METHODS: An online/face-to-face, questionnaire-based survey of respiratory specialists and primary care physicians from eight Asian countries/region was carried out. The survey explored asthma control, inhaler selection, technique and use; physician-patient communications and asthma education. Inclusion criteria were >50% of practice time spent on direct patient care; and treated >30 patients with asthma per month, of which >60% were aged >12 years.
RESULTS: REALISE Asia (Phase 2) involved 375 physicians with average 15.9(±6.8) years of clinical experience. 89.1% of physicians reporting use of guidelines estimated that 53.2% of their patients have well-controlled (GINA-defined) asthma. Top consideration for inhaler choice was asthma severity (82.4%) and lowest, socio-economic status (32.5%). Then 54.7% of physicians checked their patients' inhaler techniques during consultations but 28.2(±19.1)% of patients were using their inhalers incorrectly; 21.1-57.9% of physicians could spot improper inhaler techniques in video demonstrations. And 79.6% of physicians believed combination inhalers could increase adherence because of convenience (53.7%), efficacy (52.7%) and usability (18.9%). Initial and follow-up consultations took 16.8(±8.4) and 9.2(±5.3) minutes, respectively. Most (85.1%) physicians used verbal conversations and least (24.5%), video demonstrations of inhaler use; 56.8% agreed that patient attitudes influenced their treatment approach.
CONCLUSION: Physicians and patients have different views of 'well-controlled' asthma. Although physicians informed patients about asthma and inhaler usage, they overestimated actual usage and patients' knowledge was sub-optimal. Physician-patient interactions can be augmented with understanding of patient attitudes, visual aids and ancillary support to perform physical demonstrations to improve treatment outcomes.
METHODS: In this cross-sectional study, Type 2 diabetic patients who were on insulin therapy attending health clinics were randomly selected and interviewed using a validated questionnaire. Binary logistic regression analysis was applied.
RESULTS: Out of 304 respondents, only 11.5% of them brought their used sharps to be disposed at health care facilities. Previous advice on sharp disposal from health care providers, knowledge score, and duration of diabetes were significant contributing factors for sharp waste disposal at health care facilities: (Adj. OR 6.31; 95% CI: 2.63, 15.12; p < 0.001), (Adj. OR 1.05; 95% CI: 1.03, 1.08; p < 0.001), and (Adj. OR 2.51; 95% CI: 1.06, 5.93; p = 0.036), respectively.
CONCLUSION: Continuous education and a locally adapted safe sharp disposal option must be available to increase awareness and facilitate diabetic patients adopting proper sharp disposal behavior.