ArticleOpen respiratory archives
[Cost-utility study of a high-resolution consultation (CARE-A) for the treatment of asthma exacerbations].
Article in Open respiratory archives. 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
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Introduction: High-resolution consultations (CARE-A) are an efficient tool for reducing the costs associated with the treatment and follow-up of patients with bronchial asthma, who also benefit from specialized care. These consultations see patients who have required emergency care in hospitals or health centers within less than a week, diagnosing asthma and initiating follow-up in the specialized consultation. Our objective was to assess the efficiency of CARE-A care for asthma patients, quantifying the economic impact one year after initial care and the clinical improvement in patients. Material and methods: A pre-post quasi-experimental study analyzing clinical, functional, and inflammatory data, as well as resource utilization, in asthma patients treated at CARE-A at baseline and one year later. Results: We included 108 patients over the age of 18 with an estimated average expenditure at the start of the study of €1,583.5 ± 2.8, which was reduced to €851.71 ± 3.3 one year after receiving care at CARE-A. Patients also showed improvements in the ACT (asthma control test) (from 14.3 ± 5.9 to 17.9 ± 5.4), FEV1 (from 2.35 ± 1.09 to 2.65 ± 1.3), as well as a 20% improvement in treatment adherence tests. There was a reduction in the costs of resources used, as well as in the medication needed to control asthma. Conclusion: The high-resolution consultation has proven useful in improving control.
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.