Taking ACTion for Better Control of Asthma
Yongchang Sun
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1097/00029330-200706020-00001
2007-01-01
Abstract:The global prevalence of asthma ranges from 1% to 18% of the population in different countries.1 In China, while national data of asthma prevalence are still lacking, an epidemiological study in Beijing showed that the prevalence of asthma in occupational populations was 1.25%.2 Based on epidemiological data reported in different regions,3 it is estimated that 15–20 million people suffer from asthma in the mainland of China,4 and its prevalence continues to rise. A national epidemiological study of childhood asthma in the year of 2000 showed that the prevalence of asthma in urban children under the age of 14 years was 0.12%-3.34% in different regions, compared with 0.11% 2.03% reported ten years ago.5 Asthma is becoming an important cause of significant morbidity and economic burden in this developing country with fast growing economy and urbanization. During the last decade, an improved understanding of the pathophysiology of asthma and the availability of more effective medications for acute exacerbations have led clinicians to shift their focus from managing acute attacks to achieving asthma control. The newly updated Global Strategy for Asthma Management and Prevention (Global Initiative for Asthma, GINA) guidelines highlight this change in focus and emphasize asthma control throughout the document.1 For example, the classification of asthma is no longer mainly based on disease severity but on levels of asthma control, and the assessment, treatment and monitoring of asthma present an overall concept for asthma management oriented around the new focus on asthma control. Treatment is initiated and adjusted in a continuous cycle (assessing asthma control, treating to achieve control, and monitoring to maintain control) driven by the patient's level of asthma control. Therefore, tools that reflect the multidimensional nature of asthma control and that are easily and quickly administered and interpreted are needed to facilitate the assessment of asthma control in clinical practice. Validated measures for assessing clinical control of asthma score goals as continuous variables and provide numerical values to distinguish different levels of control. Examples of validated instruments are the Asthma Control Test (ACT), the Asthma Control Questionnaire (ACQ), the Asthma Therapy Assessment Questionnaire (ATAQ) and the Asthma Control Scoring System. Chinese versions of these tools have been available, but are mostly used for research purpose in institutions. In our asthma clinic, a Chinese version of ACQ has been used for research, and was found reliable and sensitive to change in assessing asthma control.6 However, there have been no studies on the validity of the Chinese version of ACQ in clinical practice. The ACT, a 5-item, patient-administered survey for assessing asthma control, was demonstrated to be a clinically valid measure that can be useful to clinicians and for different patient populations.7,8 It is a patient-centered instrument, and can be completed in a clinical practice setting, at home, or other locations. It allows asthma patients to self-monitor their asthma control condition easily, and therefore will improve patients' adherence to medication, a well-known problem in asthma. Whether a Chinese version of ACT is also valid and accurate for measuring asthma control needs to be confirmed before its wide application in clinical practice in this most populated country. In this issue of the Chinese Medical Journal, Zhou et al9 in a multi-center study carried out in 10 teaching hospitals, demonstrated that the Chinese version of ACT was an effective and practical instrument for asthma control assessment for Chinese patients. The reliability and screening accuracy of this Chinese version were similar to those of the original English version reported by Nathan et al.7 The study by Zhou et al9 has several implications for asthma management in China. This is the first multi-center study ever carried out to evaluate the reliability and validity of a translated assessment tool for asthma control in Chinese patients. When an assessment tool is adapted to a second language, its metric proprieties should be tested in the specified population. In Chinese, wheezing, shortness of breath, chest tightness, and even stridor and other forms of breathing difficulty (dyspnea) are all worded as "chuan", which is literally "wheezing". Whether differences in understanding of different forms of dyspnea, and the assumed Chinese tendency to express emotional experiences into bodily symptoms10 can influence the ACT score needs to be evaluated. However, as reported by Han et al,10 the descriptors of dyspnea-effort of breathing and wheezing appear to be similar to Western descriptors. This may, at least partly, explain why the results obtained by Zhou et al9 using a linguistically translated form of ACT could show similar results in Chinese asthmatics as compared with their American counterparts. But it should be pointed out that, as the authors noted,9 all subjects in this study were recruited from teaching hospitals and had received adequate education about asthma and asthma management. They may, therefore, be more likely to understand the different terminology of "chuan" in the translated form. Whether cultural differences in the language of respiratory sensation have impact on the validity of ACT can only be tested in the real life practice of asthma management in China. Disease control in asthmatic patients of China is even more disappointing.11 Despite the existence of treatment guidelines (Asthma management guidelines published by the Chinese Society of Respiratory Diseases and Chinese versions of GINA are available), many patients with asthma continue to be undertreated and are at risk for acute exacerbations resulting in missed work or school, increased use of expensive health care services, and reduced quality of life. Overestimation of asthma control by both patients and physicians often leads to early and inappropriate tapering and even stopping of maintenance therapy. As a developing country with the majority of its population living in rural areas where access to health care is limited, the care of asthma is largely focusing on treatment of acute exacerbations. In most health care facilities (even large hospitals in cities), lung function testing is unavailable. ACT as an accurate, reliable, and easy-to-use control tool not requiring FEV1 values, might be essential in the management of asthmatic patients in China. Therefore, the use of ACT in primary hospitals where spirometry is unavailable but most asthmatic patients are cared for, would entail more efforts in the study of ACT validity in this country.