A Danish population-based cohort study of newly diagnosed asthmatic children's care pathway - Adherence to guidelines

16Citations
Citations of this article
58Readers
Mendeley users who have this article in their library.

Abstract

Background. Asthma is the most common chronic disease in childhood. Large variations exist concerning the number of children being treated by general practitioners and by specialists. Consequently, health related costs due to this disease vary as care by specialists is more expensive compared with care by general practitioners. Little is known of the consequences of these variations concerning the quality of care. The aim of the study was to analyse associations between care providers and adherence to guidelines concerning frequency of contacts with the health service due to asthma. Methods. A cohort study was performed of 36,940 incident asthmatic children's (aged 6-14) contacts with the health service using the unique personal registration number to link data from five national registries. The prevalence ratios were calculated for associations between provider (general practitioner, primary care specialist, hospital specialist or both GP and specialist) and adherence with guidelines concerning three indicators of quality of care pathway: 1) diagnostic examination of lung function at start of medical treatment 2) follow-up the first six months and 3) follow-up the next six months. The associations were adjusted for sex, age, socioeconomic status, county, and severity of disease. Results. Most children (70.3%) had only been seen by their GP. About 80% of the children were treated with inhaled steroids, 70% were treated with inhaled steroids as well as inhaled beta2agonists and 13% were treated with inhaled beta2agonists only. A total of 12,650 children (34.2%) had no registered asthma-related contacts with the health service except when redeeming prescriptions. Care was in accordance with guidelines in all three indicators of quality in 7% of the cases (GPs only: 3%, primary care specialists only: 16%, hospital specialists: 28%, and both GP and specialists: 13%). Primary care specialists had a 5.01, hospital specialists a 8.81 and both GP and specialists a 4.32 times higher propensity to provide a clinical pathway according to guidelines compared to GPs alone. Conclusion. The majority of the children were seen in general practice. Hospital specialists provided care in accordance with guidelines nine times more often compared with GPs, but still only one quarter of these children had pathways in accordance with guidelines. It is relevant to study further if these lacks of adherence to guidelines have implications for the asthmatic children or if guidelines are too demanding concerning frequency of follow-up or if asthmatic children should be stratified to different care pathways. © 2008 Moth et al; licensee BioMed Central Ltd.

References Powered by Scopus

Worldwide variation in prevalence of symptoms of asthma, allergic rhinoconjunctivitis, and atopic eczema: ISAAC

3372Citations
N/AReaders
Get full text

Effect of clinical guidelines on medical practice: a systematic review of rigorous evaluations

2434Citations
N/AReaders
Get full text

The health economics of asthma and rhinitis. I. Assessing the economic impact

488Citations
N/AReaders
Get full text

Cited by Powered by Scopus

In utero exposure to selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors and risk for autism spectrum disorder

95Citations
N/AReaders
Get full text

Global Initiative for Asthma (GINA) guidelines: 15 years of application

73Citations
N/AReaders
Get full text

Prescribing patterns of asthma controller therapy for children in UK primary care: A cross-sectional observational study

35Citations
N/AReaders
Get full text

Register to see more suggestions

Mendeley helps you to discover research relevant for your work.

Already have an account?

Cite

CITATION STYLE

APA

Moth, G., Schiotz, P. O., & Vedsted, P. (2008). A Danish population-based cohort study of newly diagnosed asthmatic children’s care pathway - Adherence to guidelines. BMC Health Services Research, 8. https://doi.org/10.1186/1472-6963-8-130

Readers over time

‘12‘13‘14‘15‘16‘17‘18‘19‘20‘21‘22‘23‘24‘25036912

Readers' Seniority

Tooltip

Researcher 17

46%

PhD / Post grad / Masters / Doc 16

43%

Professor / Associate Prof. 3

8%

Lecturer / Post doc 1

3%

Readers' Discipline

Tooltip

Medicine and Dentistry 24

69%

Social Sciences 4

11%

Psychology 4

11%

Engineering 3

9%

Save time finding and organizing research with Mendeley

Sign up for free
0