Misuse and/or treatment delivery failure of inhalers among patients with asthma or COPD: A review and recommendations for the conduct of future research

Evaluation of the quality and content of YouTube videos as an educational resource in developing patients' inhaler use skills

BACKGROUND

YouTube has educational videos on inhalers. However, their content and quality are not adequately known.

OBJECTIVES

This study investigated the quality and content of educational YouTube videos on inhalers.

METHODS

This descriptive study analyzed 178 YouTube videos on inhalers between May and July 2022. Two researchers independently evaluated the videos. The Global Quality Score (GQS), Journal of American Medical Association (JAMA) Benchmark Criteria, and Inhaler Application Checklist (IAC) were used to assess the quality and content of the videos. Spearman's correlation, Kruskal-Wallis, Mann-Whitney U, ANOVA, and Post hoc analysis Bonferroni test were used for data analysis.

RESULTS

The videos had a mean GQS score of 3.70 ± 1.24, and JAMA score of 2.22 ± 0.60. A negative correlation was between the quality score of the videos and views, likes, comments, duration, and likes/views (respectively; r = -0.237 p < 0.005, r = -0.217 p < 0.003, r = -0.220 p < 0.005, r = -0.147, p < 0.005). The videos narrated by nurses and doctors had significantly higher mean JAMA and GQS scores than others (p = 0.001). The videos missed some procedural steps [gargling (29.1%), adding no more than five ml of medication and device cleaning (41.9%), and exhaling through the nose (37.5%)]. Videos uploaded by individual missed significantly more procedural steps than professional organizations (p < 0.05).

CONCLUSIONS

YouTube videos about inhaler techniques have a moderate level of quality. Videos uploaded by doctors and nurses as content narrators were of higher quality. The videos missed some procedural steps. Individual video uploaders had higher missed procedural steps. Counseling should be provided to patients regarding the reliability of online information.

A systematic review of methods of scoring inhaler technique

Many inhaler devices are currently used in clinical practice to deliver medication, with each inhaler device offering different benefits to overcome technique issues. Inhaler technique remains poor, contributing to reduced airway drug deposition and consequently poor disease control. Scoring inhaler technique has been used within research as an outcome measure of inhaler technique assessment, and this systematic review collates and evaluates these scoring methods. The review protocol was prospectively registered in PROSPERO (CRD42020218869). A total of 172 articles were screened with 77 included, and the results presented using narrative synthesis due to the heterogeneity of the study design and data. The most frequently used scoring method awarded one point per step in the inhaler technique checklist and was included in 59/77 (77%) of articles; however limited and varied guidance was provided for score interpretation. Other inhaler technique scoring methods included grading the final inhaler technique score, expressing the total score as a percentage/ratio, deducting points from the final score when errors were made, and weighting steps within the checklist depending on how crucial the step was. Vast heterogeneity in the number of steps and content in the inhaler technique checklists was observed across all device types (range 5-19 steps). Only 4/77 (5%) of the inhaler technique measures had undertaken fundamental steps required in the scale development process for use in real world practice. This review demonstrates the demand for a tool that measures inhaler technique and highlights the current unmet need for one that has undergone validation.

Delivering monoclonal antibodies via inhalation: a systematic review of clinical trials in asthma and COPD

INTRODUCTION

Advances in understanding the pathophysiology of asthma and chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) led to investigation of biologic drugs targeting specific inflammatory pathways. No biologics are licensed for COPD while all the approved monoclonal antibodies (mAbs) for severe asthma treatment are systemically administered. Systemic administration is associated with low target tissue exposure and risk of systemic adverse events. Thus, delivering mAbs via inhalation may be an attractive approach for asthma and COPD treatment due to direct targeting of the airways.

AREAS COVERED

This systematic review of randomized control trials (RCTs) evaluated the potential role of delivering mAbs via inhalation in asthma and COPD treatment. Five RCTs were deemed eligible for a qualitative analysis.

EXPERT OPINION

Compared to systemic administration, delivering mAbs via inhalation is associated with rapid onset of action, greater efficacy at lower doses, minimal systemic exposure, and lower risk of adverse events. Although some of the inhaled mAbs included in this study showed a certain level of efficacy and safety in asthmatic patients, delivering mAbs via inhalation is still challenging and controversial. Further adequately powered and well-designed RCTs are needed to assess the potential role of inhaled mAbs in the treatment of asthma and COPD.

Interventional, Quasi-Experimental Study of a Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease Education Care Plan for Hospital Discharge

Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) is one of the leading causes of morbidity, mortality, and reduced quality of life for patients. Proper use of inhaler devices is critical for effective drug delivery and prevention of COPD progression. The primary endpoint of this study was a mean percent increase in correct steps associated with inhaler technique after pharmacist education. The co-primary endpoint was a 25% increase in the proportion of patients correctly identifying the appropriate use of short-acting versus long-acting inhaler types. This was an interventional quasi-experimental study of patients hospitalized at a 491-bed tertiary academic medical center with a COPD exacerbation to assess a pharmacist-led COPD care plan. Eligible patients included general floor, adult patients admitted with a primary diagnosis of COPD exacerbation. The primary investigator recorded initial inhaler technique scores through a paper checklist, and provided education about device types and usage. Patients were reassessed within 48 h to determine if pharmacist education improved inhaler knowledge. A total of 67 patients received the COPD care plan before hospital discharge. At baseline, patients scored a median of 81.8% (67.5–97.0) of steps correct across all inhaler device types. After pharmacist education, patient scores increased to a median of 100% (90.9–100.0) (p < 0.0001). The proportion of patients correctly identifying when to use short-acting versus long-acting inhalers increased from 73.1% to 98.5% (p < 0.0001). Implementation of a pharmacist-led care plan for patients admitted for COPD exacerbation was associated with an increase in correct steps for appropriate inhaler technique and understanding of inhaler device types after pharmacist education.

Health-care Resource Requirements and Potential Financial Consequences of an Environmentally Driven Switch in Respiratory Inhaler Use in England

Background: To reduce greenhouse gas emissions, national initiatives advocate the phasing down of respiratory inhalers that use a fluorinated gas as a propellant (pressurised metered-dose inhalers [pMDI]). Nevertheless, pMDIs continue to be an effective and common choice. Objective: To assess the potential financial impact of patients with asthma or chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) switching from pMDIs to dry powder inhalers (DPIs) in a representative primary care network (PCN) population of 50 000 and the English National Health Service (NHS). Methods: Epidemiological data were combined with current inhaler use patterns to estimate the resources and costs associated with this transition, varying patient acceptance scenarios. Results: Depending on the approach, resource requirements ranged from £18 000 - £53 000 for a PCN, and from £21 - £60 million for the English NHS. Discussion: Significant funds are needed to successfully manage targeted inhaler transitions, together with counselling and follow-up appointment with an appropriately skilled clinician to assess the patient's inhaler technique and ensure disease control. Conclusions: Targeted transition of inhalers must achieve a balance between environmental impacts, organisational factors, and patient requirements. The resources for managing a switch can be substantial but are necessary to appropriately counsel and support patients, whilst protecting the environment.

Diagnostic and therapeutic challenges of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease in the elderly

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) imposes a large burden on the global population and even more so for the elderly who face significant obstacles in the diagnosis, management, and psychosocial effects of the disease. This review describes the current challenges and key points in the management of COPD in the elderly.

RECENT FINDINGS

Lower limit rather than fixed cut off of the FEV1/FVC ratio can improve the diagnosis and better predict COPD mortality. High relative to standard dose influenza vaccination reduces confirmed cases of influenza overall and reduces hospitalizations in older nursing home residents. Simple interventions that include electronic health record tracking can significantly improve vaccination rates. Although many inhaler and nebulized medications are available for the elderly, the final regimen is usually determined by a combination of expense, issues with proper device use (from difficulty with coordination, hand grip, inspiratory flows or cognitive function) and the side effect profile. Fortunately, the switch to cheaper or better covered alternatives can be well tolerated with improvement in adherence and exacerbations of COPD. Finally, caution should be made against ageism, which may be a factor in the recommendation of rehabilitation or palliative care in the elderly COPD patient, as both are underused despite evidence of benefit.

SUMMARY

Although care for the elderly COPD patient can be difficult, we summarize key points that the physician should be cognizant of to provide comprehensive care.

Smartphone App for monitoring Asthma in children and adolescents

PURPOSE

The asthma stepwise treatment approach recommended is based on monitoring patients' symptoms. The Asthma Research in Children and Adolescents (ARCA) cohort was created to provide evidence about the evolution of persistent asthma. This manuscript describes the development of an electronic health tool, comprising a mobile health application for patients with asthma and its associated online platform for pediatricians to monitor them.

METHODS

The development process followed 7 phases: the first 5 (Conceptualization, Preparation, Assessment scheduling, Image and user interface, and Technical development) defined and designed the tool, followed by a testing phase (functionality assessment and pilot test with ARCA patients), and a last phase which evaluated usability. Since the target population was aged 6-16 years, three versions were designed within the same smartphone application: parents/proxy, children, and adolescents. The online platform for pediatricians provides real-time information from the application: patients' responses over time with color-coded charts (red/amber/green, as in traffic lights).

RESULTS

The pilot test through semi-structured phone interviews of the first 50 participants included in the ARCA study (n = 53) detected their misunderstandings. Pediatricians were trained to emphasize that the application is free of charge and requires monthly answers. Median of the System Usability Scale scores (n = 85), ranging 0 (negative)-100 (positive), was > 93 in the three age versions of the application.

CONCLUSIONS

Technology has the capability of transforming the use of patient-reported outcomes. Describing all the development phases of a mobile health application for monitoring children and adolescents with asthma may increase the knowledge on how to design applications for young patients.

Ultra Long-Acting β-Agonists in Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease

INTRODUCTION

Inhaled β-agonists have been foundational medications for maintenance COPD management for decades. Through activation of cyclic adenosine monophosphate pathways, these agents relax airway smooth muscle and improve expiratory airflow by relieving bronchospasm and alleviating air trapping and dynamic hyperinflation improving breathlessness, exertional capabilities, and quality of life. β-agonist drug development has discovered drugs with increasing longer durations of action: short acting (SABA) (4-6 h), long acting (LABA) (6-12 h), and ultra-long acting (ULABA) (24 h). Three ULABAs, indacaterol, olodaterol, and vilanterol, are approved for clinical treatment of COPD.

PURPOSE

This article reviews both clinically approved ULABAs and ULABAs in development.

CONCLUSION

Indacaterol and olodaterol were originally approved for clinical use as monotherapies for COPD. Vilanterol is the first ULABA to be approved only in combination with other respiratory medications. Although there are many other ULABA's in various stages of development, most clinical testing of these novel agents is suspended or proceeding slowly. The three approved ULABAs are being combined with antimuscarinic agents and corticosteroids as dual and triple agent treatments that are being tested for clinical use and efficacy. Increasingly, these clinical trials are using specific COPD clinical characteristics to define study populations and to begin to develop therapies that are trait-specific.

Maintenance Therapy with Nebulizers in Patients with Stable COPD: Need for Reevaluation

Patients with stable COPD rely heavily on inhaled bronchodilators and corticosteroids to control symptoms, maximize quality of life, and avoid exacerbations and costly hospitalizations. These drugs are typically delivered by hand-held inhalers or nebulizers. The majority of patients are prescribed inhalers due to their perceived convenience, portability, and lower cost, relative to nebulizers. Unfortunately, poor inhaler technique compromises symptom relief in most of these patients. In contrast to one or two puffs through an inhaler, nebulizers deliver a drug over many breaths, through tidal breathing, and hence are more forgiving to poor inhalation technique. To what extent susceptibility to errors in their use may influence the relative effectiveness of these two types of inhalation device has received little attention in COPD research. In 2005, a systematic review of the literature concluded that nebulizers and inhalers are equally effective in patients who are adequately trained to use their inhalation device. This conclusion was based on two small clinical trials that only examined objective measures of lung function. Since then, additional studies have found that maintenance therapy administered by nebulizers could improve patients' reported feelings of symptom relief, quality of life, and satisfaction with treatment, compared to therapy administered by inhalers. Because it has been 15 years since the publication of the systematic review, in this article we summarize the results of studies that compared the effectiveness of inhalers with that of nebulizers in patients with stable COPD and discuss their implications for clinical practice and need for future research.

Comparing Inhaler Use Technique Based on Inhaler Type in Elderly Patients with Respiratory Disease

Background

The aim of this study was to investigate inhaler device handling in elderly patients. Inhaler devices with respect to misuse and error correction were also compared.

Methods

Inhaler use technique was assessed using standardized checklists at the first visit and 3-month follow-up visit after retraining. The primary outcome was difference in the acceptable use ratio among inhaler devices. Secondary outcomes included differences in error correction, the most common step of misuse, and factors affecting the accuracy of inhaler use.

Results

A total of 251 patients (mean age, 76.4 years) were included. The handling of 320 devices was assessed in the study. All patients had been trained before. However, only 24.7% of them used inhalers correctly. Proportions of acceptable use for Evohaler, Respimat, Turbuhaler, Ellipta, and Breezhaler/Handihaler were 38.7%, 50.0%, 61.4%, 60.8%, and 43.2%, respectively (p=0.026). At the second visit, the acceptable use ratio had increased. There were no significant differences among inhaler types (Evohaler, 63.9%; Respimat, 86.1%; Turbuhaler, 74.3%; Ellipta, 64.6%; and Breezhaler/Handihaler, 65.3% [p=0.129]). In multivariate analysis, body mass index, Turbuhaler, and Ellipta showed positive correlations with acceptable use of inhalers, whereas Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease Assessment Test score showed a negative correlation.

Conclusion

Although new inhalers have been developed, the accuracy of inhaler use remains low. Elderly patients showed more errors when using pressurized metered-dose inhalers than using dry powder inhalers and soft-mist inhalers. However, there were no significant differences in misuse among inhaler devices after individual training. Results of this study suggests that repeat training is more important than inhaler type.

Common errors in inhalation therapy: Impact and solutions

OBJECTIVE

Inhalation therapy is one of the key pillars in the treatment of chronic obstructive diseases, such as asthma and COPD (Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease); however, wide number of errors occur with high frequency in the inhalation manoeuvres among these patient. This review discuss the main errors made with inhalation devices, factors associated with poor IT (inhalation technique), their consequences and possible solutions.

DATA SOURCES

To do this, we performed a search of any publications available in PubMed between the years 2000 and 2019, using the key words: asthma, COPD, obstructive lung disease, inhalers, misuse and errors.

STUDY SELECTIONS

After a review of the titles and abstracts by the working group, the articles chosen were considered the most relevant in providing evidence of the problems and establishing solutions in the inhalation treatment of asthma and COPD.

RESULTS

There are several publications that associated the errors in the inhalation technique with a poor prognosis both of asthma and COPD. Most authors generally agree in that a poor IT is associated with poor control of the symptoms.

CONCLUSIONS

It is essential to review the IT in all our patients with asthma and COPD due to the high socio-economic impact that it involves; an effort must be made to homogenise the evaluation of IT, so that it helps to transmit a clear message to the patients, as well as to the health professionals on what is and what is not a correct manoeuvre.

The Relationship Between Clinical Trial Participation and Inhaler Technique Errors in Asthma and COPD Patients

Background

Incorrect inhaler use is associated with poorer health outcomes, reduced quality of life, and higher healthcare utilisation in patients with asthma and COPD.

Methods

We performed an observational study of pressurized metered-dose inhaler technique in patients with asthma or COPD. Patients were assessed using a six-point inhaler checklist to identify common critical inhaler technique errors. An inadequate inhaler technique was defined as the presence of one or more critical errors. A multivariate logistic regression model was used to determine the odds of an inadequate inhaler technique.

Results

During the 14-month study period, 357 patients were enrolled. At least one critical error was executed by 66.7% of participants, and 24.9% made four or more critical errors. The most common errors were failure to exhale completely prior to pMDI activation and inhalation (49.6%), failure to perform a slow, deep inhalation following device activation (48.7%), and failure to perform a breath-hold at the end of inspiration (47.3%). The risk of a critical error was higher in COPD patients (aOR 2.25, 95% CI 1.13-4.47). Prior training reduced error risk specifically when trained by a doctor (aOR 0.08, 95% CI 0.1-0.57) or a pharmacist (aOR 0.02, 95% CI 0.01-0.26) compared to those with no training. Previous clinical trial participation significantly reduced error risk and rate: <3 trials (aOR 0.35, 95% CI 0.19-0.66) and ≥3 trials (aOR 0.17, 95% CI 0.07-0.42). The rate of critical errors was not significantly associated with age, sex, or prior pMDI experience.

Conclusion

This study found a high rate of critical inhaler technique errors in a mixed population of asthma and COPD patients; however, prior training and, in particular, multiple previous clinical trial participation significantly reduced the risk of errors.

Controller Inhalers: Overview of Devices, Instructions for Use, Errors, and Interventions to Improve Technique

Inadequate inhaler technique in persistent asthma is frequently reported. However, there is little consensus on inhaler checklists, and critical elements of technique are not uniformly described. In addition, inhaler error rates and risk factors for poor technique are variable across studies. This Clinical Commentary Review summarizes the literature on inhaler design, use, and interventions to improve technique. Our aim is to help clinicians identify patients with poor inhaler technique, recognize the most important errors, and correct technique using evidence-based interventions.

Device use errors with soft mist inhalers: A global systematic literature review and meta-analysis

Inhaled bronchodilators are the cornerstone of treatment for chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD). Soft mist inhalers (SMIs) are devices that deliver bronchodilators. Although correct device use is paramount to successful medication delivery, patient errors are common. This global systematic literature review and meta-analysis examined device use errors with SMIs among patients with obstructive lung diseases. PubMed, EMBASE, PsycINFO, Cochrane, and Google Scholar were searched to identify studies published between 2010 and 2019 that met the following inclusion criteria: (a) English language; (b) a diagnosis of COPD, bronchitis, or emphysema; and (c) reported device use errors among adults receiving long-acting bronchodilator treatment with Respimat® SMI (i.e. Spiriva®, Stiolto®, Spiolto®, and Striverdi®). Descriptive statistics examined sociodemographics, clinical characteristics, and device use errors. Meta-analysis techniques were employed with random-effects models to generate pooled mean effect sizes and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) for overall and step-by-step errors. The I2 statistic measured heterogeneity. Twelve studies (n = 1288 patients) were included in this meta-analysis. Eighty-eight percent of patients had COPD, and most had moderate/very severe airflow limitation (Global Initiative for Chronic Obstructive Lung Disease spirometric stages II to IV). Aggregate results revealed that 58.9% (95% CI: 42.4-75.5; I2 = 92.8%) of patients made ≥1 device use errors. Among 11 studies with step-by-step data, the most common errors were failure to (1) exhale completely and away from the device (47.8% (95% CI: 33.6-62.0)); (2) hold breath for up to 10 seconds (30.6% (95% CI: 17.5-43.7)); (3) take a slow, deep breath while pressing the dose release button (27.9% (95% CI: 14.5-41.2)); (4) hold the inhaler upright (22.6% (95% CI: 6.2-39.0)); and (5) turn the base toward the arrows until it clicked (17.6% (95% CI: 3.0-32.2)). Device use errors occurred in about 6 of 10 patients who used SMIs. An individualized approach to inhalation device selection and ongoing training and monitoring of device use are important in optimizing bronchodilator treatment.

Biological Obstacles for Identifying In Vitro-In Vivo Correlations of Orally Inhaled Formulations

Oral inhalation of drugs is the classic therapy of obstructive lung diseases. In contrast to the oral route, the link between in vitro and in vivo findings is less well defined and predictive models and parameters for in vitro-in vivo correlations are missing. Frequently used in vitro models and problems in obtaining in vivo values to establish such models and to identify the action of formulations in vivo are discussed. It may be concluded that major obstacles to link in vitro parameters on in vivo action include lack of treatment adherence and incorrect use of inhalers by patients, variation in inhaler performance, changes by humidity, uncertainties about lung deposition, and difficulties to measure drug levels in epithelial lining fluid and tissue. Physiologically more relevant in vitro models, improvement in inhaler performance, and better techniques for in vivo measurements may help to better understand importance and interactions between individual in vitro parameters in pulmonary delivery.

Inhaler Technique in Low-Income, Inner-City Adults with Uncontrolled Asthma

BACKGROUND

Poor inhaler technique has been shown to be associated with less asthma control and increased health care utilization. Little is known about the impact of inhaler technique on the most vulnerable patients.

OBJECTIVE

This study examined inhaler technique in low-income, inner-city adults with uncontrolled asthma.

METHODS

Inhaler technique data and other patient characteristics were evaluated in adults drawn from 2 studies conducted at the University of Pennsylvania. Subjects were from low-income Philadelphia neighborhoods and had uncontrolled asthma. Baseline characteristics were collected. Inhaler technique was rated by research coordinators who were trained with written materials.

RESULTS

In 584 adults, 56% of metered dose inhaler users and 64% of dry powder inhaler users had adequate visually assessed inhaler technique. Inhaler technique did not vary by reading comprehension or numeracy levels.

CONCLUSIONS

In this group of patients with uncontrolled asthma, visually assessed inhaler technique was adequate in more than one-half. Although incorrect inhaler technique is generally common and must be routinely addressed, this study suggests that other factors that lead to poor control must be identified.

CE: Managing Stable COPD: An Evidence-Based Approach

: Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) affects as many as 16 million Americans and is expected to be the third leading cause of death worldwide by 2020. To increase awareness of COPD, encourage related research, and improve care of patients with this chronic disease, the Global Initiative for Chronic Obstructive Lung Disease (GOLD) was launched in 1998 and published an evidence-based report on COPD prevention and management strategies in 2001 that has been revised regularly. The fourth major revision, which was published in 2017 and revised in 2018, includes significant changes related to COPD classification, as well as to pharmacologic, nonpharmacologic, and comorbidity management. The authors discuss the changes to the GOLD recommendations and, using a patient scenario, explain their application to clinical practice.

Differences in health care outcomes between postdischarge COPD patients treated with inhaled corticosteroid/long-acting β2-agonist via dry-powder inhalers and pressurized metered-dose inhalers

Purpose

The aim of this study was to examine real-world differences in health care resource use (HRU) and costs among COPD patients in the USA treated with a dry powder inhaler (DPI) or pressurized metered-dose inhaler (pMDI) following a COPD-related hospitalization.

Methods

This retrospective analysis used the Truven MarketScan^® databases. Eligibility criteria included 1) age ≥40 years, 2) COPD diagnosis, 3) inpatient admission with a diagnosis of COPD exacerbation, 4) inhaled corticosteroid (ICS)/long-acting β₂-agonist (LABA) prescription within 10 days of hospital discharge (index date), and 5) continuous enrollment for 12 months preindex and 90 days postindex. Outcomes included pre- and postindex HRU and costs. DPI and pMDI groups were compared on postindex outcomes via multivariate models controlling for demographic and baseline characteristics.

Results

The sample included 1,960 DPI and 1,086 pMDI ICS/LABA patients. During the preindex period, pMDI patients were significantly more likely to be prescribed a short-acting β-agonist, experienced more COPD exacerbation-related hospital days, and had a greater number of pulmonologist visits compared to DPI patients (P<0.05), all suggestive of greater disease severity. However, multivariate models revealed that pMDI patients incurred 10% lower all-cause postindex costs (predicted mean costs [2016 US dollars]: $2,673 vs $2,956) and 19% lower COPD-related costs (predicted mean costs: $138 vs $169; P<0.05). Additionally, pMDI patients were 28% less likely to experience a COPD exacerbation-related hospital readmission within 60 days postdischarge compared to the DPI patients (OR: 0.72, 95% CI: 0.52–0.99, P<0.05).

Conclusion

Despite greater COPD-related HRU and costs preceding index hospitalization, US patients using a pMDI after hospital discharge incurred significantly lower all-cause and COPD-related health care costs compared with those using a DPI, in addition to a decreased likelihood of a COPD exacerbation-related hospital readmission. Results suggest that inhaler device type may influence COPD outcomes and that COPD patients may derive greater clinical benefit from treatment delivered via pMDI vs DPI.

Inhalation Technique Errors with Metered-Dose Inhalers Among Patients with Obstructive Lung Diseases: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of U.S. Studies

Background

Metered dose inhalers (MDIs) are commonly prescribed for inhalation therapy, but correct use is critical to promoting effective medication delivery. This systematic literature review and meta-analysis evaluates the overall and step-by-step prevalence of errors among adults with obstructive lung diseases in the United States who used MDIs.

Methods

Electronic and manual searches conducted between 1979-2018 using PubMed, EMBASE, PsycINFO, Cochrane, and Google identified 10 articles that met the following inclusion criteria: (a) English language, (b) U.S. adults diagnosed with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, and (c) MDI use error rates. Meta-analytic techniques using random-effects models were applied to calculate effect sizes, weighted proportions, and 95% confidence intervals (CIs). Heterogeneity was assessed by the I² statistic.

Results

Aggregate findings revealed that 86.7% of patients (n=390, 95% CI 77.5-96.0) made at least 1 inhalation technique error, and 76.9% (n=885, 95% CI 65.8-87.9) incorrectly performed ≥ 20% of device use steps. The most prevalent step-by-step errors across the studies (n=1105) were failure to: (a) exhale fully and away from the inhaler before inhalation (65.5% [95% CI 52.0, 78.9]); (b) hold breath for 5-10 seconds (41.9% [95% CI 29.8, 53.9]); (c) inhale slowly and deeply (39.4% [95% CI 26.2, 52.5]); (d) exhale after inhalation (35.9% [95% CI 17.0, 54.8]); and (e) shake the inhaler before use (34.2% [95% CI 30.6, 37.7]).

Conclusions

Across the studies used in this meta-analysis more than three-fourths of U.S. adults with obstructive lung diseases used MDIs incorrectly. Our findings suggest the need for ongoing patient education and consideration of alternative devices to mitigate errors.

What to consider before prescribing inhaled medications: a pragmatic approach for evaluating the current inhaler landscape

Inhaled therapies are the cornerstone of treatment in asthma and chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, and there are a multitude of devices available. There is, however, a distinct lack of evidence-based guidance for healthcare providers on how to choose an appropriate inhaler. This review aims to summarise recent updates on topics related to inhaler choice, and to offer practical considerations for healthcare providers regarding currently marketed devices. The importance of choosing the right inhaler for the right patient is discussed, and the relative merits of dry powder inhalers, pressurised metered dose inhalers, breath-actuated pressurised metered dose inhalers, spacers and soft mist inhalers are considered. Compiling the latest studies in the devices therapy area, this review focuses on the most common types of handling errors, as well as the comparative rates of incorrect inhalation technique between devices. The impact of device-specific handling errors on inhaler performance is also discussed, and the characteristics that can impair optimal drug delivery, such as inhalation flow rate, inhalation volume and particle size, are compared between devices. The impact of patient perceptions, behaviours and problems with inhalation technique is analysed, and the need for appropriate patient education is also highlighted. The continued development of technology in inhaler design and the need to standardise study assessment, endpoints and patient populations are identified as future research needs. The reviews of this paper are available via the supplemental material section.

Comparison of correct technique and preference for Spiromax®, Easyhaler® and Turbuhaler®: a single-site, single-visit, crossover study in inhaler-naïve adult volunteers

Background: Many patients do not use inhalers correctly. Inhalers associated with good technique have the potential to improve symptom control and are often preferred by patients. Methods: Inhaler-naïve, adult volunteers were randomized to use empty Spiromax®, Easyhaler®, and Turbuhaler® dry powder inhalers (DPIs) in one of six possible sequences in this single-site, single-visit, crossover study conducted in Sweden. Randomization was stratified by age and gender. Participants attempted to use each device intuitively (no instructions) and after reading the instructions for use from the patient information leaflet. Device preference was surveyed after using all devices. Mastery of device handling (i.e. dose preparation) or inhalation was defined as having no healthcare-professional-observed errors. The primary endpoint was mastery of device handling after reading the instructions. Results: More participants mastered device handling with Spiromax vs Easyhaler or Turbuhaler, both intuitively (44%, 0%, and 10%, respectively) and after reading the instructions (99%, 56%, and 81%, respectively). Fewer participants had ≥1 device-handling error with Spiromax than with the other devices. The percentage of participants still showing inhalation errors after reading the instructions ranged between 21% for Spiromax and 40% for Easyhaler. After reading instructions, mastery of handling and inhalation was numerically lower among older (aged >60 years) vs younger participants across all devices. Most participants preferred Spiromax for device handling (59%) and intuitiveness/ease of use (61%). Conclusion: These findings highlight that important differences exist between DPI devices, which could have implications for disease control when selecting a device for a patient.

Evaluation of a structured pharmacist-led inhalation technique assessment service for patients with asthma and COPD in Norwegian pharmacies

OBJECTIVE

To investigate whether the inhalation technique improved among patients with asthma and chronic obstructive pulmonary disease after an Inhalation Technique Assessment Service (ITAS), and to assess the patients' and pharmacists' perceptions of ITAS.

METHODS

This uncontrolled, pre-post study included 405 patients recruited from 42 Norwegian pharmacies. Inhalation technique was assessed by trained pharmacists before ITAS (baseline), directly after (follow-up 1) and three months after ITAS (follow-up 2), and analyzed statistically using SPSS. Perceptions of ITAS were assessed using a questionnaire.

RESULTS

488 ITAS were performed. At baseline, 8% of the inhalation technique demonstrations were rated as optimal and 31% as acceptable. Following ITAS, this increased to 72% (optimal) and 86% (acceptable). At follow-up 2 inhalation technique remained significantly higher than baseline (optimal: 52%, acceptable: 75%). The median rate of wrong steps decreased from 25% (baseline) to 0% (follow-ups). The usefulness of ITAS was rated 4 on a 5-point Likert scale.

CONCLUSION

Inhalation technique improved significantly after ITAS for both new and experienced users and all assessed devices. The technique remained significantly improved at follow-up 2. ITAS was well accepted by pharmacists and patients.

PRACTICE IMPLICATIONS

ITAS can contribute to significant improvements in inhalation technique among patients using inhaler devices.