Self-management in chronic obstructive pulmonary disease. Time for a paradigm shift?

Abstract

Self-management in chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, centering on an action plan for the exacerbation and enhanced communication between the patient and health care providers, makes good clinical sense. However, five relatively large trials of self-management in chronic obstructive pulmonary disease have had inconsistent results: only two demonstrated reductions in health care utilization and one had to be discontinued prematurely because of increased mortality. Do these discordant findings require a paradigm shift in our concept of self-management? Probably not-but an analysis of the negative studies can give us valuable insights. There are data to support the idea that patients in the trial that showed increased mortality did not self-manage appropriately. Only 4.5% of these patients called in before starting treatment for their exacerbation, the time to initiation of antibiotics or steroids was unsatisfactorily long, and the intervention arm used minimally more prednisone and antibiotics than the control arm. The reasons for a higher mortality will likely never be known, but it is possible that these high-risk patients may have needed earlier assessment by a trained professional, or that self-management led to overconfidence and treatment delays. We clearly need more effective ways to implement self-management and better define which groups of patients stand to benefit (or be harmed) by this intervention. This will require an investment in well-thought-out clinical trials.