Pharmacy World and Science

, Volume 23, Issue 6, pp 242–245 | Cite as

Do asthma patients receive sufficient information to monitor their disease − a nationwide survey in Finland

  • Ulla Närhi
  • Marja Airaksinen
  • Hannes Enlund


Objectives: The aim of this study was to assess to what extent the principles of asthma monitoring are implemented among Finnish asthma patients and if the patients have received sufficient information to adjust their medication according to asthma symptoms.Setting: All Finnish asthma patients receiving asthma medication from Finnish community pharmacies during two days in June 1998.Main outcome measures: The proportions of asthma patients who monitor their asthma status according to the national guidelines and have received specific instructions on how and when to adjust their asthma medication.Results: Eighty‐six per cent of the respondents (86%) monitored their asthma status on a method recommended by the national guidelines. They made Peak Expiratory Flow (PEF) measurements (39% of the respondents), they monitored their symptoms (34%) or both (13%). A smaller proportion of the respondents (58%) were instructed on adjusting their medication according to symptoms. The lowest rates for monitoring the asthma status was found among the elderly (65 years or more) and among those who reported that they had been on medication for longer than 5 years (17% and 13% of the subgroup populations, respectively). The lowest rates for having received specific instructions on adjusting their asthma medication according to symptoms were found among the elderly (36 %), among those who reported that they had been on asthma medication less than one year (44 %), and among males (54 %).Conclusions: Pharmacists and other health care professionals need to enhance their education activities and their co‐operation in training asthma patients to monitor their disease, especially principles of adjusting medication according to symptoms. In this process, especially the training needs of the elderly patients and those who have been using asthma medicines for a long time need to be taken into account.

Asthma Education Information Monitoring Community pharmacy services Practice guidelines Self care 


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. 1.
    The Expert Panel Report 2. Guidelines for the diagnosis and management of asthma. No. 97-4051. Bethesda, MD, US Department of Health and Human Services, National Heart, Lung and Blood Institute, 1997.Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Lahdensuo A, Haahtela T, Herrala J et al.: Randomised comparison of guided self management and traditional treatment of asthma over one year. BMJ 1996;312:748-52.Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    British Asthma Guidelines Coordinating Committee. British guidelines on asthma management:1995 review and position statement. Thorax 1997;52:S1-S24.Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Ministry of Social Affairs of Health. Asthma programme in Finland 1994-2004. Working group report. Clin Exp Allergy 1996;26 Suppl 1:1-24.Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Kauppinen R, Sintonen H, Tukiainen H: One-year economic evaluation of intensive vs conventional patient education and supervision for self-management of new asthmatic patients. Respir Med 1998;92:300-7.Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Chapman KR, Love L, Brubaker H: A comparison of breathactuated and conventional metered-dose inhaler inhalation techniques in elderly subjects. Chest 1993; 104:1332-7.Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Allen SC, Prior A: What determines whether an elderly patient can use a metered dose inhaler correctly? Br J Dis Chest 1986;80:45-9.Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Enlund H, Vainio K, Wallenius S, Poston JW: Adverse drug effects and the need for drug information. Med Care 1991;29:558-64.Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Herborg H, Sondergaard B, Frokjaer B, Fonnesbaek L, Gustafsson T, Hepler C: Pharmaceutical care value proved. Int Pharm J 10:167-8, 1996.Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Grainger-Rousseau TJ, McEInay JC. A model for community pharmacist involvement with general practitioners in the management of asthma patients. J Appl Ther 1:145-161, 1996.Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    van Mil JWF: Pharmaceutical care, the future of pharmacy. Theory, research and practice. Dissertation thesis, Drukkerij de volharding, Groningen, The Netherlands, 1999.Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Association of Finnish Pharmacies. Statistics on 1998.Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Chmelik F, Doughty A: Objective measurements of compliance in asthma treatment. Ann Allergy 1994;73:527-32.Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Kelloway JS, Wyatt RA, Adlis SA: Comparison of patients' compliance with prescribed oral and inhaled asthma medications. Arch Intern Med 1994;154:1349-52.Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Bender B, Milgrom H, Rand C: Nonadherence in asthmatic patients: is there a solution to the problem? Ann Allergy Asthma Immunol 1997;79:177-85.Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Närhi U, Vainio K, Ahonen R, Airaksinen M, Enlund H: Detecting problems of patients with asthma in a community pharmacy -a pilot study. J Soc Adm Pharm 1999;16:127-33.Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    van der Palen J, Klein JJ, Rovers MM. Compliance with inhaled medication and self-treatment guidelines following a self management programme in adult asthmatics. Eur Respir J 1997;10:652-7.Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Haahtela T, Klaukka T: Societal and health care benefits of early use of inhaled steroids. Thorax 1998;53:1005-6.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Kluwer Academic Publishers 2001

Authors and Affiliations

  • Ulla Närhi
    • 1
  • Marja Airaksinen
    • 1
  • Hannes Enlund
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of Social PharmacyUniversity of KuopioKuopioFinland

Personalised recommendations