↓ Skip to main content

A qualitative evaluation of the implementation of guidelines and a support tool for asthma management in primary care

Overview of attention for article published in Asthma Research and Practice, May 2016
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (67th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
5 X users
facebook
1 Facebook page

Citations

dimensions_citation
18 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
49 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
A qualitative evaluation of the implementation of guidelines and a support tool for asthma management in primary care
Published in
Asthma Research and Practice, May 2016
DOI 10.1186/s40733-016-0023-9
Pubmed ID
Authors

Kim Watkins, Colleen Fisher, Jila Misaghian, Carl R. Schneider, Rhonda Clifford

Abstract

Asthma management in Australia is suboptimal. The "Guidelines for provision of a Pharmacist Only medicine: short acting beta agonists" (SABA guidelines) and a novel West Australian "Asthma Action Plan card" (AAP card) were concurrently developed to improve asthma management. The aim of this qualitative research was to evaluate the collaborative, multidisciplinary and multifaceted implementation of these asthma resources and identify the lessons learnt to inform future initiatives. Feedback was sought about the implementation of the SABA guidelines and the AAP card using focus groups with key stakeholders including pharmacists (×2), pharmacy assistants, asthma educators, general practitioners, practice nurses and people with asthma (patients). Audio recordings were transcribed verbatim. Data were analysed thematically using constant comparison. The common themes identified from the focus groups were categorised according to a taxonomy of barriers including barriers related to knowledge, attitudes and behaviour. Seven focus group sessions were held with 57 participants. Knowledge barriers were identified included a lack of awareness and lack of familiarity of the resources. There was a significant lack of awareness of the AAP card where passive implementation methods had been utilised. Pharmacists had good awareness of the SABA guidelines but pharmacy assistants were unaware of the guidelines despite significant involvement in the sale of SABAs. Environmental barriers included time and workflow issues and the role of the pharmacy assistant in the organisation workflows of the pharmacy. The attitudes and behaviours of health professionals and patients with asthma were discordant and this undermined optimal asthma management. Suggestions to improve asthma management included the use of legislation, the use of electronic resources integrated into workflows and training pharmacists or practice nurses to provide patients with written asthma action plans. Greater consideration needs to be given to implementation of resources to improve awareness and overcome barriers to utilisation. Attitudes and behaviours of both health professionals and patients with asthma need to be addressed. Interventions directed toward health professionals should focus on skills needs related to achieving improved communication and patient behaviour change.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 5 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 49 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 49 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 9 18%
Student > Bachelor 6 12%
Researcher 5 10%
Lecturer 3 6%
Other 3 6%
Other 8 16%
Unknown 15 31%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 8 16%
Nursing and Health Professions 8 16%
Psychology 6 12%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 4 8%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 2 4%
Other 7 14%
Unknown 14 29%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 4. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 19 June 2017.
All research outputs
#6,840,882
of 22,955,959 outputs
Outputs from Asthma Research and Practice
#34
of 82 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#95,981
of 299,299 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Asthma Research and Practice
#3
of 3 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,955,959 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 70th percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 82 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 7.4. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 59% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 299,299 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 67% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 3 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one.