A review of strategies to improve rational prescribing in asthma

Shafqat Inam*, Wendy Lipworth, Ian Kerridge, Richard Day

*Corresponding author for this work

Research output: Contribution to journalArticlepeer-review

1 Citation (Scopus)


Background: There are well-recognised gaps between evidence-based recommendations and prescribing practices in asthma. While different strategies have been devised to improve rational prescribing, the impact of these is uncertain. Aim: To examine the characteristics and effectiveness of strategies to improve rational prescribing in asthma. Method: We systematically searched electronic databases to find studies that reported on strategies to improve prescribing in asthma, or included rational prescribing as one of the main components of the program. Results: There were 13 relevant studies. All of the strategies described in these studies involved physician education using a variety of modalities; two of the trials also included patient-specific prescribing direction; 12 of 13 studies reported improved prescribing practice. There was significant heterogeneity in the interventions and outcome criteria employed by the studies. Conclusion: Strategies to improve rational prescribing in asthma show promise, but the significant methodological heterogeneity, and the absence in most cases of demonstrable clinical benefit, raise concerns about their applicability in clinical practice.

Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)195-200
Number of pages6
JournalJournal of Pharmacy Practice and Research
Issue number4
Publication statusPublished - 2 Dec 2014
Externally publishedYes


  • Asthma
  • Inappropriate prescribing
  • Medication therapy management
  • Physician's practice patterns
  • Quality improvement


Dive into the research topics of 'A review of strategies to improve rational prescribing in asthma'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this