• ÖZ

OBJECTIVES: The aim of this study was to evaluate the knowledge of physicians on influenza and pneumococcal vaccine.MATERIALS AND METHODS: A questionnaire was administered to physicians working in Kyrenia University Hospital and Near EastUniversity School of Medicine.RESULTS: There were 38 female (56.7%) and 29 male (43.3%) participants. The mean age was 39.3±12.5 years. There were 24 generalpractitioners (GP) and 43 specialists participating in the study. Influenza vaccine and its risk minimization for infection were well knownamong 92.5% of the participants. However, 76.1% of them mentioned that they had knowledge about the pneumococcal vaccine, andthis ratio about its reducing the risk of infection was 73.1%. 83.7% of specialists and 79.2% of GP thought that adult vaccines were effective (p=0.6). The rate of influenza vaccination among specialists was higher than that of GP (67.4% vs. 41.7%, p=0.04). However, therates of pneumococcal vaccination were low and similar in both groups (p=0.3). In both specialists and GP, the most common reason fornot receiving the vaccine was the belief of not being in the risk group (p=0.9). The knowledge level of pneumococcal vaccination in GPwas found to be statistically lower than in specialists (p<0.05).CONCLUSION: Although influenza vaccine and its risk minimization for infection are well known among physicians, the pneumococcal vaccine is not well known. It is suggested that training about vaccination for both specialists and GP are important for preventivemedicine.

• ÖZ

OBJECTIVES: A multicenter trial was designed to validate the “Assessment Tools for Asthma (ATA)” questionnaire, a newly developedquestionnaire, which evaluates both asthma control and risk factors associated with asthma control with a single instrument.MATERIALS AND METHODS: This cross-sectional study involved 810 cases from 14 clinics in 9 Turkish cities. The ATA questionnaire and Asthma Control Test (ACT) were administered. The Visual Analog Scale (VAS) was used to evaluate the control status of 100randomized cases. ATA is an eight-item physician-administered questionnaire. It comprises the following two sections-ATA1, assessessymptomatic control criteria, and the remaining section, queries the flre-up of asthma, control of comorbidities, treatment adherence,and inhaler technique.RESULTS: The mean scores for ATA1, ATA total, VAS, and ACT were 24.7±14.8, 53.8±19, 7.1±3, and 18.8±5.5, respectively. According tothe ATA questionnaire, among all patients, 34.3% had controlled, 18.8% had partly controlled, and 46.9% had uncontrolled asthma. Furthermore, 16.6% patients had flre-ups between visits, 96.4% patients had uncontrolled comorbidity, 17% patients had irregular asthmatreatment, and only 8.4% patients used the incorrect inhaler technique. The ATA questionnaire showed internal consistency (Cronbach’salpha coeffiient=0.683). ACT, ATA1, and two specialists’ evaluations using VAS correlated strongly with the ATA total scores (Spearmancorrelation coeffiient (r) values: 0.776, 0.783, and 0.909, respectively; p-values: p<0.001, p<0.001, and p<0.001, respectively). According to Receiver Operating Characteristic analysis, the cut-off value of ATA was 50 (sensitivity=84.4%, specifiity=82.40%).CONCLUSION: The validated ATA questionnaire may be a practical tool for physicians in asthma management.