Actual use of PROMs in asthma and rhinitis recommended by guidelines in clinical settings: PROMUSE respiratory study.
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Cherrez-Ojeda Ivan, Bousquet Jean, Zuberbier Torsten, Calderon Juan C, Kolkhir Pavel, Allenova Anastasiia, Allenov Andrey, Tkachenko Sergey, Mihaltan Florin, Ulmeanu Ruxandra, Al-Ahmad Mona, Rodriguez-González Mònica, Wakida-Kusunoki Guillermo, Ramon German D, Rukhadze Maia, Larenas-Linnemann Désirée E, Košnik Mitja, Ivancevich Juan Carlos, Ensina Luis Felipe, Rosario Filho Nelson A, Kvedariene Violeta, Chong-Neto Herberto Jose, Tinoco Ivan, Bedbrook Anna, Rodas-Valero Gabriela, Faytong-Haro Marco, Maurer Marcus, Pfaar Oliver, Robles-Velasco Karla
Аннотация
OBJECTIVES: Our objective is to identify the utilization patterns of PROMs, together with the reasons for their usage and the barriers to their adoption among practitioners managing patients with asthma, AR, and RS.
METHODS: This was a cross-sectional observational study using a questionnaire encompassing all pertinent PROMs and disseminated to practitioners associated with the ARIA, UCARE, ADCARE, and ACARE networks. Individuals unfamiliar with PROMS or lacking prior experience with it were eliminated. Descriptive and analytical data were utilized, categorized by the frequency and type of PROMs applied. Stata 18.0 was utilized, with p < 0.05 indicating statistical significance.
RESULTS: A total of 439 practitioners participated, with PROMs predominantly utilized by physicians certified for over 30 years and by respiratory specialists (16.67% and 12.46%, respectively; p < 0.05). Pulmonologists exhibited the greatest utilization of asthma PROMs at 86%, while allergists predominantly employed AR and RS PROMs at 38.42% and 33.33%, respectively (p < 0.001). ACT (66.74%), RCAT (27.79%), and SNOTT22 (15.26%) were the predominant PROMs utilized primarily for asthma (79.19%), AR (51.23%), and RS (57.26%), respectively (p < 0.001). The foremost purposes for their application were disease control monitoring (93.39%) and evaluation of performance of therapy approaches (90.2%). The most significant barrier identified was time constraint, rated at 75.40% (p > 0.05 across all groups).
CONCLUSIONS: The use of PROMs is suboptimal, primarily due to time limitations. It is imperative that methods be swiftly implemented to include these techniques into the therapeutic environment to attain enhanced outcomes.