Petkova 2008.

Methods	Design: RT Groups: intervention group (asthma self‐management); control group (usual care)
Participants	Pharmacies: 10 (those pharmacies with the highest number of asthma patients) ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐ Pharmacy user: 50 (22 intervention; 28 control) mean age: intervention 35.14 years; control 40.82 years % female: intervention 41%; control 31% Setting: urban, Sofia Country: Bulgaria
Interventions	Pharmacy worker‐directed intervention: not reported ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐ Pharmacy user‐directed intervention: education program with information on asthma, medication, inhalers, drug reactions, exacerbation and control of asthma attacks and smoking cessation Delivered by: researcher or undergraduate students Type: education Mode of delivery: face‐to‐face, written materials TDF: knowledge, skills, environment, context, resources Duration: 4 sessions held monthly Length of follow‐up: at 4 months (post‐intervention) Pharmacy user control: usual treatment
Outcomes	Pharmacy worker: not assessed ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐ Pharmacy user: Clinical: PEF Psychological health: not assessed Behavioural: inhaler technique, asthma self‐monitoring Quality of life: asthma assessment form Process: patient satisfaction (direct interview) Costs: health care utilisation ‐ hospitalisation and GP visits
Notes	Study/intervention name: none given Funding source: not reported
Risk of bias
Bias	Authors' judgement	Support for judgement
Random sequence generation (selection bias)	Unclear risk	Assigned based on principle of random numbers
Allocation concealment (selection bias)	Unclear risk	No detail provided
Baseline outcome measures similar	Low risk	No differences on outcomes
Baseline characteristics similar	High risk	Differences between groups at the start of the study
Incomplete outcome data (attrition bias) All outcomes	Low risk	No apparent attrition on main outcomes
Blinding of outcome assessment (detection bias) All outcomes	Unclear risk	Unclear if assessor blind to group
Protection against contamination	High risk	Pharmacies offer both intervention and control
Selective reporting (reporting bias)	Low risk	Not noted
Other bias	Low risk	Not noted
Blinding of participants and personnel (performance bias) All outcomes	Unclear risk	Unclear if participants aware of grouping