No abstract

No abstract

Clinical trials evaluating the management of acute exacerbations of COPD assess heterogeneous outcomes, often omitting those that are clinically relevant or more important to patients. We have developed a core outcome set, a consensus-based minimum set of important outcomes that we recommend are evaluated in all future clinical trials on exacerbations management, to improve their quality and comparability. COPD exacerbations outcomes were identified through methodological systematic reviews and qualitative interviews with 86 patients from 11 countries globally. The most critical outcomes were prioritized for inclusion in the core outcome set through a two-round Delphi survey that was completed by 1,063 participants (256 patients, 488 health professionals and 319 clinical academics) from 88 countries in 5 continents. Two global, multi-stakeholder, virtual consensus meetings were conducted to (i) finalize the core outcome set and (ii) prioritize a single measurement instrument to be used for evaluating each of the prioritized outcomes. Consensus was informed by rigorous methodological systematic reviews. The views of patients with COPD were accounted for in all stages of the project. Survival, treatment success, breathlessness, quality of life, activities of daily living, need for higher level of care, arterial blood gases, disease progression, future exacerbations and hospital admissions, treatment safety and adherence were all included in the core outcome set. Focused methodological research was recommended to further validate and optimize some of the selected measurement instruments. The panel did not consider the prioritized set of outcomes and associated measurement instruments burdensome for patients and health professionals to use.

Disclosure of potential conflict of interest K. Niespodziana receives grant support (grant no. P29398) from the Austrian Science Foundation (FWF). K. F. Chung has received honoraria for participating in advisory board meetings of GlaxoSmithKline (GSK), AstraZeneca, Novartis, Merck, Boehringer Ingelheim, and Teva regarding treatments for asthma and chronic obstructive pulmonary disease and has also been renumerated for speaking engagements. A. Custovic reports personal fees from Novartis,

International surveys have demonstrated that asthma is still underdiagnosed and undertreated in many parts of the world. Despite improvements in the standard of asthma care delivered in many areas, as evidenced by improved global asthma mortality data, much information on projects and programmes undertaken in resource-limited regions of the world is not in the public domain. The aim of this report is to review projects and programmes in diverse regions around the world so that health care providers, planners and consumers may draw on the successes, failures and lessons learnt. Such real world experiences may contribute to achieving Global Initiative for Asthma goals of asthma control. Asthma projects and programmes in Argentina, Australia, Brazil, China, Japan, Mexico, Philippines, Russia, South Africa and Turkey were discussed by a group of experts in asthma care, the Advancing Asthma Care Network, from their respective countries, over a course of three satellite meetings in 2010. Collective analyses consistently identified low rates of dissemination and implementation of national and international treatment guidelines, low levels of continuing medical education and training of primary health care professionals and access and distribution of inhaled corticosteroids to be major barriers that are critical to the overall success of a national asthma management programme. In the less developed asthma programmes, under-recognition and undertreatment further limited the success of the programmes. Evidence from well-established national asthma management programmes suggests that establishment of a successful programme entails a logical progression through specific developmental stages, starting with political/stakeholder endorsement and commitment, followed by epidemiological evaluation, evaluation of disease burden, evaluation of access to care and best therapy, and finally optimisation and maintenance therapy for individual patients.