↓ Skip to main content

Knowledge that people with intellectual disabilities have of their inhaled asthma medications: messages for pharmacists

Overview of attention for article published in International Journal of Clinical Pharmacy, November 2015
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user

Citations

dimensions_citation
15 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
108 Mendeley
Title
Knowledge that people with intellectual disabilities have of their inhaled asthma medications: messages for pharmacists
Published in
International Journal of Clinical Pharmacy, November 2015
DOI 10.1007/s11096-015-0217-x
Pubmed ID
Authors

Sharon R. Davis, Seeta Durvasula, Diana Merhi, Paul M. Young, Daniela Traini, Sinthia Z. Bosnic Anticevich

Abstract

Background Fifteen percent of Australians with intellectual disability (ID) are reported to have asthma. People with ID are at risk of poor health knowledge due to deficits in intellectual and adaptive functioning, but their medication knowledge has largely been ignored in research to date. Objective To explore the level of understanding of asthma medication use of people with ID who self-administer their inhaled medications, in order to inform future educational support. Setting The research was conducted in NSW, Australia, at the participants' homes, the point of health care access, or the offices of relevant support organisations. Method In this qualitative study face-to-face interviews were conducted with people with ID using a semi-structured interview guide. The interviews were recorded, transcribed and thematically analysed. Main outcome Identification of barriers to asthma medication self-management by people with ID. Results Seventeen people with ID who self-administer their asthma medications were interviewed. Factors influencing their asthma medication knowledge and use included understanding of their illness and the need for medication; aspects of self-management and autonomy versus dependence. This sample of people with ID had a good understanding of the importance of using their inhaled asthma medications, as well as asthma triggers, and the difference between use of preventer and reliever medications. Both enablers and barriers to asthma medication self-management were identified in the domains of managing attacks, adherence, knowledge of side effects and sources of information on correct use of inhalers. The level of autonomy for medication use varied, with motivation to self-manage asthma influenced by the level of support that was practically available to individual participants. Conclusion This research investigated aspects of asthma medication self-management of people with ID. Based on the barriers identified, pharmacists should promote use of spacers and written asthma action plans as well as counsel people with ID about how to recognise and minimise side effects of asthma medications. Specific strategies for pharmacists when educating people with ID and their caregivers include active listening to determine understanding of concepts, exercising care with language, and working with the person's known routines to maximise adherence with preventer medications.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 108 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 108 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 12 11%
Student > Ph. D. Student 12 11%
Student > Doctoral Student 11 10%
Student > Postgraduate 9 8%
Student > Bachelor 7 6%
Other 22 20%
Unknown 35 32%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 22 20%
Nursing and Health Professions 14 13%
Psychology 10 9%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 9 8%
Social Sciences 7 6%
Other 10 9%
Unknown 36 33%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 17 November 2015.
All research outputs
#20,296,405
of 22,833,393 outputs
Outputs from International Journal of Clinical Pharmacy
#1,013
of 1,082 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#236,681
of 282,584 outputs
Outputs of similar age from International Journal of Clinical Pharmacy
#16
of 19 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,833,393 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,082 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 5.4. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 282,584 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 19 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.