首页> 美国卫生研究院文献>British Medical Journal >Integrated care for asthma: a clinical social and economic evaluation. Grampian Asthma Study of Integrated Care (GRASSIC)
【2h】

Integrated care for asthma: a clinical social and economic evaluation. Grampian Asthma Study of Integrated Care (GRASSIC)

机译:哮喘综合治疗:临床社会和经济评估。格兰屏哮喘综合治疗研究(GRASSIC)

代理获取
本网站仅为用户提供外文OA文献查询和代理获取服务,本网站没有原文。下单后我们将采用程序或人工为您竭诚获取高质量的原文,但由于OA文献来源多样且变更频繁,仍可能出现获取不到、文献不完整或与标题不符等情况,如果获取不到我们将提供退款服务。请知悉。

摘要

OBJECTIVES--To evaluate integrated care for asthma in clinical, social, and economic terms. DESIGN--Pragmatic randomised trial. SETTING--Hospital outpatient clinics and general practices throughout the north east of Scotland. PATIENTS--712 adults attending hospital outpatient clinics with a diagnosis of asthma confirmed by a chest physician and pulmonary function reversibility of at least 20%. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES--Use of bronchodilators and inhaled and oral steroids; number of general practice consultations and hospital admissions for asthma; sleep disturbance and other restrictions on normal activity; psychological aspects of health including perceived asthma control; patient satisfaction; and financial costs. RESULTS--After one year there were no significant overall differences between those patients receiving integrated asthma care and those receiving conventional outpatient care for any clinical or psychosocial outcome. For pulmonary function, forced expiratory volume was 76% of predicted for integrated care patients and 75% for conventional outpatients (95% confidence interval for difference -3.6% to 5.0%). Patients who had experienced integrated care were more likely to select it as their preferred course of future management (75% (251/333) v 62% (207/333) (6% to 20%)); they saved 39.52 pounds a year. This was largely because patients in conventional outpatient care consulted their general practitioner as many times as those in integrated care, who were not also visiting hospital. CONCLUSION--Integrated care for moderately severe asthma patients is clinically as effective as conventional outpatient care, cost effective, and an attractive management option for patients, general practitioners, and hospital consultants.
机译:目的-从临床,社会和经济角度评估哮喘综合治疗。设计-实用的随机试验。地点-整个苏格兰东北部的医院门诊和普通诊所。患者-712位在医院门诊就诊的成年人经胸科医生确认患有哮喘,肺功能可逆性至少为20%。主要观察指标-支气管扩张药和吸入及口服类固醇的使用;哮喘的一般诊治咨询次数和入院次数;睡眠障碍和其他对正常活动的限制;健康的心理方面,包括感知到的哮喘控制;患者满意度;和财务成本。结果-一年后,接受综合哮喘护理的患者与接受常规门诊护理的患者在任何临床或心理社会结局方面均无显着总体差异。对于肺功能,综合护理患者的强制呼气量为预期的76%,常规门诊患者为75%(95%的置信区间为-3.6%至5.0%)。经历过综合护理的患者更有可能选择其作为未来治疗的首选疗程(75%(251/333)对62%(207/333)(6%至20%));他们一年节省了39.52磅。这主要是因为常规门诊患者的综合诊治次数是综合门诊患者的综合诊治次数,而他们也没有去医院就诊。结论-中度重度哮喘患者的综合护理在临床上与常规门诊一样有效,具有成本效益,并且对患者,全科医生和医院顾问而言是有吸引力的管理选择。

著录项

  • 期刊名称 British Medical Journal
  • 作者

  • 作者单位
  • 年(卷),期 1994(308),6928
  • 年度 1994
  • 页码 559–564
  • 总页数 6
  • 原文格式 PDF
  • 正文语种
  • 中图分类
  • 关键词

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
代理获取

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号