BMJ  2003;326:1267 (7 June), doi:10.1136/bmj.326.7401.1267-a

Letter

Routine telephone review of asthma

Measurement of quality dimensions causes concern

The first 150 words of the full text of this article appear below.

EDITOR—The study by Pinnock et al on routine telephone review of asthma can be considered from the perspective of performance on the quality dimensions of appropriateness, accessibility, efficiency, safety, effectiveness, and acceptability.^1–3 This study indicated that, without clinical disadvantage or loss of satisfaction, telephone consultations provided an efficient option for the routine review of asthma.¹ These findings require further consideration.

The sample does not seem representative of the target population. This is important because the assessment of care is dependent on the group studied.³ In addition to the authors' concerns about generalisability, our concerns are that 75% of eligible patients did not participate and recruitment was unequal between groups. As such, appropriateness and effectiveness for the target population cannot validly be determined.

Measures emphasised patients' perceptions. This can produce a biased perspective.³ Furthermore the proportion of patients who withdrew may indicate dissatisfaction not measured in the study and . . . [Full text of this article]

Parkdale Community Rehabilitation Centre, Southern Health, Victoria, Australia tnhuynh10@yahoo.com

Department of Human Services, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia

CiteULike    Complore    Connotea    Del.icio.us    Digg    Reddit    StumbleUpon    Technorati    What's this?

Relevant Article

Accessibility, acceptability, and effectiveness in primary care of routine telephone review of asthma: pragmatic, randomised controlled trial

Hilary Pinnock, Robert Bawden, Stephen Proctor, Stephanie Wolfe, Jane Scullion, David Price, and Aziz Sheikh
BMJ 2003 326: 477-479. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Online poll

Find out more on doc2doc >>