S'abonner

Attitudes of physicians toward objective measures of airway function in asthma - 28/08/11

Doi : 10.1016/S0002-9343(03)00007-X 
Liza C O’Dowd, MD a, b, Daniel Fife, MD b, c, Thomas Tenhave, MPH, PhD b, Reynold A Panettieri, MD a,
a Pulmonary, Allergy and Critical Care Division (LO, RP), University of Pennsylvania Health System, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, USA 
b Department of Clinical Epidemiology and Biostatistics (LO, DF, TT), University of Pennsylvania School of Medicine, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, USA 
c Johnson & Johnson Pharmaceutical Research & Development (DF), Department of Drug Safety and Surveillance, Titusville, New Jersey, USA 

*Requests for reprints should be addressed to Reynold A. Panettieri, Jr, MD, Pulmonary, Allergy and Critical Care Division, University of Pennsylvania Medical Center, 421 Curie Boulevard, 805 BRB II/III, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania 19104-6160, USA

Abstract

Background

The National Asthma Education and Prevention Program (NAEPP) recommends pulmonary function testing as part of asthma evaluation. The objectives of this study were to determine the use of spirometry in patients with asthma by primary care physicians and asthma specialists, and to identify barriers to use of spirometry.

Methods

We developed, validated, and administered a mailed survey to primary care physicians and asthma specialists in the general community. We asked about the use of spirometry, access to spirometry, and barriers to spirometry use.

Results

Of 975 eligible subjects, 672 (69%) completed the survey. Asthma specialists were more likely to have an office spirometer (78% [216/277] vs. 43% [169/395], P <0.001) than were primary care physicians, and more likely to report measuring pulmonary function in at least 75% of their patients with asthma (83% [223/270] vs. 34% [131/388], P <0.001). In logistic regression analysis, factors most strongly associated with reported spirometry use (in at least 75% of patients) among asthma specialists were owning a spirometer, disagreeing with the statement that the test requires excessive use of office resources, and agreeing that spirometry is a necessary part of the asthma evaluation. Among primary care physicians, owning a spirometer, agreeing that the data are necessary for accurate diagnosis, and believing that they were trained to perform and interpret the test were most strongly associated with reported spirometry use.

Conclusion

Pulmonary function testing is underutilized by physicians, with rates of utilization lowest among primary care physicians. Providing primary care physicians with better access to spirometry, through provision of a machine and appropriate training in its use and interpretation, may improve compliance with the NAEPP recommendations.

Le texte complet de cet article est disponible en PDF.

Keywords : Asthma specialists, primary care physicians, practice guidelines, spirometry, asthma


Plan


 This project was supported by funding from the National Institutes of Health (5T32HL07586), Bethesda, Maryland, and Zeneca Pharmaceuticals, Wilmington, Delaware.


© 2003  Excerpta Medica Inc. Tous droits réservés.
Ajouter à ma bibliothèque Retirer de ma bibliothèque Imprimer
Export

    Export citations

  • Fichier

  • Contenu

Vol 114 - N° 5

P. 391-396 - avril 2003 Retour au numéro
Article précédent Article précédent
  • The effects of a targeted multicomponent delirium intervention on postdischarge outcomes for hospitalized older adults
  • Sidney T Bogardus, Mayur M Desai, Christianna S Williams, Linda Leo-Summers, Denise Acampora, Sharon K Inouye
| Article suivant Article suivant
  • A cost-benefit analysis of electronic medical records in primary care
  • Samuel J. Wang, Blackford Middleton, Lisa A. Prosser, Christiana G. Bardon, Cynthia D. Spurr, Patricia J. Carchidi, Anne F. Kittler, Robert C. Goldszer, David G. Fairchild, Andrew J. Sussman, Gilad J. Kuperman, David W. Bates

Bienvenue sur EM-consulte, la référence des professionnels de santé.
L’accès au texte intégral de cet article nécessite un abonnement.

Déjà abonné à cette revue ?

Mon compte


Plateformes Elsevier Masson

Déclaration CNIL

EM-CONSULTE.COM est déclaré à la CNIL, déclaration n° 1286925.

En application de la loi nº78-17 du 6 janvier 1978 relative à l'informatique, aux fichiers et aux libertés, vous disposez des droits d'opposition (art.26 de la loi), d'accès (art.34 à 38 de la loi), et de rectification (art.36 de la loi) des données vous concernant. Ainsi, vous pouvez exiger que soient rectifiées, complétées, clarifiées, mises à jour ou effacées les informations vous concernant qui sont inexactes, incomplètes, équivoques, périmées ou dont la collecte ou l'utilisation ou la conservation est interdite.
Les informations personnelles concernant les visiteurs de notre site, y compris leur identité, sont confidentielles.
Le responsable du site s'engage sur l'honneur à respecter les conditions légales de confidentialité applicables en France et à ne pas divulguer ces informations à des tiers.


Tout le contenu de ce site: Copyright © 2024 Elsevier, ses concédants de licence et ses contributeurs. Tout les droits sont réservés, y compris ceux relatifs à l'exploration de textes et de données, a la formation en IA et aux technologies similaires. Pour tout contenu en libre accès, les conditions de licence Creative Commons s'appliquent.