Jump to: Page Content, Site Navigation, Site Search,
You are seeing this message because your web browser does not support basic web standards. Find out more about why this message is appearing and what you can do to make your experience on this site better.
BMJ 2003;326:1267 (7 June), doi:10.1136/bmj.326.7401.1267-b
| The first 150 words of the full text of this article appear below. |
EDITORPinnock et al conclude that telephone consultation for asthma review is an efficient option for patients in primary care.1 We have several concerns about this study.
Firstly, a large number of patients (654/932) chose not to take part, and a further 307 were excluded for other reasons. It is not inconceivable that patients who dislike telephone consultations could have entirely opted out even before the study started.
Secondly, the assumption that actual observation of patients' inhaler technique and peak flow measurement is equivalent to asking patients about their technique or measurements causes concerns. Patients commonly deny problems using inhalers but often fail to demonstrate effective usage.
Thirdly, the conclusion that both interventions were equally effective is somewhat spurious since, using their own instrument. neither intervention produced a difference in outcome three months later. It might be better to say both were equally ineffectual.
Lastly we found in our
Brian McKinstry, senior researcher
Community Health Sciences, Edinburgh University, Edinburgh EH8 9DZ
David Heaney, senior researcher
Highlands and Islands Health Research Institute, University of Aberdeen, Beechwood Business Park North, Inverness IV2 3ED
Jeremy Walker, research fellow
Research Unit in Health, Behaviour and Change, University of Edinburgh, Medical School, Edinburgh EH8 9AG
Sally Wyke, director, Scottish School of Primary Care
Lister Institute, Edinburgh EH8 9DR