Improving clinician self-efficacy does not increase asthma guideline use by primary care clinicians

Objective: The purpose of this study was to show the association between changes in clinician self-efficacy and readiness to change and implementation of an asthma management program (Easy Breathing). Methods: A 36 month randomized, controlled trial was conducted involving 24 pediatric practices (88 clinicians). Randomized clinicians received interventions designed to enhance clinician self-efficacy and readiness to change which were measured at baseline and 3 years. Interventions consisted of an educational toolbox, seminars, teleconferences, mini-fellowships, opinion leader visits, clinician-specific feedback, and pay for performance. The primary outcome was program utilization (number of children enrolled in Easy Breathing/year); secondary outcomes included development of a written treatment plan and severity-appropriate therapy. Results: At baseline, clinicians enrolled 149 ± 147 (mean ± SD) children/clinician/year; 84% of children had a written treatment plan and 77% of plans used severity-appropriate therapy. At baseline, higher self-efficacy scores were associated with greater program utilization (relative rate [RR], 1.34; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.04-1.72; P =.04) but not treatment plan development (RR, 0.63; 95% CI, 0.29-1.35; P =.23) or anti-inflammatory use (RR, 1.76; 95% CI, 0.92-3.35; P =.09). Intervention clinicians participated in 17 interventions over 36 months. At study end, self-efficacy scores increased in intervention clinicians compared to control clinicians (P =.01) and more clinicians were in an action stage of change (P =.001) but these changes were not associated with changes in primary or secondary outcomes. Conclusions: Self-efficacy scores correlated with program use at baseline and increased in the intervention arm, but these increases were not associated with greater program-related activities. Self-efficacy may be necessary but not sufficient for behavior change. Copyright © 2012 by Academic Pediatric Association.

Inappropriate prescribing of combination inhalers in Northern Ireland: retrospective cross-sectional cohort study of prescribing practice in primary care

BACKGROUND: Asthma management guidelines advocate a stepwise approach to asthma therapy, including the addition of a long-acting bronchodilator to inhaled steroid therapy at step 3. This is almost exclusively prescribed as inhaled combination therapy.

AIMS: To examine whether asthma prescribing practice for inhaled combination therapy (inhaled corticosteroid/long-acting β2-agonist (ICS/LABA)) in primary care in Northern Ireland is in line with national asthma management guidelines.

METHODS: Using data from the Northern Ireland Enhanced Prescribing Database, we examined initiation of ICS/LABA in subjects aged 5-35 years in 2010.

RESULTS: A total of 2,640 subjects (67%) had no inhaled corticosteroid monotherapy (ICS) in the study year or six months of the preceding year (lead-in period) and, extending this to a 12-month lead-in period, 52% had no prior ICS. 41% of first prescriptions for ICS/LABA were dispensed in January to March. Prior to ICS/LABA prescription, in the previous six months only 17% had a short-acting β2-agonist (SABA) dispensed, 5% received oral steroids, and 17% received an antibiotic.

CONCLUSIONS: ICS/LABA therapy was initiated in the majority of young subjects with asthma without prior inhaled steroid therapy. Most prescriptions were initiated in the January to March period. However, the prescribing of ICS/LABA did not appear to be driven by asthma symptoms (17% received SABA in the previous 6 months) or severe asthma exacerbation (only 5% received oral steroids). Significant reductions in ICS/LABA, with associated cost savings, would occur if the asthma prescribing guidelines were followed in primary care.

Statin prescription initiation and lifestyle behaviour: a primary care cohort study

BACKGROUND: Statin prescribing and healthy lifestyles contribute to declining cardiovascular disease mortality. Recent guidelines emphasise the importance of giving lifestyle advice in association with prescribing statins but adherence to healthy lifestyle recommendations is sub-optimal. However, little is known about any change in patients' lifestyle behaviours when starting statins or of their recall of receiving advice. This study aimed to examine patients' diet and physical activity (PA) behaviours and their recall of lifestyle advice following initiation of statin prescribing in primary care.

METHOD: In 12 general practices, patients with a recent initial prescription of statin therapy, were invited to participate. Those who agreed received a food diary by post, to record food consumed over 4 consecutive days and return to the researcher. We also telephoned participants to administer brief validated questionnaires to assess typical daily diet (DINE) and PA level (Godin). Using the same methods, food diaries and questionnaires were repeated 3 months later. At both times participants were asked if they had changed their behaviour or received advice about their diet or PA.

RESULTS: Of 384 invited, 122 (32 %) participated; 109 (89.3 %) completed paired datasets; 50 (45.9 %) were male; their mean age was 64 years. 53.2 % (58/109) recalled receiving lifestyle advice. Of those who did, 69.0 % (40/58) reported having changed their diet or PA, compared to 31.4 % (16/51) of those who did not recall receiving advice. Initial mean daily saturated fat intake (12.9 % (SD3.5) of total energy) was higher than recommended; mean fibre intake (13.8 g/day (SD5.5)), fruit/vegetable consumption (2.7 portions/day (SD1.3)) and PA levels (Godin score 7.1 (SD13.9)) were low. Overall, although some individuals showed evidence of behaviour change, there were no significant changes in the proportions who reported high or medium fat intake (42.2 % v 49.5 %), low fibre (51.4 % v 55.0 %), or insufficient PA (80.7 % v 83.5 %) at 3-month follow-up.

CONCLUSION: Whilst approximately half of our cohort recalled receiving lifestyle advice associated with statin prescribing this did not translate into significant changes in diet or PA. Further research is needed to explore gaps between people's knowledge and behaviours and determine how best to provide advice that supports behaviour change.

Qutting and restarting smoking: cohort study of patients with angina in primary care

Objective To examine variations in self-reported smoking habit among a cohort of individuals with chronic coronary heart disease over a five year period. Design Cross-sectional cohort; interviews at baseline, 2 years and 5 years. Setting Primary care. Participants A cross-sectional sample of 688 patients previously diagnosed as having angina, identified from 18 general practices in the Greater Belfast Area; a cohort of 487 were followed for five years. Outcome measures Changes in self-reported smoking habits; breath carbon monoxide measurement. Results Initially 92 of the 487 participants (19%) reported smoking, 34 (27%) subsequently reported non-smoking. Of the 395 self-reported non-smokers at baseline, 21 (5%) subsequently reported smoking. The prevalence of self-reported smoking amongst the cohort was 19% and 15% at two and five years respectively. However, changes in reported smoking habits indicating periods of abstinence and resumption were reported by 55/487 (11%) participants. Of the 21 non-smokers who changed their report, 20 had smoked previously, five reported having stopped for less than one year but nine for more than five years. Of the initial sample twice as many smokers as non-smokers had died by 2 years (10% v 5%; p

Development of a Complex Intervention for Secondary Prevention of Coronary Heart Disease in Primary Care Using the UK Medical Research Council Framework

Objective: To apply the UK Medical Research Council (MRC) framework for development and evaluation of trials of complex interventions to a primary healthcare intervention to promote secondary prevention of coronary heart disease. Study Design: Case report of intervention development. Methods: First, literature relating to secondary prevention and lifestyle change was reviewed. Second, a preliminary intervention was modeled, based on literature findings and focus group interviews with patients (n = 23) and staff (n = 29) from 4 general practices. Participants’ experiences of and attitudes toward key intervention components were explored. Third, the preliminary intervention was pilot-tested in 4 general practices. After delivery of the pilot intervention, practitioners evaluated the training sessions, and qualitative data relating to experiences of the intervention were collected using semistructured interviews with staff (n = 10) and patient focus groups (n = 17). Results: Literature review identified 3 intervention components: a structured recall system, practitioner training, and patient information. Initial qualitative data identified variations in recall system design, training requirements (medication prescribing, facilitating behavior change), and information appropriate to the prospective study participants. Identifying detailed structures within intervention components clarified how the intervention could be tailored to individual practice, practitioner, and patient needs while preserving the theoretical functions of the components. Findings from the pilot phase informed further modeling of the intervention, reducing administrative time, increasing practical content of training, and omitting unhelpful patient information. Conclusion: Application of the MRC framework helped to determine the feasibility and development of a complex intervention for primary care research.