Cited by 125Pharmacy and Medical PracticesAsthma and respiratory diseasesChronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease (COPD) Research

Can a self-management programme delivered by a community pharmacist improve asthma control? A randomised trial

Open access
Barbanel, D·2003·Thorax

Abstract

BACKGROUND: No randomised studies have addressed whether self-management for asthma can be successfully delivered by community pharmacists. Most randomised trials of asthma self-management have recruited participants from secondary care; there is uncertainty regarding its effectiveness in primary care. A randomised controlled study was undertaken to determine whether a community pharmacist could improve asthma control using self-management advice for individuals recruited during attendance at a community pharmacy. METHODS: Twenty four adults attending a community pharmacy in Tower Hamlets, east London for routine asthma medication were randomised into two groups: the intervention group received self-management advice from the pharmacist with weekly telephone follow up for 3 months and the control group received no input from the pharmacist. Participants self-completed the North of England asthma symptom scale at baseline and 3 months later. RESULTS: The groups were well matched at baseline for demographic characteristics and mean (SD) symptom scores (26.3 (4.8) and 27.8 (3.7) in the intervention and control groups, respectively). Symptom scores improved in the intervention group and marginally worsened in the control group to 20.3 (4.2) and 28.1 (3.5), respectively (p<0.001; difference adjusted for baseline scores=7.0 (95% CI 4.4 to 9.5). CONCLUSIONS: A self-management programme delivered by a community pharmacist can improve asthma control in individuals recruited at a community pharmacy. Further studies should attempt to confirm these findings using larger samples and a wider range of outcome measures.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1136/thorax.58.10.851

Cites

17 of 17 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 1

  1. Hayward SA, Jordan M, Golden G, et al. A randomised controlled evaluation of asthma self management in general practice. Asthma Gen Pract 1996;4:11-3.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Barbanel, D.
Affiliations
Queen Mary University of London (GB)
Corresponding author
Barbanel, D
Venue
Thorax
Publisher
BMJ
Published
2003-10-01
Volume
58
Issue
10
Pages
851-854
ISSN
0040-6376 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2141601684
Cited by
125
References
17
Citations by year
2026: 3 · 2025: 2 · 2024: 1 · 2023: 3 · 2022: 2 · 2021: 9 · 2020: 3 · 2019: 8 · 2018: 9 · 2017: 4 · 2016: 6 · 2015: 6 · 2014: 11 · 2013: 5 · 2012: 7
FWCI
3.35
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Thorax (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutics › Pharmacology › Pharmacy and Medical Practices
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Physiology › Asthma and respiratory diseases
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Pulmonary and Respiratory Medicine › Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease (COPD) Research
Keywords
asthma, self-management, community pharmacy, asthma control, telephone follow-up, primary care, symptom scores
MeSH terms
Administration, Inhalation, Adolescent, Adrenal Cortex Hormones, Adult, Aged, Asthma, Female, Follow-Up Studies, Humans, London, Male, Middle Aged, Patient Education as Topic, Peak Expiratory Flow Rate, Pharmacies, Pharmacists, Self Care, Treatment Outcome

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review