Background Asthma is misdiagnosed in one-third of patients. Due to its variable nature, international guidelines recommend performing key diagnostic tests during symptomatic periods or in the morning to improve accuracy. Limited access to timely clinic appointments and community-based diagnostics makes this difficult. Handheld spirometry and fractional exhaled nitric oxide (FeNO) are feasible for home use, enabling timely and flexible testing.

Objective To explored patients’ views on performing spirometry and FeNO at home during the asthma diagnostic process.

Design A qualitative study using semi-structured interviews. Data were analysed using framework approach.

Setting This prospective observational study was conducted at a National Institute for Health and Care Research Clinical Research Facility (NIHR CRF), based within a large National Health Service (NHS) Trust, as part of the Rapid-Access Diagnostics for Asthma (RADicA) study (ISRCTN11676160).

Participants A purposive sample of 15 symptomatic adult patients with GP-suspected asthma who were referred for diagnostic evaluation of the condition; all patients used home spirometry and FeNO devices during their diagnostic processes.

Results Three themes emerged from the analysis: ‘Perceived value of, and burdens of home testing’, ‘Views on device usability and acceptability’, and ‘Information and support needs’. Home testing was generally welcomed by patients as a way of improving their understanding of their condition and enabling an accurate diagnosis of their symptoms. Key barriers (e.g. testing frequency, lack of privacy) and enablers to improve feasibility (e.g. training and support) were also identified.

Conclusion This study provides valuable insights into the barriers and enablers of home-based diagnostic strategies for asthma. Findings can inform service design and implementation approaches to enhance the feasibility and effectiveness of home testing.

Funding This study was funded by National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) Research for Patient Benefit Grant (NIHR203591) and supported by the Manchester NIHR Biomedical Research Centre (BRC) (grant no. BRC-1215-20007, and NIHR203308), Asthma UK/Innovate (grant no. AUK-PG-2018-406) and North West Lung Centre Charity. The views expressed are those of the author(s) and not necessarily those of the NIHR or the Department of Health and Social Care.

Strengths and limitations of this study

A key strength to this study is that the patients participated in the interviews were representative of those at the diagnostic stage.

Patients who participated in the interviews openly share their experiences in the absence of the main clinical research staff.

The identified enablers and barriers to ambulatory testing using handheld devices for asthma diagnosis are transferable to other settings, including for disease monitoring and self-management.

The study findings may not be representative of the experiences and views of all patients with suspected asthma due to the qualitative nature of the study design, but nonetheless, the current study included a diverse group of patients with broad baseline characteristics, providing useful insights into their views.

The authors have declared no competing interest.

https://doi.org/10.1136/bmjopen-2024-083908

This study was funded by National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) Research for Patient Benefit Grant (NIHR203591) and supported by the Manchester NIHR Biomedical Research Centre (BRC) (grant no. BRC-1215-20007, and NIHR203308), Asthma UK/Innovate (grant no. AUK-PG-2018-406) and North West Lung Centre Charity. The views expressed are those of the author(s) and not necessarily those of the NIHR or the Department of Health and Social Care.

I confirm all relevant ethical guidelines have been followed, and any necessary IRB and/or ethics committee approvals have been obtained.

Yes

The details of the IRB/oversight body that provided approval or exemption for the research described are given below:

This study was approved by the North West-Greater Manchester East Research Ethics Committee (18/NW/0777; ISRCTN 11676160). All participants provided written consent.

I confirm that all necessary patient/participant consent has been obtained and the appropriate institutional forms have been archived, and that any patient/participant/sample identifiers included were not known to anyone (e.g., hospital staff, patients or participants themselves) outside the research group so cannot be used to identify individuals.

Yes

I understand that all clinical trials and any other prospective interventional studies must be registered with an ICMJE-approved registry, such as ClinicalTrials.gov. I confirm that any such study reported in the manuscript has been registered and the trial registration ID is provided (note: if posting a prospective study registered retrospectively, please provide a statement in the trial ID field explaining why the study was not registered in advance).

Yes

I have followed all appropriate research reporting guidelines, such as any relevant EQUATOR Network research reporting checklist(s) and other pertinent material, if applicable.

Yes