4.2. Strengths and Weaknesses of the Study
asthmatic, asthma
ASTHMATIC, ASTHMA
Our study had a straightforward sample collection process with inclusion and exclusion criteria. All study participants volunteered and benefited from the study; asthmatic clubs were established to improve the adherence rate reduction over the period. The study design closely followed the checklists of CONSORT 2010. Research methods were clearly described and reproducible. The sample size was calculated clearly; therefore, data were specific to the Vietnamese population (However, there were also some limitations in our study. Our study was an open trial that was evaluated in one hospital. Therefore, it could bias the baseline characteristics, adherence rate, and treatment outcomes of the patients. A multicenter study with a larger sample size and blinding method is required for more accurate statistics. Our study assessed the adherence of patient within 1 month of follow-up, so the improvement was great and obvious. Adherence rates will likely decrease over time, so long-term follow-up studies are recommended for more accurate evaluation. Our study improved this limitation by organizing an asthmatic club. In the results section, we had not analyzed the difference in medication distinction and inhalation technique between each group’s baseline and follow-up period due to data loss. However, we found a significant difference during the study period that showed that pharmaceutic care enhanced the adherence and asthma symptoms of patients. In addition, we used a patient self-reported method, which may lead to bias due to unclearly remembering and underestimating medical use. This is a common method, but we still mentioned the improvement method in the bias control method.