Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
Clinical Trial
. 2003 Mar 1;326(7387):477-9.
doi: 10.1136/bmj.326.7387.477.

Accessibility, acceptability, and effectiveness in primary care of routine telephone review of asthma: pragmatic, randomised controlled trial

Hilary Pinnock  1 , Robert Bawden, Stephen Proctor, Stephanie Wolfe, Jane Scullion, David Price, Aziz Sheikh
Affiliations
Clinical Trial

Accessibility, acceptability, and effectiveness in primary care of routine telephone review of asthma: pragmatic, randomised controlled trial

Hilary Pinnock et al. BMJ. .

Abstract

Objective: To determine whether routine review by telephone of patients with asthma improves access and is a good alternative to face to face reviews in general practices.

Design: Pragmatic, randomised controlled trial.

Setting: Four general practices in England.

Participants: 278 adults who had not been reviewed in the previous 11 months.

Intervention: Participants were randomised to either telephone review or face to face consultation with the asthma nurse.

Main outcome measures: Primary outcome measures were the proportion of participants who were reviewed within three months of randomisation and disease specific quality of life, as measured by the Juniper mini asthma quality of life questionnaire. Secondary outcome measures included the validated "short Q" asthma morbidity score, nursing care satisfaction questionnaire score, and length of consultation.

Results: Of 137 people randomised to telephone consultation, 101 (74%) were reviewed, compared with 68 reviewed (48%) of the 141 people in the surgery group, a difference of 26% (95% confidence interval 14% to 37%; P<0.001; number needed to treat 3.8). Three months after randomisation the two groups did not differ in the Juniper score (risk difference -0.07 (95% confidence interval -0.40 to 0.27) or in satisfaction with the consultation (risk difference -0.07 (-0.27 to 0.13)). Telephone consultations were on average 10 minutes shorter than reviews held in the surgery (mean difference 10.7 minutes (12.6 to 8.8; P<0.001)).

Conclusions: Compared with face to face consultations in the surgery, telephone consultations enable more people with asthma to be reviewed, without clinical disadvantage or loss of satisfaction. A shorter duration means that telephone consultations are likely to be an efficient option in primary care for routine review of asthma.

PubMed Disclaimer

Figures

Figure
Figure
Flow of patients through the trial
See this image and copyright information in PMC

Comment in

Similar articles

See all similar articles

Cited by

See all "Cited by" articles

References

    1. British Thoracic Society. The British guidelines on asthma management: 1995 review and position statement. Thorax. 1997;52(suppl 1):S1–20.
    1. Gibson PG, Coughlan J, Wilson AJ, Abramson M, Bauman A, Hensley MJ, et al. Self-management education and regular practitioner review for adults with asthma. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2002;(2):CD001117. - PubMed
    1. Gruffydd-Jones K, Nicholson I, Best L, Connell E. Why don't patients attend the asthma clinic? Asthma in General Practice. 1999;7:36–38.
    1. National Asthma Campaign. Out in the open: a true picture of asthma in the United Kingdom today. Asthma Journal. 2001;6:3–14.
    1. Partridge M. Consultation by telephone and e-mail. Asthma Journal. 1999;4:103.

Publication types