cases. CONCLUSIONS: In primary care, a proportion of patients diagnosed with COPD do not have COPD, and misclassification of grade of airflow obstruction is common. Misdiagnosis and misclassification is less common in the specialist care setting of BreathingSpace.

Is a large scale community programme as effective as a community rehabilitation programme delivered in the setting of a clinical trial?

BACKGROUND: The rationale for commissioning community pulmonary rehabilitation programmes is based on evidence from randomised clinical trials. However, there are a number of reasons why similar programmes might be less effective outside the environment of a clinical trial. These include a less highly selected patient group and less control over the fidelity of intervention delivery. The main objective of this study was therefore to test the hypothesis that the real-world programme would have similar outcomes to an intervention delivered in the context of a clinical trial. METHODS: As part of the evaluation of an innovative community-based pulmonary rehabilitation programme ("BreathingSpace"), clinical and quality of life measures were collected before and after delivery of a rehabilitation programme. Baseline characteristics of participants and the change in symptoms and quality of life after the BreathingSpace programme were compared to measures collected in the community-based arm of a separate randomised trial of pulmonary rehabilitation. RESULTS: Despite differences between the BreathingSpace participants and research participants in clinical status at baseline, patient reported symptoms and quality of life measures were similar. Improvements in both symptoms and quality of life were of the same order of magnitude despite the different contexts, setting and scale of the two intervention programmes. Whilst 73% (326/448) of those considered suitable for community rehabilitation in the trial and 80% (393/491) assessed as suitable for the BreathingSpace programme agreed to participate, less than half of participants completed rehabilitation, whether in a research or "real world" setting (47% and 45% respectively). CONCLUSION: The before-after changes in outcomes seen in a "real world" community rehabilitation programme are similar in magnitude to those seen in the intervention arm of a clinical trial. However suboptimal uptake and high dropout rates from rehabilitation amongst eligible participants occurs in both clinical trials and community based programmes and must be addressed if the benefits of rehabilitation for people with chronic lung disease are to be maximised.

GP and nurses' perceptions of how after hours care for people receiving palliative care at home could be improved: a mixed methods study.

BACKGROUND: Primary health care providers play a dominant role in the provision of palliative care (PC) in Australia but many gaps in after hours service remain. In some rural areas only 19% of people receiving palliative care achieve their goal of dying at home. This study, which builds on an earlier qualitative phase of the project, investigates the gaps in care from the perspective of general practitioners (GPs) and PC nurses. METHODS: Questionnaires, developed from the outcomes of the earlier phase, and containing both structured and open ended questions, were distributed through Divisions of General Practice (1 urban, 1 rural, 1 mixed) to GPs (n = 524) and through a special interest group to palliative care nurses (n = 122) in both rural and urban areas. RESULTS: Questionnaires were returned by 114 GPs (22%) and 52 nurses (43%). The majority of GPs were associated with a practice which provided some after hours services but PC was not a strong focus for most. This was reflected in low levels of PC training, limited awareness of the existence of after hours triage services in their area, and of the availability of Enhanced Primary Care (EPC) Medicare items for care planning for palliative patients. However, more than half of both nurses and GPs were aware of accessible PC resources.Factors such as poor communication and limited availability of after hours services were identified the as most likely to impact negatively on service provision. Strategies considered most likely to improve after hours services were individual patient protocols, palliative care trained respite carers and regular multidisciplinary meetings that included the GP. CONCLUSION: While some of the identified gaps can only be met by long term funding and policy change, educational tools for use in training programs in PC for health professionals, which focus on the utilisation of EPC Medicare items in palliative care planning, the development of advance care plans and good communication between members of multidisciplinary teams, which include the GP, may enhance after hours service provision for patients receiving palliative care at home. The role of locums in after PC is an area for further research.

An evidence-based approach to urinary catheter changes.

Many people in the community have a urinary catheter that is routinely changed by a community nurse. People with urinary catheters can experience a number of problems including catheter blockages. A blocked catheter causes great distress and inconvenience to the person and places a strain on the resources of community nursing organizations because of the need for unscheduled visits to change the catheter. A procedure that enabled catheter changes to be planned before they blocked would reduce patient distress and better assist community nursing organizations with resource management. The planned catheter change approach is a procedure that community nurses can use to better plan urinary catheter changes to minimize complications. In this article the author presents the outcomes from the implementation of a planned approach to catheter care in a home nursing service in Melbourne, Australia.

Patient subjective experience and satisfaction during the perioperative period in the day surgery setting: a systematic review.

This systematic review used the Joanna Briggs Institute Qualitative Assessment and Review Instrument to manage, appraise, analyse and synthesize textual data in order to present the best available information in relation to how patients experience nursing interventions and care during the perioperative period in the day surgery setting. Some of the significant findings that emerged from the systematic review include the importance of pre-admission contact, provision of relevant, specific education and information, improving communication skills and maintaining patient privacy throughout their continuum of care.

Prioritization of congenital cardiac surgical patients using fuzzy reasoning--a solution to the problem of the waiting list?

Surgical waiting lists are of high importance in countries, where the national health system is unable to deliver surgical services at a rate that would allow patients to avoid unnecessary periods of waiting. Prioritization of these lists, however, is frequently arbitrary and inconsistent. The objective of our research was to analyze the medical decision-making process when prioritizing patients with congenital cardiac malformations for cardiac surgical procedures, identifying an appropriate representation of knowledge, and transferring this knowledge onto the design and implementation of an expert system ("PrioHeart"). The medical decision-making process was stratified into three stages. The first was to analyze the details of the procedure and patient to define important impact factors on clinical priority, such as the risk of adverse events. The second step was to evaluate these impact factors to define an appropriate "timing category" within which a procedure should be performed. The third, and final, step was to re-evaluate the characteristics of individual patients to differentiate between those in the same timing category. We implemented this decision-making process using a rule-based production system with support for fuzzy sets, using the FuzzyCLIPS inference engine and expert system shell as a suitable development environment for the knowledge base. The "PrioHeart" expert system was developed to give paediatric cardiologists a tool to allow and facilitate the prioritization of patients on the cardiosurgical waiting list. Evaluation of "PrioHeart" on limited sets of patients documented appropriate results of prioritization, with a significant correlation between the prioritization made using "PrioHeart" and those results obtained by the individual consultant specialist. We conclude that our study has demonstrated the feasibility of using an expert system approach with a fuzzy, rule-based production system to implement the prioritization of cardiac surgical patients. The approach may potentially be transferable to other medical subspecialities.