Search

The pandemic, political upheavals, and social justice efforts in our society have resulted in attention to persistent health disparities and the urgent need to address them. Using a scoping review, we describe published updates to address disparities and targets for interventions to improve gaps in care within allergy and immunology. These disparities-related studies provide a broad view of our current understanding of how social determinants of health threaten patient outcomes and our ability to advance health equity efforts in our field. We outline next steps to improve access to care and advance health equity for patients with allergic/immunologic diseases through actions taken at the individual, community, and policy levels, which could be applied outside of our field. Key among these are efforts to increase the diversity among our trainees, providers, and scientific teams and enhancing efforts to participate in advocacy work and public health interventions. Addressing health disparities requires advancing our understanding of the interplay between social and structural barriers to care and enacting the needed interventions in various key areas to effect change.

Objectives: To assess electronic health record patient portal use among Spanish-speaking patients with asthma compared to English-speaking patients and identify barriers to use.Methods: Using data collected for a PCORI-funded randomized controlled trial to increase patient portal use in low-income adults with uncontrolled asthma, we estimated the association between portal use, measured using surveys and actual user login data, and primary language. Open-ended survey responses were grouped into common themes.Results: Among 301 adults with asthma: age 18-87, 90% female, 17% Spanish speakers; 44% had no portal use during the study. Spanish speakers were less likely to have ever heard of the patient portal than English speakers (p=.001) and reported more difficulty navigating the portal (p≤.001). Spanish speakers with low health literacy had less portal use (31%) than their English-speaking counterparts (51%) (p=.02). Compared to high-literacy English speakers, the odds of using the portal for low-literacy Spanish speakers were 0.34 (95% CI 0.14, 0.84) (p=.02). Three-quarters of Spanish speakers cited barriers to portal use compared to one-quarter of English speakers, and many suggested creating a Spanish version to improve user-friendliness.Conclusions: English-only patient portals may not meet the needs of Spanish-speaking patients with uncontrolled asthma. Health systems serving Spanish-speaking communities should implement patient portals in Spanish.

Health disparities are health differences linked with economic, social, and environmental disadvantage. They adversely affect groups that have systematically experienced greater social or economic obstacles to health. Renewed efforts are needed to reduced health disparities in the United States, highlighted by the disparate impact on racial minorities during the coronavirus pandemic. Institutional or systemic patterns of racism are promoted and legitimated through accepted societal standards, and organizational processes within the field of medicine, and contribute to health disparities. Herein, we review current evidence regarding health disparities in allergic rhinitis, asthma, atopic dermatitis, food allergy, drug allergy, and primary immune deficiency disease in racial and ethnic underserved populations. Best practices to address these disparities involve addressing social determinants of health and adopting policies to improve access to specialty care and treatment for the underserved through telemedicine and community partnerships, cross-cultural provider training to reduce implicit bias, inclusion of underserved patients in research, implementation of culturally competent patient education, and recruitment and training of health care providers from underserved communities. Addressing health disparities requires a multilevel approach involving patients, health providers, local agencies, professional societies, and national governmental agencies.

The coronavirus disease pandemic and the growing movements for social and racial equality have increased awareness of disparities in American health care that exist on every level. Social determinants of health, structural racism, and implicit bias play major roles in preventing health equity. We begin with the larger picture and then focus on examples of systemic and health inequities and their solutions that have special relevance to allergy-immunology. We propose a 4-prong approach to address inequities that requires (1) racial and ethnic inclusivity in research with respect to both participants and investigators, (2) diversity in all aspects of training and practice, (3) improvement in communication between clinicians and patients, and (4) awareness of the social determinants of health. By communication we mean sensitivity to the role of language, cultural background, and health beliefs in physician-patient interactions and provision of training and equipment so that the use of telecommunication can be a resource for all patients. The social determinants of health are the social factors that affect health and the success of health care, such as adequacy of housing and access to nutritious foods. Using this 4-prong approach we can overcome health disparities.

The Food and Drug Administration is tasked with evaluating the efficacy and safety of a drug. Despite having a regimented appraisal process in place, safety evidence can emerge during clinical trials as well as from observations and studies conducted after the drug has been on the market, which might require a boxed warning. The boxed warning is the most severe warning that the Food and Drug Administration can give to an approved drug. It is commonly referred to as a Black Box Warning because it is outlined in the package insert by a thick black box to garner the attention of prescribers and patients. There are currently more than 400 medications that have boxed warnings, and the information addressing major risks associated with a particular drug may, appropriately or inappropriately, influence patient and clinician decision making. Health care professionals must use the best evidence and clinical judgment in determining whether to prescribe medications with these warnings. Use of an approved drug at dosages or for indications other than what it was originally licensed for is referred to as "off-label" and is legal, commonplace, and may be evidence-based. All drugs may expose patients to possible harm, so prescribers have an obligation to discuss the best available evidence regarding benefits and harms so that patients can participate in shared decision making.

Inadequate inhaler technique in persistent asthma is frequently reported. However, there is little consensus on inhaler checklists, and critical elements of technique are not uniformly described. In addition, inhaler error rates and risk factors for poor technique are variable across studies. This Clinical Commentary Review summarizes the literature on inhaler design, use, and interventions to improve technique. Our aim is to help clinicians identify patients with poor inhaler technique, recognize the most important errors, and correct technique using evidence-based interventions.

Black and Latinx patients bear a disproportionate burden of asthma. Efforts to reduce the disproportionate morbidity have been mostly unsuccessful, and guideline recommendations have not been based on studies in these populations.In this pragmatic, open-label trial, we randomly assigned Black and Latinx adults with moderate-to-severe asthma to use a patient-activated, reliever-triggered inhaled glucocorticoid strategy (beclomethasone dipropionate, 80 μg) plus usual care (intervention) or to continue usual care. Participants had one instructional visit followed by 15 monthly questionnaires. The primary end point was the annualized rate of severe asthma exacerbations. Secondary end points included monthly asthma control as measured with the Asthma Control Test (ACT; range, 5 [poor] to 25 [complete control]), quality of life as measured with the Asthma Symptom Utility Index (ASUI; range, 0 to 1, with lower scores indicating greater impairment), and participant-reported missed days of work, school, or usual activities. Safety was also assessed.Of 1201 adults (603 Black and 598 Latinx), 600 were assigned to the intervention group and 601 to the usual-care group. The annualized rate of severe asthma exacerbations was 0.69 (95% confidence interval [CI], 0.61 to 0.78) in the intervention group and 0.82 (95% CI, 0.73 to 0.92) in the usual-care group (hazard ratio, 0.85; 95% CI, 0.72 to 0.999; P = 0.048). ACT scores increased by 3.4 points (95% CI, 3.1 to 3.6) in the intervention group and by 2.5 points (95% CI, 2.3 to 2.8) in the usual-care group (difference, 0.9; 95% CI, 0.5 to 1.2); ASUI scores increased by 0.12 points (95% CI, 0.11 to 0.13) and 0.08 points (95% CI, 0.07 to 0.09), respectively (difference, 0.04; 95% CI, 0.02 to 0.05). The annualized rate of missed days was 13.4 in the intervention group and 16.8 in the usual-care group (rate ratio, 0.80; 95% CI, 0.67 to 0.95). Serious adverse events occurred in 12.2% of the participants, with an even distribution between the groups.Among Black and Latinx adults with moderate-to-severe asthma, provision of an inhaled glucocorticoid and one-time instruction on its use, added to usual care, led to a lower rate of severe asthma exacerbations. (Funded by the Patient-Centered Outcomes Research Institute and others; PREPARE ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT02995733.).

Successful cross-cultural communication is critical for adequate exchange of ideas with our patients. Our communities have become more diverse, and thus, the necessity has increased. The murder of George Floyd and other atrocities have sparked recognition of the need to address social injustice and racism and as we fight the ongoing coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic. Allergist-immunologists are uniquely trained to explain the complex immunology of COVID-19 to patients, but they have less experience discussing issues of health equity. Here, we explore critical components of patient-provider communication: communicating with those for whom English is a second language, advising patients with limited health literacy, and understanding nonbiomedical views of health and wellness. Two barriers to communication are discussed: implicit bias and structural racism. Finally, we consider how the recent innovations in technology, the electronic health record including its patient portal and the use of telemedicine, have both impeded and improved communication. We offer suggestions as to what we could do to address these in our own local communities that would ensure better understanding and exchange of health information. This perspective grew out of an effort by the American Academy of Allergy, Asthma, and Immunology (AAAAI) Committee on the Underserved to provide training in cross-cultural communication.

Asthma is the most common chronic condition among children, with low-income families living in urban areas experiencing significantly higher rates. Evidence based interventions for asthma are routinely implemented in either the home, school, or primary care setting. However, even when caregivers of poor children are engaged in asthma interventions in one setting, they often have to navigate challenges in another setting, such as an under-resourced home, non-supportive school, or disengaged health care provider. The West Philadelphia Asthma Care Implementation Plan aims to compare the effectiveness of a primary care-based intervention, school-based intervention, and combined primary care and school intervention to usual care for improving asthma control in school-age children to explore if the synergistic effect of Community Health Worker (CHW) support in the home, school, and health care environments will result in improved asthma control. Children ages 5–13 with uncontrolled asthma from four West Philadelphia recruitment sites will be eligible for enrollment. The families of school age children interested in participating will be randomized to receive a primary care CHW or usual care. Those identified as attending a participating school will have a CHW-led school intervention or usual care in school. If proven effective, this care coordination program will assist caregivers in assessing resources, improving self-management skills, and ultimately reducing asthma-related ED visits and hospitalizations as well as provide additional information for healthcare systems and policy makers to inform their decisions about how and where to focus additional resources and investments in childhood asthma care to improve health outcomes.

BACKGROUND: Poor inhaler technique has been shown to be associated with less asthma control and increased healthcare utilization. Little is known about the impact of inhaler technique on the most vulnerable patients. OBJECTIVE: This study examined inhaler technique in low-income, inner-city adults with uncontrolled asthma. METHODS: Inhaler technique data and other patient characteristics were evaluated in adults drawn from two studies conducted at the University of Pennsylvania. Subjects were from low-income Philadelphia neighborhoods and had uncontrolled asthma. Baseline characteristics were collected. Inhaler technique was rated by research coordinators who were trained with written materials. RESULTS: In 584 adults, 56% of metered dose inhaler (MDI) users and 64% of dry powder inhaler (DPI) users had adequate visually-assessed inhaler technique. Inhaler technique did not vary by reading comprehension or numeracy levels. CONCLUSION: In this group of patients with uncontrolled asthma, visually-assessed inhaler technique was adequate in more than one-half. While incorrect inhaler technique is generally common and must be routinely addressed, this study suggests that other factors that lead to poor control must be identified.

Introduction: Asthma evidence-based interventions (EBI) are implemented in the home, school, community or primary care setting. Although families are engaged in one setting, they often have to navigate challenges in another setting.Objective: Our objective is to design and implement a comprehensive plan which integrates EBI's and connects the four sectors in underserved communities such as Philadelphia.Methods: September 2015-April 2016 we implemented a three-pronged strategy to understand needs and resources of the community including 1) focus groups and key informant interviews, 2) secondary data analysis and 3) pilot testing for implementation to determine gaps in care, and opportunities to overcome those gaps.Results: Analysis of the focus group and key informant responses showed themes: diagnosis fear, clinician time, home and school asthma trigger exposures, school personnel training and communication gaps across all four sectors. EBI's were evaluated and selected to address identified themes. Pilot testing of a community health worker (CHW) intervention to connect home, primary care and school resulted in an efficient transfer of asthma medications and medication administration forms to the school nurse office for students with uncontrolled asthma addressing a common delay leading to poor asthma management in school.Conclusion: Thus far there has been limited success in reducing asthma disparities for low-income minority children. This study offers hope that strategically positioning CHWs may work synergistically to close gaps in care and result in improved asthma control and reduced asthma disparities.

Background Generally, a short-acting beta-2 agonist (SABA) delivered via metered-dose inhaler (MDI) is recommended for quick relief of asthma symptoms. However, in the PeRson EmPowered Asthma RElief (PREPARE) pragmatic trial, 67% of patients reported having used a nebulizer for SABA administration. Objective To understand preferences, experiences, and decision making regarding the use of nebulizers in Black and Latinx adults with uncontrolled asthma. Methods We interviewed 40 of the 1,201 PREPARE patients employing a matrix analysis. Those interviewed were Black (n = 20) and Latinx (n = 20) adults with uncontrolled asthma seeking primary or specialty care in clinics throughout the United States. Data were analyzed used a Rapid Assessment Procedures qualitative methodology, informed by grounded theory. Results Substudy participants, on average, reported using a nebulizer 3.5 times/wk. Daily use was common, and frequency ranged from less than daily to up to 6 times daily. Nearly all participants reported a longstanding history of nebulizer use. Participants tended to use their nebulizer at home, and some shared it with others in the home. Many reported preferring a nebulizer over an MDI for relief of severe symptoms and to avoid emergency room visits or hospitalizations. The extent to which cost affected nebulizer use varied among participants. Conclusions Despite asthma guideline recommendations that MDIs be used rather than nebulizers for SABA administration, nebulizer use was common among PREPARE study participants. Clinicians should explore patients’ history and experiences with nebulizer use as part of evaluation of asthma control.

Background Exposure to fine particulate matter (PM2.5) increases the risk of asthma exacerbations, and thus, monitoring personal exposure to PM2.5 may aid in disease self-management. Low-cost, portable air pollution sensors offer a convenient way to measure personal pollution exposure directly and may improve personalized monitoring compared with traditional methods that rely on stationary monitoring stations. We aimed to understand whether adults with asthma would be willing to use personal sensors to monitor their exposure to air pollution and to assess the feasibility of using sensors to measure real-time PM2.5 exposure. Methods We conducted semi-structured interviews with 15 adults with asthma to understand their willingness to use a personal pollution sensor and their privacy preferences with regard to sensor data. Student research assistants used HabitatMap AirBeam devices to take PM2.5 measurements at 1-s intervals while walking in Philadelphia neighborhoods in May–August 2018. AirBeam PM2.5 measurements were compared to concurrent measurements taken by three nearby regulatory monitors. Results All interview participants stated that they would use a personal air pollution sensor, though the consensus was that devices should be small (watch- or palm-sized) and light. Patients were generally unconcerned about privacy or sharing their GPS location, with only two stating they would not share their GPS location under any circumstances. PM2.5 measurements were taken using AirBeam sensors on 34 walks that extended through five Philadelphia neighborhoods. The range of sensor PM2.5 measurements was 0.6–97.6 μg/mL (mean 6.8 μg/mL), compared to 0–22.6 μg/mL (mean 9.0 μg/mL) measured by nearby regulatory monitors. Compared to stationary measurements, which were only available as 1-h integrated averages at discrete monitoring sites, sensor measurements permitted characterization of fine-scale fluctuations in PM2.5 levels over time and space. Conclusions Patients were generally interested in using sensors to monitor their personal exposure to PM2.5 and willing to share personal sensor data with health care providers and researchers. Compared to traditional methods of personal exposure assessment, sensors captured personalized air quality information at higher spatiotemporal resolution. Improvements to currently available sensors, including more reliable Bluetooth connectivity, increased portability, and longer battery life would facilitate their use in a general patient population.

Background Few interventions have targeted low-income adults with moderate to severe asthma despite their high mortality. Objective To assess whether a patient advocate (PA) intervention improves asthma outcomes over usual care (UC). Methods This 2-armed randomized clinical trial recruited adults with moderate to severe asthma from primary care and asthma-specialty practices serving low-income neighborhoods. Patients were randomized to 6 months of a PA intervention or UC. PAs were recent college graduates anticipating health care careers, who coached, modeled, and assisted participants with preparations for asthma-related medical visits, attended visits, and confirmed participants' understanding of provider recommendations. Participants were followed for at least a year for patient-centered asthma outcomes: asthma control (primary outcome), quality of life, prednisone requirements, emergency department visits, and hospitalizations. Results There were 312 participants. Their mean age was 51 years (range, 19-93 years), 69% were women, 66% African American, 8% Hispanic/Latino, 62% reported hospitalization for asthma in the year before randomization, 21% had diabetes, and 61% had a body mass index of 30 or more. Asthma control improved over 12 months, more in the intervention group (−0.45 [95% CI, −0.67 to −0.21]) than in the UC group (−0.26 [95% CI, −0.53 to −0.01]), and was sustained at 24 months but with no statistical difference between groups. The 6-month rate of emergency department visits decreased in the intervention (−0.90 [95% CI, −1.56 to −0.42]) and UC (−0.42 [95% CI, −0.72 to −0.06]) groups over 12 months. The cost of the PA program was $1521 per patient. Only 64% of those assigned had a PA visit. Conclusions A PA may be a promising intervention to improve and sustain outcomes in this high-risk population if expanded to address factors that make keeping appointments difficult.

INTRODUCTION: In an ongoing study, a new clinical role adapted from a patient navigator called the patient advocate (PA) met with patients before medical visits, attended appointments and afterwards reviewed provider instructions. This qualitative analysis examines the perspectives of PAs and providers regarding their experiences with patients to understand how a PA can help patients and providers achieve better asthma control. METHODS: PAs recorded journal entries about their experiences with patients. Provider focus groups and interviews were conducted by researchers and transcribed. Analysis was based on the Grounded Theory approach for qualitative research, using open and then focused coding. Two researchers independently coded these sources until intercoder agreement was achieved. RESULTS: Upon review of 31 journal entries on PA experiences with 24 patients and transcripts from 2 provider focus groups and 12 provider interviews, 5 themes emerged surrounding asthma care and self-management: medication adherence, follow-up, communication, social determinants of health and time. While patients shared with PAs specific socioeconomic barriers to medication adherence and follow-up, providers often did not know about these problems and cited barriers to communication. Time restrictions on medical visits further limited communication. CONCLUSIONS: Perspectives reported here illustrate a gap in knowledge and understanding between patients and providers. The PA’s unique relationship with patients and presence inside and outside of medical visits allowed them to learn contextual patient information unknown to providers. PAs and providers cited numerous ways PAs can help to improve patient–provider mutual understanding.

Background This review will inform updated National Asthma Education and Prevention Program clinical practice guidelines. Objective We sought to evaluate the effectiveness of allergen reduction interventions on asthma outcomes. Methods We systematically searched the "gray literature" and 5 bibliographic databases. Eligible studies included systematic reviews, randomized controlled trials, and nonrandomized interventional studies. Risk of bias was assessed by using the Cochrane Risk of Bias instrument and the Newcastle-Ottawa scale. The evidence base was assessed by using the approach of the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality's Evidence–based Practice Center program. Results Fifty-nine randomized and 8 nonrandomized trials addressed 8 interventions: acaricide, air purification, carpet removal, high-efficiency particulate air filtration (HEPA) vacuums, mattress covers, mold removal, pest control, and pet removal. Thirty-seven studies evaluated single-component interventions, and 30 studies assessed multicomponent interventions. Heterogeneity precluded meta-analysis. For most interventions and outcomes, the evidence base was inconclusive or showed no effect. No interventions were associated with improvement in validated asthma control measures or pulmonary physiology. Exacerbations were diminished in multicomponent studies that included HEPA vacuums or pest control (moderate strength of evidence [SOE] for both). Quality of life improved in studies of air purifiers (SOE: low) and in multicomponent studies that included HEPA vacuums (SOE: moderate) or pest control (SOE: low). Conclusions Single interventions were generally not associated with improvement in asthma measures, with most strategies showing inconclusive results or no effect. Multicomponent interventions improved various outcomes, but no combination of specific interventions appears to be more effective. The evidence was often inconclusive because of a lack of studies. Further research is needed comparing the effect of indoor allergen reduction interventions on validated asthma measures, with sufficient population sizes to detect clinically meaningful differences.

Purpose of review Comparative efficacy trials are designed to evaluate the harms and benefits of health care in a research environment. There is increasing interest in the results of comparative effectiveness trials, which are intended to fill gaps in evidence to inform decision-making in real-life clinical environments. The objective of this report is to review various tools to classify trials along the efficacy to effectiveness continuum. Recent findings Three tools [Pragmatic-Explanatory Continuum Indicator Summary (PRECIS), PRECIS-2, and PRAgmatic Clinical Trial Assessment Scale (PRACTAS)] are available that use a star diagram to illustrate where each element of a clinical trial design falls along the efficacy to effectiveness continuum (e.g., selectivity of eligibility criteria, supports to promote participant adherence). The number and type of design element to be classified varies (e.g., 10 elements for PRECIS and PRACTAS vs. nine elements for PRECIS-2; only the PRACTAS tool includes stakeholder engagement). There is substantial interrater reliability when using all three tools and interrater reliability varies across the different design elements (intraclass correlation of coefficient 0.4-0.8). Summary The PRECIS, PRECIS-2, and PRACTAS tools are options when classifying trials along the efficacy to effectiveness continuum. Researchers and decision-making stakeholders are likely to disagree about the extent to which clinical trials employ efficacy or effectiveness designs.

In this year's Advances in Asthma review, we discuss viral infections in asthmatic patients and potential therapeutic agents, the microbiome, novel genetic associations with asthma, air quality and climate effects on asthma, exposures during development and long-term sequelae of childhood asthma, patient-centered outcomes research, and precision medicine. In addition, we discuss application of biomarkers to precision medicine and new information on asthma medications. New evidence indicates that rhinovirus-triggered asthma exacerbations become more severe as the degree of sensitization to dust mite and mouse increase. The 2 biggest drivers of asthma severity are an allergy pathway starting with allergic sensitization and an environmental tobacco smoke pathway. In addition, allergic sensitization and blood eosinophils can be used to select medications for management of early asthma in young children. These current findings, among others covered in this review, represent significant steps toward addressing rapidly advancing areas of knowledge that have implications for asthma management.

Few interventions to improve asthma outcomes have targeted low-income minority adults. Even fewer have focused on the real-world practice where care is delivered. We adapted a patient navigator, here called a Patient Advocate (PA), a term preferred by patients, to facilitate and maintain access to chronic care for adults with moderate or severe asthma and prevalent co-morbidities recruited from clinics serving low-income urban neighborhoods. We describe the planning, design, methodology (informed by patient and provider focus groups), baseline results, and challenges of an ongoing randomized controlled trial of 312 adults of a PA intervention implemented in a variety of practices. The PA coaches, models, and assists participants with preparations for a visit with the asthma clinician; attends the visit with permission of participant and provider; and confirms participants' understanding of what transpired at the visit. The PA facilitates scheduling, obtaining insurance coverage, overcoming patients' unique social and administrative barriers to carrying out medical advice and transfer of information between providers and patients. PA activities are individualized, take account of comorbidities, and are generalizable to other chronic diseases. PAs are recent college graduates interested in health-related careers, research experience, working with patients, and generally have the same race/ethnicity distribution as potential participants. We test whether the PA intervention, compared to usual care, is associated with improved and sustained asthma control and other asthma outcomes (prednisone bursts, ED visits, hospitalizations, quality of life, FEV1) relative to baseline. Mediators and moderators of the PA-asthma outcome relationship are examined along with the intervention's cost-effectiveness.

BACKGROUND: Asthma disproportionately affects low-income and minority adults. In an era of electronic records and internet-based digital devices, it is unknown whether portals, for patient-provider communication, can improve asthma outcomes. OBJECTIVE: To estimate the effect on asthma outcomes of an intervention using home visits by community health workers plus training in patient portals compared to usual care and portal training only. METHODS: 301 predominantly African American and Hispanic/Latino adults with uncontrolled asthma, were recruited from primary care and asthma-specialty practices serving low income urban neighborhoods, directed to internet access, and given portal training. Half were randomized to home visits over six months by community health workers to facilitate competency in portal use and promote care coordination. RESULTS: 170 (56%) patients used the portal independently. Rates of portal activity did not differ between randomized groups. Asthma control and asthma-related quality of life improved in both groups over one year. Differences in improvements over time were greater for the home visit group for all outcomes, but reached conventional levels of statistical significance only for yearly hospitalization rate (−0.53, 95% CI= −1.08 to −0.024). Poor neighborhoods and living conditions plus limited internet access were barriers for patients to complete the protocol and for community health workers to make home visits. CONCLUSION: For low-income adults with uncontrolled asthma, portal access and community health workers produced small incremental benefits. Home visits with emphasis on self-management education might be necessary to facilitate patient-clinician communication and to improve outcomes for asthma.

Background Asthma prevalence, morbidity, and mortality disproportionately impact African American/Black (AA/B) and Hispanic/Latinx (H/L) communities. Adherence to daily inhaled corticosteroid (ICS), recommended by asthma guidelines in all but the mildest cases of asthma, is generally poor. As-needed ICS has shown promise as a patient-empowering asthma management strategy, but it has not been rigorously studied in AA/B or H/L patients or in a real-world setting. Design and Aim The PeRson EmPowered Asthma RElief (PREPARE) Study is a randomized, open-label, pragmatic study which aims to assess whether a patient-guided, reliever-triggered ICS strategy called PARTICS (Patient-Activated Reliever-Triggered Inhaled CorticoSteroid) can improve asthma outcomes in AA/B and H/L adult patient populations. In designing and implementing the study, the PREPARE research team has relied heavily on advice from AA/B and H/L Patient Partners and other stakeholders. Methods PREPARE is enrolling 1200 adult participants (600 AA/Bs, 600H/Ls) with asthma. Participants are randomized to PARTICS + Usual Care (intervention) versus Usual Care (control). Following a single in-person enrollment visit, participants complete monthly questionnaires for 15 months. The primary endpoint is annualized asthma exacerbation rate. Secondary endpoints include asthma control; preference-based quality of life; and days lost from work, school, or usual activities. Discussion The PREPARE study features a pragmatic design allowing for the real-world assessment of a patient-centered, reliever-triggered ICS strategy in AA/B and H/L patients. Outcomes of this study have the potential to offer powerful evidence supporting PARTICS as an effective asthma management strategy in patient populations that suffer disproportionately from asthma morbidity and mortality.

Research on asthma frequently recruits patients from clinics because the ready pool of patients leads to easy access to patients in office waiting areas, emergency departments, or hospital wards. Patients with other chronic conditions, and with mobility problems, face exposures at home that are not easily identified at the clinic. In this article, we describe the perspective of the community health workers and the challenges they encountered when making home visits while implementing a research intervention in a cohort of low-income, minority patients. From their observations, poor housing, often the result of poverty and lack of social resources, is the real elephant in the chronic asthma room. To achieve a goal of reduced asthma morbidity and mortality will require a first-hand understanding of the real-world social and economic barriers to optimal asthma management and the solutions to those barriers.

Background Inhaled corticosteroid (ICS) adherence rates are suboptimal among adult black/African Americans. Comprehensive studies characterizing the effectiveness and the methodological approaches to the development of interventions to improve ICS adherence in adult black/African Americans have not been performed. Objectives Conduct a systematic review of patient/family-level interventions to improve ICS adherence in adult black/African Americans. Methods We searched MEDLINE, EMBASE, Web of Science, and CINAHL from inception to August 2017 for English-language US studies enrolling at least 30% black/African Americans comparing patient/family-level ICS adherence interventions with any comparator. Two investigators independently selected, extracted data from, and rated risk of bias. We collected information on intervention characteristics and outcomes, and assessed whether studies were informed by behavior theory, stakeholder engagement, or both. Results Among 1661 abstracts identified, we reviewed 230 full-text articles and identified 4 randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and 1 quasi-experimental (pre-post design) study meeting criteria. Study participants (N range, 17-333) varied in mean age (22-47 years), proportion black/African Americans studied (71%-93%), and sex (69%-82% females). RCTs evaluated problem-solving classes, self-efficacy training, technology-based motivational interviewing program, and the use of patient advocates. The RCT testing self-efficacy training was the only intervention informed by both behavior theory and stakeholder engagement. All 4 RCTs compared interventions with active control and rated as medium risk of bias. No RCTs found a statistically significant improvement in adherence. Conclusions Few studies assessing asthma adherence interventions focused on adult black/African-American populations. No RCTs demonstrated improved ICS adherence in participants. Future studies that are informed by behavior change theory and stakeholder engagement are needed.

Background Patient-clinician communication, essential for favorable asthma outcomes, increasingly relies on information technology including the electronic heath record–based patient portal. For patients with chronic disease living in low-income neighborhoods, the benefits of portal communication remain unclear. Objective To describe portal activities and association with 12-month outcomes among low-income patients with asthma formally trained in portal use. Methods In a longitudinal observational study within a randomized controlled trial, 301 adults with uncontrolled asthma were taught 7 portal tasks: reviewing upcoming appointments, scheduling appointments, reviewing medications, locating laboratory results, locating immunization records, requesting refills, and messaging. Half the patients were randomized to receive up to 4 home visits by community health workers. Patients' portal use by activities, rate of usage over time, frequency of appointments with asthma physicians, and asthma control and quality of life were assessed over time and estimated as of 12 months from randomization. Results Fewer than 60% of patients used the portal independently. Among users, more than half used less than 1 episode per calendar quarter. The most frequent activities were reading messages and viewing laboratory results and least sending messages and making appointments. Higher rates of portal use were not associated with keeping regular appointments during follow-up, better asthma control, or higher quality of life at 12-month postintervention. Conclusions Patients with uncontrolled asthma used the portal irregularly if at all, despite in-person training. Usage was not associated with regular appointments or with clinical outcomes. Patient portals need modification to accommodate low-income patients with uncontrolled asthma.

Background Asthma is a chronic inflammatory lung disease that affects 18.7 million U.S. adults. Electronic health records (EHRs) are a unique source of information that can be leveraged to understand factors associated with asthma in real-life populations. In this study, we identify demographic factors and comorbidities associated with asthma exacerbations among adults according to EHR-derived data and compare these findings to those of epidemiological studies. Methods We obtained University of Pennsylvania Hospital System EHR-derived data for asthma encounters occurring between 2011 and 2014. Regression analyses were performed to model asthma exacerbation frequency as explained by age, sex, race/ethnicity, health insurance type, smoking status, body mass index (BMI) and various comorbidities. We analyzed data from the National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey (NHANES) from 2001 to 2012 to compare findings with those from the EHR-derived data. Results Based on data from 9068 adult patients with asthma, 33.37% had at least one exacerbation over the four-year study period. In a proportional odds logistic regression predicting number of exacerbations during the study period (levels: 0, 1–2, 3–4, 5+ exacerbations), after controlling for age, race/ethnicity, sex, health insurance type, and smoking status, the highest odds ratios (ORs) of significantly associated factors were: chronic bronchitis (2.70), sinusitis (1.50), emphysema (1.39), fluid and electrolyte disorders (1.35), class 3 obesity (1.32), and diabetes (1.28). An analysis of NHANES data showed associations for class 3 obesity, anemia and chronic bronchitis with exacerbation frequency in an adjusted model controlling for age, race/ethnicity, sex, financial class and smoking status. Conclusions EHR-derived data is helpful to understand exacerbations in real-life asthma patients, facilitating design of detailed studies and interventions tailored for specific populations. Electronic supplementary material The online version of this article (10.1186/s40733-019-0048-y) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.