TREATMENT PATTERN AND OUTCOME ASSESSMENT OF ASTHMATIC PATIENTS ADMITTED TO ACCIDENT & EMERGENCY DEPARTMENT (ED) IN A TERTIARY TEACHING HOSPITAL
Author(s)
Samsinah H Hussain, BPHARM, (HONS), Professor1, Shien Woan Wong, BPHARM, (HONS), Provisional Pharmacist2, Mohamad Noor Ramli, BPHARM, (HONS), Senior Pharmacist3, Abdul Ali Raja Mohamed, MBBS, Associate Professor31University of Malaya, KualaLUmpur, Federal Territor, Malaysia; 2 University of Malaya, Kuala Lumpur, Federal Territor, Malaysia; 3 University Malaya Medical Centre, Kuala Lumpur, Federal Territor, Malaysia
OBJECTIVES: The prevalence rate of asthma in Malaysia is 9.2%. Acute exacerbations resulting in unscheduled visits and hospitalizations are a burden to the healthcare resources in the country. This study was designed to describe the treatment pattern and health outcome of asthmatic patients hospitalized after attending ED. METHODS: A retrospective observational study was conducted. In Phase I, all asthmatic patients with at least one ED visit for asthma (ICD-10 codes J45-J46) leading to hospitalization were included. Inhaled corticosteroid (ICS) prescribed; asthma education, action plan and clinic follow-up given; number of asthma exacerbations (AEBA); number of unscheduled visits and medications prior to hospitalization were recorded. In Phase II, medical records of the same patients but who had at least one follow-up visit or unscheduled visit or ED visit or hospitalization were reviewed to assess four components recommended in the asthma GINA guideline after an asthma-related ED visit. Data were collected from patient medical records, Pharmacy Information System and Hospital Information System. RESULTS: In Phase I, 194 patients were included comprising of 60.8% female and 54.6% children. Eighty-five made unscheduled visits, 120 experienced AEBA in the past 1-year, 98 received asthma education, 194 given follow-up appointment (118 defaulted). A total of 49.5% were either on ICS mono- or combination therapy prior to hospitalization. In Phase II, sixty-three patients fulfilled the inclusion criteria (Children 55.6% and female 54.3%). ICS use documented an increased but was not significant (p=0.063), eighteen patients were provided with asthma education, 61 patients were given follow-up appointment and 2 were provided with an asthma action plan. The number of unscheduled visits increased significantly (p=0.018). CONCLUSIONS:AEBA indicates the failure of asthma long-term management. This study showed that there are still gaps in the management of asthma as reflected by the treatment pattern and outcome of asthmatic patients hospitalized after attending ED.
Conference/Value in Health Info
2008-09, ISPOR Asia Pacific 2008, Seoul, South Korea
Value in Health, Vol. 11, No. 6 (November 2008)
Code
HP3
Topic
Health Service Delivery & Process of Care
Topic Subcategory
Treatment Patterns and Guidelines
Disease
Respiratory-Related Disorders