Launching a UK asthma and respiratory telehealth service in 2026: inhalers, reviews, and safety-netting

Respiratory is a large, chronic, under-served market — and one of the easiest to get dangerously wrong. The failure mode is obvious once you see it: a service that ships salbutamol on repeat to people whose asthma is quietly deteriorating. A safe asthma telehealth service is built around review and control, not supply. Here is how to design one that helps patients without becoming a reliever vending machine.

The case for respiratory telehealth

Asthma affects millions of people in the UK, and a large share are not well controlled — often because reviews are skipped and inhaler technique is never checked. Remote care can close some of that gap: structured reviews, symptom monitoring, technique coaching and timely treatment changes are all things a well-run telehealth service can do at scale.

The commercial model is a managed subscription, not one-off supply. That framing matters, because the value — and the safety — is in the ongoing review, not the dispatch of the next inhaler.

What changed in the 2024 asthma guideline

In late 2024 the British Thoracic Society, NICE and SIGN published a joint asthma guideline (NG245) that shifted UK practice. The headline change is a move away from short-acting reliever-only treatment toward inhaled corticosteroid (ICS)-containing regimens from the start, including anti-inflammatory reliever (AIR) and maintenance-and-reliever-therapy (MART) approaches that combine a preventer and reliever in one inhaler.

For an operator, this is not academic. Your prescribing logic, formulary and review protocols need to reflect current guidance, and a service still built around reliever-only pathways is out of step with the standard of care. Build the clinical model on NG245 and keep it under review.

Inhaler classes and what you can safely prescribe remotely

The core inhaler classes are:

• Short-acting relievers (SABA), such as salbutamol — prescription-only, and now positioned within an ICS-containing approach rather than as standalone treatment.
• Inhaled corticosteroid preventers, such as beclometasone or budesonide.
• ICS/LABA combination inhalers, used as maintenance or in MART regimens.
• Add-on therapies for more complex disease, which generally sit beyond a routine remote service.

What you can safely prescribe remotely depends on control and history, not just the request. A stable, well-controlled patient with a documented review is a very different proposition from a first presentation or someone whose control is slipping — and the second group needs more than an online form.

The SABA over-reliance problem

Reliever over-reliance is the single clearest danger signal in asthma. Getting through three or more reliever inhalers a year is a widely used marker of poor control, and the National Review of Asthma Deaths found over-use of relievers alongside under-use of preventers as a recurring theme in avoidable deaths. A service that simply refills salbutamol on demand is amplifying exactly the pattern that harms people.

So reliever ordering has to trigger review, not fulfilment. If a patient is burning through relievers, the right response is a clinical conversation about control and preventer therapy — not another canister in the post. Build that trigger into the system so it cannot be skipped.

Safety-netting and when to refuse

Safety-netting is the part that separates a responsible service from a liability. Patients need clear, unambiguous guidance on what a deterioration looks like and where to go — worsening breathlessness, a reliever that is not lasting, night-time symptoms, a falling peak flow — and when to seek urgent or emergency care. That guidance has to be prominent, not buried.

Equally important is knowing when to refuse remote care. Acute, severe, brittle or poorly controlled asthma is not a remote-only patient; the right action is to direct them to in-person or urgent care, and to document that decision. A service that never says no is not safe.

A service that never says no is not safe. Acute, severe or poorly controlled asthma is not a remote-only patient — and knowing when to refuse is part of the clinical model, not an exception to it.

Remote reviews, monitoring, and inhaler technique

The recurring value is the review. A structured remote asthma review checks control, reliever use, adherence, triggers and inhaler technique — and technique is routinely poor, which quietly undermines otherwise reasonable treatment. Video or guided self-assessment can catch a lot of it, and coaching costs little but improves outcomes.

Underpin the reviews with monitoring and clear protocols so the same standard applies every time. Our guide to writing clinical SOPs covers how to make review pathways consistent, and how UK patients choose a telehealth service is a useful read on what keeps them engaged.

How PExpo supports a respiratory launch

PExpo provides the regulated layer — registered dispensing, prescriber governance, pharmacovigilance and the patient record — so a brand can launch a respiratory service on a compliant base. The reliever-review triggers, safety-netting and record-keeping that make asthma care defensible sit on infrastructure built to run them.

You bring the brand and the patient experience; the higher-risk clinical plumbing is already in place. See our brand model for the scope and pricing for the commercials.

Respiratory rewards operators who build for review and control rather than supply. Align the clinical model with NG245, make reliever over-reliance trigger a conversation, and safety-net hard. Do that and asthma is a large, defensible vertical. See our launch checklist and brand model for the operational detail.

Frequently asked questions