Use of asthma apgar tools in primary care practices

A cluster-randomized controlled trial

Barbara P. Yawn, Peter C. Wollan, Matthew A Rank, Susan L. Bertram, Young J Juhn, Wilson Pace

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

7 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

PURPOSE The purpose of this study was to assess patient and practice outcomes after introducing the Asthma APGAR (Activities, Persistent, triGGers, Asthma medications, Response to therapy) tools into primary care practices. METHODS We used a pragmatic cluster-randomized controlled design in 18 US family medicine and pediatric practices to compare outcomes in patients with persistent asthma aged 5 to 45 years after introduction of the Asthma APGAR tools vs usual care. Patient outcomes included asthma control, quality of life, and emergency department (ED), urgent care, and inpatient hospital visits. The practice outcome was adherence to asthma guidelines. RESULTS We enrolled 1,066 patients: 245 children, 174 adolescents, and 647 adults. Sixty-five percent (692 patients) completed both baseline and 12-month questionnaires, allowing analysis for patient-reported outcomes. Electronic health record data were available for 1,063 patients (99.7%) for practice outcomes. The proportion of patients reporting an asthma-related ED, urgent care, or hospital visit in the final 6 months of the study was lower in the APGAR practices vs usual care practices (10.6% vs 20.9%, P =.004). The percentage of patients with “in control” asthma increased more between baseline and 1 year in the APGAR group vs usual care group (13.5% vs 3.4%, P =.0001 vs P =.86) with a trend toward better control scores and asthma-related quality of life in the former at 1 year (P ≤.06 and P =.06, respectively). APGAR practices improved their adherence to 3 or more guideline elements compared with usual care practices (20.7% increase vs 1.9% decrease, P =.001). CONCLUSIONS Introduction of the Asthma APGAR tools improves rates of asthma control; reduces asthma-related ED, urgent care, and hospital visits; and increases practices’ adherence to asthma management guidelines.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)100-110
Number of pages11
JournalAnnals of Family Medicine
Volume16
Issue number2
DOIs
StatePublished - Mar 1 2018

Fingerprint

Primary Health Care
Asthma
Randomized Controlled Trials
Ambulatory Care
Hospital Emergency Service
Guidelines
Quality of Life
Electronic Health Records
Inpatients
Medicine
Pediatrics

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Family Practice

Cite this

Use of asthma apgar tools in primary care practices : A cluster-randomized controlled trial. / Yawn, Barbara P.; Wollan, Peter C.; Rank, Matthew A; Bertram, Susan L.; Juhn, Young J; Pace, Wilson.

In: Annals of Family Medicine, Vol. 16, No. 2, 01.03.2018, p. 100-110.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Yawn, Barbara P. ; Wollan, Peter C. ; Rank, Matthew A ; Bertram, Susan L. ; Juhn, Young J ; Pace, Wilson. / Use of asthma apgar tools in primary care practices : A cluster-randomized controlled trial. In: Annals of Family Medicine. 2018 ; Vol. 16, No. 2. pp. 100-110.
@article{b8766f2e44e64ad29f74aa4bdc380642,
title = "Use of asthma apgar tools in primary care practices: A cluster-randomized controlled trial",
abstract = "PURPOSE The purpose of this study was to assess patient and practice outcomes after introducing the Asthma APGAR (Activities, Persistent, triGGers, Asthma medications, Response to therapy) tools into primary care practices. METHODS We used a pragmatic cluster-randomized controlled design in 18 US family medicine and pediatric practices to compare outcomes in patients with persistent asthma aged 5 to 45 years after introduction of the Asthma APGAR tools vs usual care. Patient outcomes included asthma control, quality of life, and emergency department (ED), urgent care, and inpatient hospital visits. The practice outcome was adherence to asthma guidelines. RESULTS We enrolled 1,066 patients: 245 children, 174 adolescents, and 647 adults. Sixty-five percent (692 patients) completed both baseline and 12-month questionnaires, allowing analysis for patient-reported outcomes. Electronic health record data were available for 1,063 patients (99.7{\%}) for practice outcomes. The proportion of patients reporting an asthma-related ED, urgent care, or hospital visit in the final 6 months of the study was lower in the APGAR practices vs usual care practices (10.6{\%} vs 20.9{\%}, P =.004). The percentage of patients with “in control” asthma increased more between baseline and 1 year in the APGAR group vs usual care group (13.5{\%} vs 3.4{\%}, P =.0001 vs P =.86) with a trend toward better control scores and asthma-related quality of life in the former at 1 year (P ≤.06 and P =.06, respectively). APGAR practices improved their adherence to 3 or more guideline elements compared with usual care practices (20.7{\%} increase vs 1.9{\%} decrease, P =.001). CONCLUSIONS Introduction of the Asthma APGAR tools improves rates of asthma control; reduces asthma-related ED, urgent care, and hospital visits; and increases practices’ adherence to asthma management guidelines.",
author = "Yawn, {Barbara P.} and Wollan, {Peter C.} and Rank, {Matthew A} and Bertram, {Susan L.} and Juhn, {Young J} and Wilson Pace",
year = "2018",
month = "3",
day = "1",
doi = "10.1370/afm.2179",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "16",
pages = "100--110",
journal = "Annals of Family Medicine",
issn = "1544-1709",
publisher = "Annals of Family Medicine, Inc",
number = "2",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Use of asthma apgar tools in primary care practices

T2 - A cluster-randomized controlled trial

AU - Yawn, Barbara P.

AU - Wollan, Peter C.

AU - Rank, Matthew A

AU - Bertram, Susan L.

AU - Juhn, Young J

AU - Pace, Wilson

PY - 2018/3/1

Y1 - 2018/3/1

N2 - PURPOSE The purpose of this study was to assess patient and practice outcomes after introducing the Asthma APGAR (Activities, Persistent, triGGers, Asthma medications, Response to therapy) tools into primary care practices. METHODS We used a pragmatic cluster-randomized controlled design in 18 US family medicine and pediatric practices to compare outcomes in patients with persistent asthma aged 5 to 45 years after introduction of the Asthma APGAR tools vs usual care. Patient outcomes included asthma control, quality of life, and emergency department (ED), urgent care, and inpatient hospital visits. The practice outcome was adherence to asthma guidelines. RESULTS We enrolled 1,066 patients: 245 children, 174 adolescents, and 647 adults. Sixty-five percent (692 patients) completed both baseline and 12-month questionnaires, allowing analysis for patient-reported outcomes. Electronic health record data were available for 1,063 patients (99.7%) for practice outcomes. The proportion of patients reporting an asthma-related ED, urgent care, or hospital visit in the final 6 months of the study was lower in the APGAR practices vs usual care practices (10.6% vs 20.9%, P =.004). The percentage of patients with “in control” asthma increased more between baseline and 1 year in the APGAR group vs usual care group (13.5% vs 3.4%, P =.0001 vs P =.86) with a trend toward better control scores and asthma-related quality of life in the former at 1 year (P ≤.06 and P =.06, respectively). APGAR practices improved their adherence to 3 or more guideline elements compared with usual care practices (20.7% increase vs 1.9% decrease, P =.001). CONCLUSIONS Introduction of the Asthma APGAR tools improves rates of asthma control; reduces asthma-related ED, urgent care, and hospital visits; and increases practices’ adherence to asthma management guidelines.

AB - PURPOSE The purpose of this study was to assess patient and practice outcomes after introducing the Asthma APGAR (Activities, Persistent, triGGers, Asthma medications, Response to therapy) tools into primary care practices. METHODS We used a pragmatic cluster-randomized controlled design in 18 US family medicine and pediatric practices to compare outcomes in patients with persistent asthma aged 5 to 45 years after introduction of the Asthma APGAR tools vs usual care. Patient outcomes included asthma control, quality of life, and emergency department (ED), urgent care, and inpatient hospital visits. The practice outcome was adherence to asthma guidelines. RESULTS We enrolled 1,066 patients: 245 children, 174 adolescents, and 647 adults. Sixty-five percent (692 patients) completed both baseline and 12-month questionnaires, allowing analysis for patient-reported outcomes. Electronic health record data were available for 1,063 patients (99.7%) for practice outcomes. The proportion of patients reporting an asthma-related ED, urgent care, or hospital visit in the final 6 months of the study was lower in the APGAR practices vs usual care practices (10.6% vs 20.9%, P =.004). The percentage of patients with “in control” asthma increased more between baseline and 1 year in the APGAR group vs usual care group (13.5% vs 3.4%, P =.0001 vs P =.86) with a trend toward better control scores and asthma-related quality of life in the former at 1 year (P ≤.06 and P =.06, respectively). APGAR practices improved their adherence to 3 or more guideline elements compared with usual care practices (20.7% increase vs 1.9% decrease, P =.001). CONCLUSIONS Introduction of the Asthma APGAR tools improves rates of asthma control; reduces asthma-related ED, urgent care, and hospital visits; and increases practices’ adherence to asthma management guidelines.

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85043776932&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=85043776932&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1370/afm.2179

DO - 10.1370/afm.2179

M3 - Article

VL - 16

SP - 100

EP - 110

JO - Annals of Family Medicine

JF - Annals of Family Medicine

SN - 1544-1709

IS - 2

ER -