ArticleJournal of asthma and allergy2024
A Retrospective Claims Database Study to Clarify Treatment Reality of Asthma Patients Before and After Referral to a Specialist.
Article in Journal of asthma and allergy, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
1 citing paper in PubMed, 1 citations in OpenAlex.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Purpose: Japanese guidelines recommend that patients with uncontrolled asthma be referred by non-specialists to specialists (allergists and/or pulmonologists). This study investigated the reality of clinical practice in asthma patients referred to specialists in Japan. Patients and Methods: This was a retrospective, observational cohort study of asthma patients in a health insurance claim database (Cross Fact) referred from facilities with non-specialists to those with specialists from January 2016 to December 2018. The referred asthma patients were defined as patients with ≥4 inhaled corticosteroid (ICS)-containing prescriptions during a 1-year baseline period, with an asthma diagnosis, and who had visited a facility with specialists. Asthma exacerbation, maintenance treatment, laboratory tests, and medical procedures before and after referral were analyzed. Results: Data for 2135 patients were extracted, of which 420 with referral codes were analyzed. The proportion of patients with asthma exacerbations was 50.2% (95% confidence interval [CI]: 45.4-55.1%) before referral and 37.4% (95% CI: 32.7-42.2%) after, a significant decrease (P<0.001; McNemar test). The proportions of patients prescribed ICS alone, long-acting beta-agonists (LABA), and ICS/LABA were lower after referral than before, but the proportions of patients prescribed long-acting muscarinic antagonists (LAMA), ICS/LABA/LAMA, and biologics increased after referral. More asthma-related laboratory tests were performed after referral, and spirometry incidence increased from 16.4% before referral to 51.4% after referral. Conclusion: This study shows a decrease in asthma exacerbations, change in asthma treatments, and increase in laboratory tests after referral to a specialist, suggesting that referrals to specialists lead to better management of asthma.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.