Different psychoeducational and family-based interventions have been shown to improve chronic physical diseases, such as asthma. There is an increasing consistency of therapeutic effects in these programmes, across the literature. However, scientific validation of the benefits of each programme and what is the best model/method are required.

To evaluate the effects of Multifamily/MG and Psychoeducational/PG interventions for asthma on psychological, biological and morbidity outcomes.

A sample with 299 outpatients with asthma diagnosis from a University Hospital was recruited consecutively. Patients with moderate/severe asthma were included in a five-month randomized controlled study with simple occultation. There was a balanced inclusion of 141 patients allocated to three groups: MG, PG and control group/CG. All patients continued usual pharmacological treatment. Anxiety (SAS/STAIY), depression (BDI), coping mechanisms (WCAEL), quality of life (MiniAQLQ), asthma control (ACQ), lung function (FEV1/PEF), airway inflammation (FeNO), asthma severity and morbidity were assessed at the beginning and the end of the study.

Both MG and PG improved asthma control. The overall quality of life score increased in MG (0.5 U) and PG (0.8 U), but not in the CG. A significant decrease was also found in the use of oral steroids in MG and in the hospitalization in PG. The behavioural changes improved psychological parameters (anxiety, depression, coping), and lung function.

Multidisciplinary group interventions seem to improve physical/psychological parameters in asthma, and assessment of efficacy is necessary after a longer follow-up period, as is identification of patients’ clusters which benefit the most from each intervention.