a Department of Pediatrics, University of Pennsylvania School of Medicine, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania
b Division of Emergency Medicine, Children's Hospital of Philadelphia, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania
| ABSTRACT |
|---|
|
|
|---|
METHODS. A survey of all physician members of the American Academy of Pediatrics Section on Emergency Medicine who provide care for children in an ED was performed.
RESULTS. Surveys were returned by 391 (50%) of 782 physicians. The majority (80%) indicated that fewer than one half of children with persistent asthma were using LTCMs on ED arrival. Although 99% believe that children with persistent asthma should be treated with LTCMs, <20% provide LTCMs for the majority of such children at ED discharge. For 49%, the main reason for not prescribing these medications was the belief that this was the role of the primary care provider or asthma specialist. Practice setting, prior training, and annual patient volume were not associated significantly with prescribing LTCM. Patient's age and likelihood of compliance and physician's belief in efficacy and concerns about adverse effects were not important criteria in the decision to begin LTCM.
CONCLUSIONS. ED physicians often encounter children with persistent asthma who are not receiving LTCMs, they believe in the efficacy and safety of LTCMs, and they think that children with persistent disease should be treated with LTCMs, but they prescribe LTCMs infrequently.
Key Words: long-term controller medication emergency department asthma
Abbreviations: LTCMlong-term controller medication EDemergency department NAEPPNational Asthma Education and Prevention Program ICSinhaled corticosteroid AAPAmerican Academy of Pediatrics PCPprimary care provider PEMpediatric emergency medicine
The marked increase in asthma prevalence since 1980,1 as well as increases in asthma-related mortality rates,2 hospitalizations,2 disability,3 and cost,4 have led to the development of practice guidelines such as the National Asthma Education and Prevention Program (NAEPP) guidelines for the diagnosis and management of asthma published by the National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute.5,6 These guidelines define persistent asthma and recommend that infants and children of all ages with persistent disease be treated daily with a long-term controller medication (LTCM), preferably an inhaled corticosteroid (ICS). However, the guidelines do not state explicitly that emergency department (ED) physicians should identify children with persistent asthma or initiate LTCM therapy for them. In fact, in one study, just one third of ED physicians who care primarily for adults reported routinely prescribing an ICS at ED discharge.7 This issue has not been well studied in children.
Traditionally, the role of ED physicians in caring for patients with acute asthma exacerbations has been to provide emergency treatment and then to arrange follow-up visits with a primary care provider (PCP) for ongoing preventive care. The efficacy of preventive care in improving outcomes such as ED visits and hospitalizations is well documented.811 However, linkage between ED and PCP visits is often poor. Researchers from the National Cooperative Inner City Asthma Study estimated that only one half of children visited a PCP within 1 month after an ED asthma visit.12 The NAEPP recommends that children see their PCP for follow-up care within 5 days after an ED visit for asthma; in previous work, we reported that just 23% of children met this standard.13 Furthermore, 22% of adults reported the ED as their usual source of asthma prescriptions.14 Therefore, there are subsets of patients with asthma who primarily have contact with physicians only during ED visits for acute asthma exacerbations. This may explain, in part, why as many as 73% of children with persistent asthma do not use LTCM on a daily basis.15
The short-term16,17 and long-term10,11,1820 benefits of LTCMs are well established, and there is accumulating evidence supporting the safety of these medications.2022 Therefore, ED physicians may be ready to expand their role to include initiating LTCM therapy for select children. The purpose of this study was to describe the frequency with which ED physicians prescribe LTCMs for children with persistent asthma who are being discharged from the ED after treatment for acute asthma. In addition, we assessed ED physicians' awareness of and level of agreement with national guidelines for LTCM use and we determined the criteria used by them to prescribe LTCMs and the barriers to their use.
| METHODS |
|---|
|
|
|---|
Physicians were told in writing that the hospital's institutional review board had approved the study and that their responses would remain confidential and would not be linked to their names. Practitioners who indicated that they did not care for pediatric patients in the ED were asked to indicate so and to return their uncompleted surveys. Similarly, individuals who did not wish to complete the survey were asked to indicate so and return it. All others were instructed to describe their clinical practice patterns when caring for children with asthma in the ED.
Survey Instrument
The initial questions in the self-report survey sought demographic information about the participants and data regarding their level of training, experience, and practice setting. The remaining questions sought information about the participants' awareness of the NAEPP guidelines and details regarding the circumstances under which they prescribe LTCMs. Questions were in multiple-choice format and, when appropriate, an opportunity to write an open-ended response was provided. Also, a sample scenario was presented under 2 different circumstances, ie, the patient is 2 years of age or the patient is 15 years of age, as follows. A 2 (or 15)-year-old child with a history of frequent asthma symptoms is about to be discharged from the ED, after treatment for an asthma exacerbation. She does not take LTCMs. In your role as an ED physician, how frequently do you or the resident you are supervising prescribe LTCM for such a child (never, rarely [110%], sometimes [1125%], often [2650%], or usually [>50%])?
For standardization and clarity, the following survey terms were defined for participants: LTCMs: ICS, leukotriene modifiers, including montelukast (Singulair; Merck & Co, West Point, PA), zafirlukast (Accolate; AstraZeneca Pharmaceuticals LP, Wilmington, DE), and zileuton (Zyflo; Abbott Laboratories, Inc, Abbott Park, IL), mast cell stabilizers, including nedocromil and cromolyn (Intal; Monarch Pharmaceuticals, Bristol, TN), long-acting orally administered or inhaled ß2-receptor agonists, including salmeterol (Serevent; GlaxoSmithKline, Research Triangle Park, NC), combination medications, including fluticasone/salmeterol (Advair; GlaxoSmithKline, Research Triangle Park, NC), and theophylline; pediatric patients: patients 0 to 18 years of age; care for: provide medical treatment directly or supervise treatment by a resident; frequent asthma symptoms: symptoms
3 days per week or
3 nights per month. The term frequent asthma symptoms was used in the survey for the benefit of practitioners who did not know the definition of persistent asthma.
Survey Methods
Before the first mailing in April 2004, the survey was pilot-tested by a group of 20 pediatric emergency medicine (PEM) physicians and revisions were made on the basis of their suggestions. Each survey was coded with a number to track respondents and was mailed with an addressed, postage-paid, return envelope. In July 2004, a second mailing was sent to nonrespondents. In September 2004, when no new surveys had been returned for 2 weeks, the study's data collection phase ended.
Statistical Analyses
There were 782 members of the AAP Section on Emergency Medicine in March 2004. Study data were analyzed with SPSS 12.0 software (SPSS, Chicago, IL). The
2 test or Fisher's exact test was used to test the significance of the differences between categorical variables, and Student's t test was used for continuous data. Statistical significance was set at P < .05.
| RESULTS |
|---|
|
|
|---|
Table 1 describes the study participants and their practice settings and characteristics. The majority of respondents were board-certified in pediatrics and PEM and had completed fellowship training, and 120 (36%) had completed residency training within the past decade.
|
Almost all physicians (334 physicians [99%]) think that children with a history of frequent asthma symptoms should be maintained on LTCMs, and almost all (334 physicians [99%]) believe in the long-term benefits of LTCMs. Physicians' awareness of (know the definition of persistent asthma) and agreement with (belief that children with persistent asthma symptoms should be taking LTCMs) the guidelines as they pertain to LTCM use for persistent asthma were analyzed on the basis of practice setting and level of training (Table 2). These variables were not associated significantly with awareness or agreement, with 1 exception; significantly more physicians who had not completed fellowship training knew the definition of persistent asthma.
|
|
|
|
| DISCUSSION |
|---|
|
|
|---|
Working in a university-based children's hospital, being fellowship trained, and recently completing residency were used as proxies for being academically oriented and/or being trained when guidelines were being developed and disseminated. For the most part, these factors did not influence significantly physicians' awareness or prescribing habits (Tables 2 and 3). In fact, a significantly greater proportion of physicians who had not completed fellowship training knew the definition of persistent asthma. We had hypothesized that, because of concerns about growth suppression, physicians would be less inclined to prescribe a LTCM for a 2-year-old child, compared with a 15-year-old child. Although we did note a statistically significant difference in prescribing patterns based on patient age (Fig 1), the absolute differences were not substantial. Furthermore, the likelihood of compliance, belief in efficacy, and concerns about adverse effects were not important criteria in the decision to begin LTCM therapy. The most common reasons for not prescribing these medications were the belief that it was the role of the PCP or asthma specialist to do so and the inability of ED physicians to provide long-term follow-up care (Table 4).
ED physicians who prescribe LTCMs such as ICSs at ED discharge could have either of 2 management goals. They might wish to improve long-term asthma outcomes for children with persistent asthma and/or they might be seeking short-term benefits that might result in lower rates of relapse to the ED. Although many studies have shown LTCMs to be efficacious in the management of asthma,811,1724 perhaps the best data proving the long-term efficacy of ICSs comes from the Childhood Asthma Management Program Research Group.10 In that multicenter study, 1041 children 5 to 12 years of age were assigned randomly to daily treatment with budesonide, nedocromil, or placebo for 4 to 6 years. Those treated with budesonide had a 43% lower rate of hospitalizations, a 45% lower rate of urgent visits to a caretaker, a 43% lower rate of prednisone use, and a reduced need for albuterol and other asthma medications, compared with the placebo group. As stated in national guidelines, "strong evidence from clinical trials has established that ICS improve control of asthma for children with mild or moderate persistent asthma."6
Regarding the short-term efficacy of ICSs after ED discharge, the preponderance of evidence seems to favor their use, although most studies have been performed among adults. Rowe et al16 randomly assigned 188 adults to receive high-dose budesonide or placebo after an ED visit for asthma. All subjects were also treated with prednisone for 7 days. After 21 days, one half as many in the ICS group had experienced an ED relapse and those in the budesonide group had better symptom scores and less need for rescue treatment with ß-receptor agonists. Also, among 635 patients 5 to 60 years of age, those prescribed ICSs after ED discharge had 45% fewer relapse ED visits, compared with nonusers.17 Brenner et al25 failed to demonstrate that the use of flunisolide among adults had any efficacy in the first 24 days after ED discharge. However, that study had several limitations, including the use of a medium, not high, daily ICS dose, a follow-up rate of just 72%, and a compliance rate of just 56%.25
Just 4 physicians (1%) cited concerns about adverse effects as the main reason for not prescribing LTCMs, which reflects a good understanding of recent literature.10,20,22,26 Agertoff and Pedersen22 found that children with asthma who had been treated with long-term ICS therapy achieved normal adult height, and Bisgaard et al20 found no effect on growth for preschoolers treated with a ICS for 1 year. As stated by the NAEPP, "strong evidence from clinical trials following children for up to 6 years shows that the use of ICS at recommended doses does not have frequent, clinically significant, or irreversible effects on any outcomes reviewed."6
At our own institution, we found that 64% of a convenience sample of children with acute asthma had persistent disease.27 Furthermore, in our prior work, we noted that, among the cohort with persistent disease, just 21% of patients were using an ICS daily,27 whereas other investigators found that just 26% to 39% of patients were taking antiinflammatory medication daily.2830 Cabana et al31 reported barriers among general pediatricians to prescribing daily ICS therapy. These barriers included concerns about long-term safety, lack of awareness of efficacy and dosing, and parental fear of corticosteroids. To our knowledge, ours is the first study that attempts to identify barriers that ED physicians face when considering the use of LTCMs, and none of the barriers described by Cabana et al31 was an important factor for the ED physicians. Pathman et al32 stated that, in order for physicians to comply with practice guidelines, they must become aware, agree intellectually, decide to adopt, and then adhere. Physicians in this study were aware of national guidelines calling for PCPs to prescribe LTCMs when appropriate and agreed with the guidelines to a great extent but did not adopt them into their own practices. Other ED physicians, with less knowledge of NAEPP definitions and recommendations, may be even less inclined to prescribe LTCMs; therefore, these data may underestimate overall prescribing rates.
This study was subject to limitations inherent with surveys. One half of those surveyed did not respond, and it is possible that responders and nonresponders differed in their use of LTCMs. However, if it is assumed that those with a strong interest in asthma were more likely to respond, then the low rates of use reported here may in fact overestimate what occurs in actual practice among all physicians. The survey was pilot-tested to assess clarity, accuracy, and comprehensiveness. However, the validity of the results depends on respondents' recall and honesty. Attempts were made to limit recall bias by asking questions related to current practice. It was not possible to target and to question all emergency providers for children, including those who were not members of the AAP; we do not know how their responses might have compared with those of the surveyed group. We did attempt to maximize the generalizability of the data by including physicians from across the nation and from various practice settings, as well as those with and without fellowship training. Also, we specifically sought to survey physicians who cared for children in an ED setting, to determine prevailing practices in the treatment of children with asthma.
| CONCLUSIONS |
|---|
|
|
|---|
The present data show that ED physicians commonly encounter children with persistent asthma who are not being treated with LTCMs, they are aware of national guidelines recommending the use of LTCMs for such children, and they believe in the efficacy of LTCMs. However, only a small proportion of the children who potentially would benefit from LTCMs are receiving them at ED discharge. This, combined with inconsistent PCP follow-up care,12,13 is contributing to the underutilization of LTCMs for children with persistent asthma. Perhaps if future versions of the NAEPP guidelines address specifically the role of ED physicians in prescribing LTCMs, a greater proportion of children with persistent asthma would be treated with preventive medications.
| ACKNOWLEDGMENTS |
|---|
| FOOTNOTES |
|---|
Address correspondence to Richard J. Scarfone, MD, FAAP, Division of Emergency Medicine, Children's Hospital of Philadelphia, 34th Street and Civic Center Boulevard, Philadelphia, PA 19104. E-mail: scarfone{at}email.chop.edu
The authors have indicated they have no financial relationships relevant to this article to disclose.
| REFERENCES |
|---|
|
|
|---|
This article has been cited by other articles:
![]() |
A. Zuppa, S. Vijayakumar, B. Jayaraman, D. Patel, M. Narayan, K. Vijayakumar, J. T. Mondick, and J. S. Barrett An Informatics Approach to Assess Pediatric Pharmacotherapy: Design and Implementation of a Hospital Drug Utilization System J. Clin. Pharmacol., September 1, 2007; 47(9): 1172 - 1180. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
H. K. Lehman, K. A. Lillis, S. H. Shaha, M. Augustine, and M. Ballow Initiation of Maintenance Antiinflammatory Medication in Asthmatic Children in a Pediatric Emergency Department Pediatrics, December 1, 2006; 118(6): 2394 - 2401. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||