IntroductionPoor treatment adherence among asthmatic patients currently remains a public health challenge. One of the most quoted determinants is the quality of the professional–patient relationship although it has clearly not been fully described.PurposeThis study aims at deeply exploring asthmatic patients’ needs and expectations about the accompaniment proposed by their healthcare professionals.MethodsA rigorous narrative review was performed.ResultsAccording to patients, what they expect from professionals can be split into eight themes: getting exhaustive information, relying on an available healthcare professional, being more involved into life with one’s asthma, being accompanied by a multidisciplinary team, being respected in one’s uniqueness, being cared through a humanist approach, feeling the professional is skilled and Other needs.Discussion and conclusionAsthmatic patients’ needs have little evolved in 20 years illustrating that if they are met, that would positively affect the way patients want to be followed by healthcare professionals and so, that would increase their treatment adherence. Several recommendations such as setting up a doctor – asthma nurse practitioner binomial or studying a concrete care pathway may help in fulfilling these needs. Finally, this research opens the way to other studies since similar results have been found in populations suffering from other chronic diseases than asthma.
réservés pour tous pays.La reproduction ou représentation de cet article, notamment par photocopie, n'est autorisée que dans les limites des conditions générales d'utilisation du site ou, le cas échéant, des conditions générales de la licence souscrite par votre établissement. Toute autre reproduction ou représentation, en tout ou partie, sous quelque forme et de quelque manière que ce soit, est interdite sauf accord préalable et écrit de l'éditeur, en dehors des cas prévus par la législation en vigueur en France. Il est précisé que son stockage dans une base de données est également interdit.
Background
Addressing the challenges of asthma has involved various approaches, including the examination of costs associated with hospitalization. However, there is a limited number of studies that have investigated the actual expenses incurred by hospital settings in caring for asthma patients. This study aims to describe the costs, predictors, and breakdown of expenditures in different categories.
Methods
A retrospective cohort study was conducted, involving 314 hospital stays of patients over 12 years old who were admitted for asthma and classified under APR-DRG 141 (asthma). Univariate and multiple linear regression analyses were performed.
Results
The median cost, regardless of DRG severity, amounted to 2.314€ (1.550€-3.847€). Significant variations were observed when the sample was stratified based on the severity of DRG, revealing a cost gradient that increases with severity. The length of stay followed a similar trend. Six predictors were identified: age, admission to intensive care, asthma severity, severity level of the DRG, winter admission, and length of stay. The cost breakdown showed that 44% constituted direct costs, 25% were indirect costs, 26% were attributed to medical procedures performed outside the patient unit, and 5% were related to medication administration.
Conclusions
This study initiates a discussion on the role of reducing hospital costs in strategies aiming at controlling asthma-related costs. We argue that cost reduction cannot be achieved solely at the hospital level but must be approached from a public health perspective. This includes promoting high-quality outpatient care and addressing factors leading to poor adherence to the care plan.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.