ArticleBJGP open2025
Reducing pressurised metered-dose inhaler prescriptions for asthma to reduce carbon emissions: a qualitative study of healthcare professional perspectives.
Article in BJGP open, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.
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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Prescribing for the patient and the planet: a pragmatic feasibility study of a behaviour change intervention to reduce liquid amoxicillin prescribing in primary care.Exploratory research in clinical and social pharmacy · 2026Article
- Climate conscious pharmacy practice: a qualitative interview study with pharmacists in the context of respiratory health care.International journal of clinical pharmacy · 2026Article
- Supporting general practices to develop green action plans to reduce carbon emissions: development and evaluation of the feasibility of a workshop-based intervention.Primary health care research & development · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundPrescribing of pressurised metered-dose inhalers (pMDIs) is a key NHS carbon hotspot and reducing the number of these devices prescribed will help achieve NHS net zero targets.
aimTo explore primary healthcare professionals' perspectives on reducing the prescribing of pMDIs for people with asthma to reduce associated carbon emissions. DESIGN &
settingQualitative study of healthcare professionals (GPs, practice nurses [PNs], and clinical pharmacists [CPs]) working in general practice in England.
methodEighteen semi-structured interviews were conducted with healthcare professionals. Participants were recruited through professional networks and using snowball sampling. Topic guides were developed to explore participant perspectives, concerns, and motivations.
resultsEight GPs, six PNs, and four CPs were interviewed. Results are presented over two topics. The first explores factors influencing inhaler device choice and discusses the following themes: patient-centred care; bias and assumptions; clinician confidence and knowledge; and status quo of asthma care. The second topic identifies facilitators and barriers for prescribing fewer pMDIs through the following themes: understanding; attitudes to change; confidence in dry powder inhalers (DPIs); attitudes to change; engagement with sustainable prescribing; and system drivers.
conclusionInterlinking personal, consultation, and external factors influence which inhaler device is prescribed for patients with asthma. There are considerable actionable barriers to implementing carbon-conscious prescribing, many of which would improve the quality of asthma care.
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.