RESUMEN
Background: Chronic pain (CP) patients frequently feel misunderstood and experience a lack of support. This led to the creation of support telephone lines in some countries. However, there is no scientific data grounding their development or evaluating their performance. Almost 37% of the Portuguese adult population suffers from CP, with great costs for patients and the healthcare system. Methods: To determine the viability of a support line for CP in Portugal, a qualitative study was designed, and online focus group meetings, with patients and healthcare professionals, were conducted. Their perspectives, beliefs, and expectations were evaluated and described. Results: This study revealed that a CP support line is a feasible project from the participants' perspective if its interventions are limited to active listening, emotional support, and tailored suggestions. Conclusions: It has the potential to generate a positive impact on healthcare services, while also contributing to greater equity of access to support.
RESUMEN
OBJECTIVE: We aimed to compare patient's and physician's ratings of inhaled medication adherence and to identify predictors of patient-physician discordance. DESIGN: Baseline data from two prospective multicentre observational studies. SETTING: 29 allergy, pulmonology and paediatric secondary care outpatient clinics in Portugal. PARTICIPANTS: 395 patients (≥13 years old) with persistent asthma. MEASURES: Data on demographics, patient-physician relationship, upper airway control, asthma control, asthma treatment, forced expiratory volume in one second (FEV1) and healthcare use were collected. Patients and physicians independently assessed adherence to inhaled controller medication during the previous week using a 100 mm Visual Analogue Scale (VAS). Discordance was defined as classification in distinct VAS categories (low 0-50; medium 51-80; high 81-100) or as an absolute difference in VAS scores ≥10 mm. Correlation between patients' and physicians' VAS scores/categories was explored. A multinomial logistic regression identified the predictors of physician overestimation and underestimation. RESULTS: High inhaler adherence was reported both by patients (median (percentile 25 to percentile 75) 85 (65-95) mm; 53% VAS>80) and by physicians (84 (68-95) mm; 53% VAS>80). Correlation between patient and physician VAS scores was moderate (rs=0.580; p<0.001). Discordance occurred in 56% of cases: in 28% physicians overestimated adherence and in 27% underestimated. Low adherence as assessed by the physician (OR=27.35 (9.85 to 75.95)), FEV1 ≥80% (OR=2.59 (1.08 to 6.20)) and a first appointment (OR=5.63 (1.24 to 25.56)) were predictors of underestimation. An uncontrolled asthma (OR=2.33 (1.25 to 4.34)), uncontrolled upper airway disease (OR=2.86 (1.35 to 6.04)) and prescription of short-acting beta-agonists alone (OR=3.05 (1.15 to 8.08)) were associated with overestimation. Medium adherence as assessed by the physician was significantly associated with higher risk of discordance, both for overestimation and underestimation of adherence (OR=14.50 (6.04 to 34.81); OR=2.21 (1.07 to 4.58)), while having a written action plan decreased the likelihood of discordance (OR=0.25 (0.12 to 0.52); OR=0.41 (0.22 to 0.78)) (R2=44%). CONCLUSION: Although both patients and physicians report high inhaler adherence, discordance occurred in half of cases. Implementation of objective adherence measures and effective communication are needed to improve patient-physician agreement.