Evaluation of pattern of prescription for Asthma : A multicentre prospective observational study from Pakistan
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.38106/LMRJ.2023.5.1.06Keywords:
Asthma, Prescriptions, Prescribing attitude, rationality, HyderabadAbstract
Asthma is a common allergic reaction and a number of drugs are available. This study was conducted to evaluate the prescribing pattern and usage of anti-asthma medications at different medical setups in Hyderabad. The study was conducted from August 2017 to July 2018. A total of 1000 patients from different medical setups diagnosed with asthma were recruited. A pre-designed, detailed questionnaire was used for their data collection. Their prescriptions were collected to evaluate and compare them with the standard guidelines of GINA. The prescribing pattern of anti-asthma was assessed regarding the type of therapy, route of administration, single or multiple treatments, class of drugs, doses, and frequency. Demographically, more asthmatics were found be males (i.e 73.5%), 46.5% were adults, 58.3% from urban areas and 51.68% of the sample had outdoor jobs, while 41.5% of illiterate people were found to be asthmatic. A major type of asthma was persistent at 65.3%. A maximum prescription of 85.5% for asthma management was combined therapy. From long-term use, the monotherapy ICS group was reported in a considerable number (44.13%) (i.e. Beclomethasone in 70% and Budesonide in 7%). Prescriptions of multiple routes of administration were comparatively higher (79.5%). The study concluded that male, young, urban, illiterate and people with outdoor jobs were more likely to get asthma. Preventer drugs were prescribed more in combined therapy, in which Fluticasone + Salmeterol were preferred. The oral inhalational route was selected more. The treatment pattern was consistent with standard guidelines.
Downloads
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
Categories
License
Copyright (c) 2023 Muhammad Mubashir Shah, Abdullah Dayo, Ubed ur Rahman Mughal, Nabeela Latif; Nargis Saharan
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License.
Copyright: Open access journal copyright lies with authors and protected under CC BY-NC-ND 4.0 licence (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/).