Skip to main content
. 2009 Apr 15;2009(2):CD001290. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD001290.pub2

Charlton 1994.

Methods STUDY DESIGN: Parallel group randomised controlled trial 
 LOCATION, NUMBER OF CENTRES: Single centre in Australia 
 DURATION OF STUDY: 2 years
Outcome assessors were blinded to treatment group allocation
Participants SCREENED: Not reported 
 N RANDOMISED: 91 (treatment: 48; control 43) 
 N COMPLETED: 79 (treatment: 42; control 37) 
 M = 52 
 F = 39 
 MEAN AGE: 6.8 
 BASELINE DETAILS: 55% had hospital admission, 34% ED visit, 59% GP home visit in previous 6 months 
 INCLUSION CRITERIA: Admission for asthma or attended outpatients department for asthma at time of recruitment; hospital admission for asthma in previous 12 months 
 EXCLUSION CRITERIA: Not stated
Interventions EDUCATION GROUP: Nurse run asthma clinic; information; self‐monitoring of symptoms, PEF and medications; written action plan allowing self adjustment of medications based on symptoms or PEF; reminders sent for regular medical review with own GP; medication modified if necessary (on consultation with hospital doctor)
Parents and children included; delivered at time of visit or admission. Initial interview lasted 45 minutes; follow‐up letters sent every 3 months for 12 months reminding patients to have asthma reviewed by their GP or nurse
CONTROL GROUP: Lower intensity education consisting of self‐monitoring of symptoms, PEF and medications (different diary to intervention group). This involved an interview of about 15 minutes only.
TREATMENT PERIOD: 12 months 
 FOLLOW‐UP PERIOD: 12 months
Outcomes Hospital admissions and home visits by GP ‐ measured for the 6 to 12 month period from beginning to end of the intervention, i.e. DURING intervention. Skills (response to an acute attack), daily PEF, day and night wheeze scores, daily puffs of bronchodilator and inhaled steroids, days of oral steroids, days lost from school, daily activity restriction score ‐ measured for 12 months from beginning to end of the intervention, i.e. DURING intervention.
Notes  
Risk of bias
Bias Authors' judgement Support for judgement
Adequate sequence generation? Unclear risk Information not available
Allocation concealment? Low risk Sealed envelope
Incomplete outcome data addressed? 
 All outcomes High risk Available case