ArticleJournal of asthma and allergy2025
Evaluation of Real-World Quality of Asthma Care According to the Spanish Consensus Protocol: The AsmaNET Project (ESR-20-20897).
Article in Journal of asthma and allergy, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: The emergency room (ER) approach for patients with asthma exacerbations (AEs) should be based on a comprehensive, multidisciplinary approach to ensure effective and timely care. This study aims to analyze the compliance level of recommended indicators, as defined in a consensus document, for the management of AEs in the ER using available electronic medical records. Methods: An open-label, observational, non-interventional, retrospective study of adult patients treated in hospital ER for AEs was conducted at La Paz University Hospital and Salamanca University Hospital. Data were collected from medical records regarding a set of predefined measures and variables concerning asthma severity, ER stay, and subsequent discharge. Results: During 2019, a total of 1,019 patients accounted for 1,089 AEs were evaluated. Clinical variables predominantly included historical data, such as previous hospitalizations, Intensive Care Unit admissions, and prior exacerbations, which were recorded in 45.8% of medical records. Auscultation details were extensively documented (99.8%), yet respiratory rate (25.4%) and spirometry (less than 10%) were notably lower. Regarding discharge planning, 69.6% of patients had a defined care plan, and 59.5% received Inhaled Corticosteroids plus Long-Acting Beta-Agonists combination treatment at discharge. Medical referrals resulted in 25.5% being referred for specialized care and 87.2% to primary care. 13.3% had a specific post-discharge care timeframe. Conclusion: This study highlights significant variability in the documentation and adherence to recommended indicators for AE management in the ER. Moreover, discharge planning and follow-up care were suboptimal. These findings underscore the need for improved standardization and implementation of evidence-based protocols in emergency 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.