Use and misuse of metered-dose inhalers by patients with chronic lung disease. A controlled, randomized trial of two instruction methods

Drug combinations for inhalation: Current products and future development addressing disease control and patient compliance

Pulmonary delivery is an alternative route of administration with numerous advantages over conventional routes of administration. It provides low enzymatic exposure, fewer systemic side effects, no first-pass metabolism, and concentrated drug amounts at the site of the disease, making it an ideal route for the treatment of pulmonary diseases. Owing to the thin alveolar-capillary barrier, and large surface area that facilitates rapid absorption to the bloodstream in the lung, systemic delivery can be achieved as well. Administration of multiple drugs at one time became urgent to control chronic pulmonary diseases such as asthma and COPD, thus, development of drug combinations was proposed. Administration of medications with variable dosages from different inhalers leads to overburdening the patient and may cause low therapeutic intervention. Therefore, products that contain combined drugs to be delivered via a single inhaler have been developed to improve patient compliance, reduce different dose regimens, achieve higher disease control, and boost therapeutic effectiveness in some cases. This comprehensive review aimed to highlight the growth of drug combinations by inhalation over time, obstacles and challenges, and the possible progress to broaden the current options or to cover new indications in the future. Moreover, various pharmaceutical technologies in terms of formulation and device in correlation with inhaled combinations were discussed in this review. Hence, inhaled combination therapy is driven by the need to maintain and improve the quality of life for patients with chronic respiratory diseases; promoting drug combinations by inhalation to a higher level is a necessity.

Integrating digital inhalers into clinical care of patients with asthma and chronic obstructive pulmonary disease

Modernizing inhaled medications through digital technology can help address persistent problems of non-adherence and poor inhaler technique in patients with obstructive lung diseases. With a growing body of supportive clinical studies, advances in digital inhaler sensors and platforms, greater support from payers and healthcare organizations, significant growth with these technologies is expected. While all digital (smart) inhalers record adherence, these are distinguished by their compatibility with commercial inhalers, capabilities to guide inhaler technique, use of patient-reported outcomes, and user-friendliness for both the healthcare professional (HCP) and patient. Due to the complexity and novelty of employing digital inhalers, collaboration with multiple entities within health systems is necessary and a well-planned integration is needed. For HCPs and patients, cybersecurity and privacy are critical, it will require review by each healthcare organization. In the US, some payers reimburse for remote monitoring using digital inhalers, but reimbursement is currently unavailable in other countries. There are several models for remote patient care, as employing an active, ongoing digital interface between the HCP and patient or they may choose to only review data at clinical encounters. Personalization of therapies and feedback are key to success. While digital inhaler malfunction uncommonly occurs, patient attrition over a year is significant. Some patients will be challenged to use digital platforms or have the necessary technology. Additional research is needed to address cost-effectiveness, in vivo accuracy of inspiratory measurement capable devices, ability to teach inhaler technique, their application for monitoring lung function, and lastly real-world adoption and implementation in routine clinical practice.

Association of depression with improper use of inhaler devices by patients with obstructive disease

INTRODUCTION

Obstructive pulmonary disease may cause some psychiatric disorders such as depression, similar to other chronic diseases. Patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease or asthma are especially susceptible to inhaler technique errors. The aim of this study was to evaluate the depression that can affect improper use of inhaler devices and to show the contribution of age, sex, and education to correct usage.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

In this study, trained health care workers in the presence of Chest specialist requested patients to demonstrate their inhaler technique and assessed it according to the checklist. If any of the steps were missing or done incorrectly, it was marked as an incorrect technique.

RESULTS

We included 188 participants, mean age of 58.3 ± 12.7 years. Significant variables of individual risk were having comorbidities, age, sex, smoking status, and educational level. There was an inverse relationship between education level and incorrect inhaler technique. Even after controlling for age, gender, and education, depressive symptoms were a significant and independent predictor of improper use of inhaler devices. High levels of depressive symptoms were associated with a 22-fold increase (95% confidence interval, 8.9 to 53.5) in the odds of improper use of inhaler devices after adjustment for potential confounders.

CONCLUSIONS

As a result, the presence of depression symptoms may increase the improper use of inhaler devices. Further research is needed to determine if screening for and treating depression improves improper use of inhaler devices and obstructive disease outcomes in this population.

Effect of a Multidimensional Pharmaceutical Care Intervention on Inhalation Technique in Patients with Asthma and COPD

Background

Inhalation therapy is the main treatment for asthma and chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) patients. Owing to the poor inhaler technique in using inhalers, we assessed the effect of a multidimensional pharmaceutical care on inhalation technique in patients with asthma and COPD.

Materials and Methods

A 3-month controlled parallel-group study was undertaken in asthma and COPD patients using dry powder inhalers (DPIs). Patients in the intervention group received multidimensional pharmaceutical care, including establishment of a special dispensing window, face-to-face demonstration and education, brochure education, videos education, online consultation and education, and follow-up reeducation. Patients in the control group received usual pharmaceutical care. The inhaler technique score, correctness of inhaler usage, beliefs about medicines questionnaire (BMQ) score, asthma control test (ACT), and COPD assessment test (CAT) were measured pre- and postintervention. Quality of life improvement evaluated according to score changes of ACT in asthma and CAT in COPD and patient satisfaction were measured postintervention.

Results

259 patients finished the study with 133 in the intervention group and 126 in the control group. Compared to preintervention and control group postintervention, the inhaler technique score, correctness of inhaler usage, and ACT score significantly increased in the intervention group postintervention, while the BMQ score and CAT score decreased significantly (P < 0.05). Significant improvements in quality of life and patient satisfaction were found (P < 0.05).

Conclusion

This study showed the multidimensional pharmaceutical care for asthma and COPD patients were effective in improving inhalation technique. By providing pharmaceutical care, pharmacists might help asthma and COPD patients to acquire better quality of life.

Monitoring of inhaler use at home with a smartphone video application in a pilot study

Inhalation therapy is the basis of the pharmacological management of asthma and COPD. Most patients are trained on the correct use of inhalers by health professionals but after that do patients continue to take them correctly at home remains largely unknown. Video recording of the inhalation technique using a smartphone can be used to evaluate the inhaler technique at home. Through this pilot study, we aimed to understand whether inhaler training given to patients in the outpatient clinic translates into good inhalation practices at home by a video application platform using a smartphone. We recruited 70 newly diagnosed asthma and COPD patients and a pulmonologist trained them to use their inhaler until they were able to use it correctly. Videos of inhaler use were captured by a relative or a friend at home and then sent to an independent reviewer via WhatsApp on Days 1, 7, 14 and 28 (±2). Each step of the inhaler technique was evaluated based on a predetermined checklist with a rating scale of 0 to 10 (10 for all steps done correctly). Out of 70 patients recruited, 30 (42%) sent all videos. We found that, although all patients performed all the steps correctly in the clinic, none of them performed all steps correctly at home even on Day 1 itself of the inhaler use. On Day 1, the steps score reduced from 10 to 6.9 with a downward trend until Day 28. The most common mistakes from Day 1 onwards were incorrect inspiratory flow rates and not gargling after the inhaler use. Also, most patients showed partially effective inhalation as per our scoring method. Remote video monitoring of inhaler use in the home environment is possible with a mobile video application that gives us a better insight into the most common inhaler mistakes performed by patients at home. Inhaler errors start appearing immediately on Day 1 after the training, and incorrect inspiratory flow rates and forgetting to do gargles are common errors. Early detection of inhaler errors at home may be possible through this method.

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.

What can be done to impact respiratory inhaler misuse: exploring the problem, reasons, and solutions

INTRODUCTION

Respiratory inhalers, when used correctly, provide critical treatments for managing pulmonary conditions. However, many patients misuse inhalers, negatively affecting disease control, quality of life, healthcare utilization, and costs. Numerous factors are associated with misuse and are nested within four levels of influence: individual, interpersonal, organizational/institutional, and policy.

AREAS COVERED

This review analyzed published literature and identified the most salient factors at each socio-ecological framework level. English language articles from any year were identified from PubMed, Google Scholar, and Embase databases. Misuse exists across clinical settings, patient populations, and device types. Several potential solutions are highlighted. Published interventions to improve inhaler technique have utilized handouts, in-person, virtual, and biofeedback approaches both inside and outside of healthcare settings with varied effectiveness. However, some interventions have superior effectiveness for improving technique and reducing acute care utilization.

EXPERT OPINION

To robustly address inhaler misuse, future solutions should focus on multi-level approaches to account for the myriad of factors contributing to inhaler misuse. Solutions should also streamline inhaler equipment, identify innovative technology-based solutions, support collaborations across healthcare and non-healthcare settings, and ensure reimbursement to healthcare professionals for inhaler education. Rigorous research studies must be funded and supported to identify and disseminate solutions.

Today's improvement in asthma treatment: role of MART and Easyhaler

Asthma affects more than 330 million people worldwide, but many analyses have shown that there are still a lot of unmet needs for both patients and physicians in the treatment of asthma: poor adherence to treatment is one of the main causes of sub-optimal clinical results. Maintenance and Reliever Therapy (MART) with the combination of formoterol and inhaled corticosteroids (ICS) has an established scientific rationale and demonstrated to reduce asthma exacerbations. The aim of this review is to highlight how in asthmatic patients MART can be able to express its maximum therapeutic potential when administered through an 'ideal inhaler'. Since the treatment may be necessary several times a day, the use of a single combination inhaler simplifies the management, potentially improving adherence; moreover, easiness of use and comfort in administration of asthma treatment devices are not secondary aspects. Asthmatic patients are often young, with a normal relational and working life and they could request for a comfortable and not too noticeable device. Finally to the "ideal inhaler" is requested to guarantee accuracy, dose consistency, and resistance to stress conditions. Easyhaler® more closely demonstrates many expected characteristics: effective, consistent performance regardless of inspiration rate, stability, versatility, with several patient acceptability advantages. Asthma control is enhanced by a strong adherence obtained through the combination in a single inhaler of both maintenance and reliever therapy and the availability of a device as close as possible to the characteristics of the ideal inhaler.

The Use of Video Instructions in Patient Education Promoting Correct Technique for Dry Powder Inhalers: An Investigation on Inhaler-Naïve Individuals

Introduction: The correct use of a prescribed inhaler device is crucial for achieving successful disease management in asthma. This study investigates non-verbal, demonstrational videos as a method of teaching inhaler naïve individuals how to use a dry powder inhaler (DPI). Methods: Video instructions for four DPIs were examined using a mixed methodology; 31 inhaler-naïve individuals participated in the study. Participants were each shown a demonstrational video of one the four inhalers, after each video the participant demonstrated how they would use the inhaler. After demonstrating the use, participants crossed over to the next inhaler. The demonstrations were videotaped. A common questionnaire was filled at the beginning of the study and four inhaler-specific questionnaires which were filled out by the participant after each inhaler demonstration. Results: The frequency of participant error varied between inhalers. When asked about how they perceived the video instructions, participants often stated they would have liked to receive feedback on their performance. The importance of feedback was further highlighted by the fact that participants tended to overestimate their own inhaler technique. Conclusion: Non-verbal videos may be more efficient for some DPIs than for others as a method for providing inhaler instructions. Lack of feedback on the participants’ inhaler performance emerged as a clear shortcoming of this educational method. Some steps in the inhalation process may be harder for individuals to remember and therefore require extra emphasis in order to achieve correct inhaler technique.

The Efficacy and Safety of Once-daily Fluticasone Furoate/Umeclidinium/Vilanterol Versus Twice-daily Budesonide/Formoterol in a Subgroup of Patients from China with Symptomatic COPD at Risk of Exacerbations (FULFIL Trial)

The FULFIL study evaluated once-daily fluticasone furoate/umeclidinium/vilanterol (FF/UMEC/VI) 100 µg/62.5 µg/25 µg versus twice-daily budesonide/formoterol (BUD/FOR) 400 µg/12 µg in patients with symptomatic COPD at risk of exacerbations. FULFIL demonstrated clinically meaningful and statistically significant improvements at Week 24 in trough forced expiratory volume in 1 second (FEV₁), St George's Respiratory Questionnaire (SGRQ) Total scores and reduced exacerbation frequency. Predefined analyses were performed to evaluate treatment effects in a subgroup of patients recruited in China (China subgroup; FF/UMEC/VI, n = 32; BUD/FOR, n = 29). Analyses included treatment by region (China versus non-China) to allow estimated treatment effects in patients from China to be compared with those of the non-China subgroup and the overall FULFIL intent-to-treat (ITT) population. In the China subgroup at Week 24: the mean change from baseline in trough FEV₁ was 125 mL (95% confidence interval [CI] 36, 214) for FF/UMEC/VI and -70 mL (95% CI -163, 23) BUD/FOR (between-treatment difference: 195 mL [95% CI 67, 323]; p = 0.003) and in SGRQ Total score was -5.6 units (95% CI -10.5, -0.7) and -0.3 units (95% CI -5.4, 4.7), respectively (between-treatment difference: -5.3 [95% CI -12.3, 1.7]; p = 0.140). Fewer moderate/severe exacerbations occurred with FF/UMEC/VI than BUD/FOR (16% and 28%, respectively). The overall incidence of adverse events was similar between arms (FF/UMEC/VI: 38%; BUD/FOR: 31%). This prespecified subgroup analysis of patients recruited in China to FULFIL demonstrated comparable efficacy and safety to that observed in the non-China and in the overall ITT populations, for FF/UMEC/VI versus BUD/FOR.

Pulmonary deposition of fluticasone propionate/formoterol in healthy volunteers, asthmatics and COPD patients with a novel breath-triggered inhaler

INTRODUCTION

A combination of fluticasone propionate/formoterol fumarate (FP/FORM) has been incorporated within a novel, breath-triggered device, named K-haler^®. This low resistance device requires a gentle inspiratory effort to actuate it, triggering at an inspiratory flow rate of approximately 30 L/min; thus avoiding the need for coordination of inhalation with manual canister depression. The aim of the study was to evaluate total and regional pulmonary deposition of FP/FORM when administered via the K-haler device.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Twelve healthy subjects, 12 asthmatics, and 12 COPD patients each received a single dose of 2 puffs ^99mtechnetium-labelled FP/FORM 125/5 μg. A gamma camera was used to obtain anterior and posterior two-dimensional images of drug deposition. Prior transmission scans (using a^99mtechnetium flood source) allowed the definition of regions of interest and calculation of attenuation correction factors. Image analysis was performed per standardised methods.

RESULTS

Of 36 subjects, 35 provided evaluable post-dose scintigraphic data. Mean subject ages were 35.7 (healthy), 44.5 (asthma) and 61.7 years (COPD); mean FEV₁% predicted values were 109.8%, 77.4% and 43.2%, respectively. Mean pulmonary deposition was 26.6% (healthy), 44.7% (asthma), 39.0% (COPD) of the delivered dose. The respective mean penetration indices (peripheral:central ratio normalised to a transmission lung scan) were 0.44, 0.31 and 0.30.

CONCLUSION

FP/FORM administration via the K-haler device resulted in high lung deposition in patients with obstructive lung disease but somewhat lesser deposition in healthy subjects. Regional deposition data demonstrated drug deposition in both the central and peripheral regions in all subject populations.

EUDRACT NUMBER

2015-000744-42.

Knowledge and pharmaceutical care practice regarding inhaled therapy among registered and unregistered pharmacists: an urgent need for a patient-oriented health care educational program in Iraq

Background

Inadequate inhaled aerosol device demonstration and technique by health care professionals can lead to poor disease control. The aims of this study were to develop and validate Knowledge of Aerosol Tool (KAT) among registered and unregistered pharmacists and to assess the pharmaceutical care practice among registered pharmacists.

Methods

The KAT and pharmaceutical care practice questionnaires were developed and modified from previous reports, then an observational cross-sectional study with a convenience sample size of 340 was carried out among registered and unregistered pharmacists. The validation process included face validity and reliability, and item analysis was carried out.

Results

The results showed good face validity and reliability with Cronbach’s alpha test and Pearson’s correlation coefficient for test–retest of 0.637 and 0.440, respectively. The KAT item difficulty index for most items was between 0.130 and 0.667. The total KAT scores for registered and unregistered pharmacists were 10.13±3.152 and 8.29±2.930, respectively, which revealed inadequate pharmacist knowledge of inhaled aerosol device technique and therapies. In addition, only 38.38% of the total sample was found to have a high KAT level score. The results showed higher KAT scores among males, pharmacists with a family history of respiratory disease, and pharmacists with a master’s degree. For the registered pharmacists, there were positive correlations between the total KAT score and the total pharmaceutical care practice score and the average number of patients with a respiratory disease seen by the pharmacist weekly, respectively. Moreover, there was a positive correlation between the total KAT score and its aerosol administration subscale with pharmacotherapy care and comorbid disease management practice care.

Conclusion

The KAT showed good validity and reliability, hence, it can be used for training or educational purposes. This study showed that professional knowledge and pharmaceutical care are a major concern in Iraq. KAT implementation depends on the whole educational process from undergraduate study to residence training.

Single-inhaler fluticasone furoate/umeclidinium/vilanterol versus fluticasone furoate/vilanterol plus umeclidinium using two inhalers for chronic obstructive pulmonary disease: a randomized non-inferiority study

BACKGROUND

Single-inhaler fluticasone furoate/umeclidinium/vilanterol (FF/UMEC/VI) 100/62.5/25 μg has been shown to improve lung function and health status, and reduce exacerbations, versus budesonide/formoterol in patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD). We evaluated the non-inferiority of single-inhaler FF/UMEC/VI versus FF/VI + UMEC using two inhalers.

METHODS

Eligible patients with COPD (aged ≥40 years; ≥1 moderate/severe exacerbation in the 12 months before screening) were randomized (1:1; stratified by the number of long-acting bronchodilators [0, 1 or 2] per day during run-in) to receive 24-week FF/UMEC/VI 100/62.5/25 μg and placebo or FF/VI 100/25 μg + UMEC 62.5 μg; all treatments/placebo were delivered using the ELLIPTA inhaler once-daily in the morning. Primary endpoint: change from baseline in trough forced expiratory volume in 1 s (FEV1) at Week 24. The non-inferiority margin for the lower 95% confidence limit was set at - 50 mL.

RESULTS

A total of 1055 patients (844 [80%] of whom were enrolled on combination maintenance therapy) were randomized to receive FF/UMEC/VI (n = 527) or FF/VI + UMEC (n = 528). Mean change from baseline in trough FEV1 at Week 24 was 113 mL (95% CI 91, 135) for FF/UMEC/VI and 95 mL (95% CI 72, 117) for FF/VI + UMEC; the between-treatment difference of 18 mL (95% CI -13, 50) confirmed FF/UMEC/VI's was considered non-inferior to FF/VI + UMEC. At Week 24, the proportion of responders based on St George's Respiratory Questionnaire Total score was 50% (FF/UMEC/VI) and 51% (FF/VI + UMEC); the proportion of responders based on the Transitional Dyspnea Index focal score was similar (56% both groups). A similar proportion of patients experienced a moderate/severe exacerbation in the FF/UMEC/VI (24%) and FF/VI + UMEC (27%) groups; the hazard ratio for time to first moderate/severe exacerbation with FF/UMEC/VI versus FF/VI + UMEC was 0.87 (95% CI 0.68, 1.12). The incidence of adverse events was comparable in both groups (48%); the incidence of serious adverse events was 10% (FF/UMEC/VI) and 11% (FF/VI + UMEC).

CONCLUSIONS

Single-inhaler triple therapy (FF/UMEC/VI) is non-inferior to two inhalers (FF/VI + UMEC) on trough FEV1 change from baseline at 24 weeks. Results were similar on all other measures of efficacy, health-related quality of life, and safety.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

GSK study CTT200812; ClinicalTrials.gov NCT02729051 (submitted 31 March 2016).

Inhaler technique: does age matter? A systematic review

Poor inhaler technique and inferior asthma outcomes are evident in older adults. Reviews comparing metered dose inhaler (MDI) and dry powder inhaler (DPI) techniques across older adults and younger cohorts are scarce. This systematic review aimed to determine whether differences exist between such cohorts with regards to the number and type of MDI and DPI errors made. A systematic literature search was conducted in Embase, Medline and PubMed from July 1 to December 31, 2016. Studies were selected in accordance with preset inclusion criteria, relevant data were extracted, and quality was assessed with validated checklists. 14 studies were identified. Evidence suggests a negative correlation between advancing age and correct technique across MDI and varying DPI devices when examined collectively. Differences appear to exist between older adult and younger cohorts prescribed MDIs in error types. There is evidence of age-associated differences in the number and type of inhaler technique errors. Further research is required to assess outcomes in individual DPIs, reproducibility and the effects of confounders.

FULFIL Trial: Once-Daily Triple Therapy for Patients with Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease

RATIONALE

Randomized data comparing triple therapy with dual inhaled corticosteroid (ICS)/long-acting β₂-agonist (LABA) therapy in patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) are limited.

OBJECTIVES

We compared the effects of once-daily triple therapy on lung function and health-related quality of life with twice-daily ICS/LABA therapy in patients with COPD.

METHODS

The FULFIL (Lung Function and Quality of Life Assessment in Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease with Closed Triple Therapy) trial was a randomized, double-blind, double-dummy study comparing 24 weeks of once-daily triple therapy (fluticasone furoate/umeclidinium/vilanterol 100 μg/62.5 μg/25 μg; ELLIPTA inhaler) with twice-daily ICS/LABA therapy (budesonide/formoterol 400 μg/12 μg; Turbuhaler). A patient subgroup remained on blinded treatment for up to 52 weeks. Co-primary endpoints were change from baseline in trough FEV₁ and in St. George's Respiratory Questionnaire (SGRQ) total score at Week 24.

MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS

In the intent-to-treat population (n = 1,810) at Week 24 for triple therapy (n = 911) and ICS/LABA therapy (n = 899), mean changes from baseline in FEV₁ were 142 ml (95% confidence interval [CI], 126 to 158) and -29 ml (95% CI, -46 to -13), respectively, and mean changes from baseline in SGRQ scores were -6.6 units (95% CI, -7.4 to -5.7) and -4.3 units (95% CI, -5.2 to -3.4), respectively. For both endpoints, the between-group differences were statistically significant (P < 0.001). There was a statistically significant reduction in moderate/severe exacerbation rate with triple therapy versus dual ICS/LABA therapy (35% reduction; 95% CI, 14-51; P = 0.002). The safety profile of triple therapy reflected the known profiles of the components.

CONCLUSIONS

These results support the benefits of single-inhaler triple therapy compared with ICS/LABA therapy in patients with advanced COPD. Clinical trial registered with www.clinicaltrials.gov (NCT02345161).

Effectiveness and success factors of educational inhaler technique interventions in asthma & COPD patients: a systematic review

With the current wealth of new inhalers available and insurance policy driven inhaler switching, the need for insights in optimal education on inhaler use is more evident than ever. We aimed to systematically review educational inhalation technique interventions, to assess their overall effectiveness, and identify main drivers of success. Medline, Embase and CINAHL databases were searched for randomised controlled trials on educational inhalation technique interventions. Inclusion eligibility, quality appraisal (Cochrane's risk of bias tool) and data extraction were performed by two independent reviewers. Regression analyses were performed to identify characteristics contributing to inhaler technique improvement. Thirty-seven of the 39 interventions included (95%) indicated statistically significant improvement of inhaler technique. However, average follow-up time was relatively short (5 months), 28% lacked clinical relevant endpoints and all lacked cost-effectiveness estimates. Poor initial technique, number of inhalation procedure steps, setting (outpatient clinics performing best), and time elapsed since intervention (all, p < 0.05), were shown to have an impact on effectiveness of the intervention, explaining up to 91% of the effectiveness variation. Other factors, such as disease (asthma vs. chronic obstructive pulmonary disease), education group size (individual vs. group training) and inhaler type (dry powder inhalers vs. pressurised metered dose inhalers) did not play a significant role. Notably, there was a trend (p = 0.06) towards interventions in adults being more effective than those in children and the intervention effect seemed to wane over time. In conclusion, educational interventions to improve inhaler technique are effective on the short-term. Periodical intervention reinforcement and longer follow-up studies, including clinical relevant endpoints and cost-effectiveness, are recommended.

Device errors in asthma and COPD: systematic literature review and meta-analysis

Inhaler device errors are common and may impact the effectiveness of the delivered drug. There is a paucity of up-to-date systematic reviews (SRs) or meta-analyses (MAs) of device errors in asthma and chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) patients. This SR and MA provides an estimate of overall error rates (both critical and non-critical) by device type and evaluates factors associated with inhaler misuse. The following databases from inception to July 23, 2014 (Embase®, MEDLINE®, MEDLINE® In-Process and CENTRAL) were searched, using predefined search terms. Studies in adult males and females with asthma or COPD, reporting at least one overall or critical error, using metered dose inhalers and dry powder inhalers were included. Random-effect MAs were performed to estimate device error rates and to compare pairs of devices. Overall and critical error rates were high across all devices, ranging from 50-100% and 14-92%, respectively. However, between-study heterogeneity was also generally >90% (I-squared statistic), indicating large variability between studies. A trend towards higher error rates with assessments comprising a larger number of steps was observed; however no consistent pattern was identified. This SR and MA highlights the relatively limited body of evidence assessing device errors and the lack of standardised checklists. There is currently insufficient evidence to determine differences in error rates between different inhaler devices and their impact on clinical outcomes. A key step in improving our knowledge on this topic would be the development of standardised checklists for each device.

CHRONIC LUNG DISEASES

CALL TO STANDARDISE RESEARCH INTO INHALER DEVICE ERRORS: Researchers should adopt a standardised approach to investigate the incorrect use of inhalers and its associated clinical implications. Henry Chrystyn at Plymouth University, together with scientists across the UK and the Netherlands, conducted a review of research related to inhaled medication errors made by patients with asthma or chronic obstructive pulmonary disease. It is widely acknowledged that many patients with lung conditions don't use their inhaler devices correctly, which affects drug effectiveness and disease control. While Chrystyn's team found high critical error rates reported across all devices, their meta-analysis and systematic review highlighted significant gaps in knowledge regarding different inhalers and associated error rates, and how these affect clinical outcomes. The researchers call for in-depth studies into device use, alongside standardised checklists and definitions for such studies to use to ensure consistency.

Effect of novel inhaler technique reminder labels on the retention of inhaler technique skills in asthma: a single-blind randomized controlled trial

Inhaler technique can be corrected with training, but skills drop off quickly without repeated training. The aim of our study was to explore the effect of novel inhaler technique labels on the retention of correct inhaler technique. In this single-blind randomized parallel-group active-controlled study, clinical pharmacists enrolled asthma patients using controller medication by Accuhaler [Diskus] or Turbuhaler. Inhaler technique was assessed using published checklists (score 0-9). Symptom control was assessed by asthma control test. Patients were randomized into active (ACCa; THa) and control (ACCc; THc) groups. All patients received a "Show-and-Tell" inhaler technique counseling service. Active patients also received inhaler labels highlighting their initial errors. Baseline data were available for 95 patients, 68% females, mean age 44.9 (SD 15.2) years. Mean inhaler scores were ACCa:5.3 ± 1.0; THa:4.7 ± 0.9, ACCc:5.5 ± 1.1; THc:4.2 ± 1.0. Asthma was poorly controlled (mean ACT scores ACCa:13.9 ± 4.3; THa:12.1 ± 3.9; ACCc:12.7 ± 3.3; THc:14.3 ± 3.7). After training, all patients had correct technique (score 9/9). After 3 months, there was significantly less decline in inhaler technique scores for active than control groups (mean difference: Accuhaler -1.04 (95% confidence interval -1.92, -0.16, P = 0.022); Turbuhaler -1.61 (-2.63, -0.59, P = 0.003). Symptom control improved significantly, with no significant difference between active and control patients, but active patients used less reliever medication (active 2.19 (SD 1.78) vs. control 3.42 (1.83) puffs/day, P = 0.002). After inhaler training, novel inhaler technique labels improve retention of correct inhaler technique skills with dry powder inhalers. Inhaler technique labels represent a simple, scalable intervention that has the potential to extend the benefit of inhaler training on asthma outcomes.

ASTHMA

REMINDER LABELS IMPROVE INHALER TECHNIQUE: Personalized labels on asthma inhalers remind patients of correct technique and help improve symptoms over time. Iman Basheti at the Applied Science Private University in Jordan and co-workers trialed the approach of placing patient-specific reminder labels on dry-powder asthma inhalers to improve long-term technique. Poor asthma control is often exacerbated by patients making mistakes when using their inhalers. During the trial, 95 patients received inhaler training before being split into two groups: the control group received no further help, while the other group received individualized labels on their inhalers reminding them of their initial errors. After three months, 67% of patients with reminder labels retained correct technique compared to only 12% of controls. They also required less reliever medication and reported improved symptoms. This represents a simple, cheap way of tackling inhaler technique errors.

Clinical Considerations in the Use of Inhalation Delivery Devices

Medications delivered through oral inhalation represent the cornerstone of pharmacotherapy for asthma and chronic obstructive pulmonary diseases. Several options exist as methods of delivering aerosols to the lung, including metered-dose inhalers, metered-dose inhalers attached to spacers or valved holding chambers, dry powder inhalers, and nebulizers. Delivery of aerosols to the lung is affected by numerous factors including characteristics of aerosol particles, patients’ ventilatory patterns, and physical condition of the lung. It has become increasingly clear that the device used to deliver the medication is an important factor in the extent of deposition and the ultimate therapeutic effect. Further, the same therapeutic agent may exhibit differing effects depending on which delivery device is used. Each inhalation device has specific instructions for use, and the techniques for use vary significantly among the available products. In each case, patients should be instructed and observed to ensure that they have the proper technique of use to achieve an optimal effect.

Asthma Patient Education

Patient education is a very important aspect of the treatment of asthma. Success of therapy is highly dependent upon patients' knowledge of asthma and the correct use of their medications. Over the last decade the morbidity and mortality rates due to asthma have increased. Education of patients is necessary to reduce these rates. Pharmacists can play a major role in the education of patients. Pharmacists are readily available and see most patients frequently for refills. Regular use of anti-inflammatory medications, use of β2-agonists for rescue therapy, and prevention of exercise induced asthma, and correct inhaler technique should be stressed. Spacer devices and peak flow meters should be routinely recommended by pharmacists. Educational aids such as handouts, pamphlets, and video tapes are available from many different organizations that can help make education more time efficient. Asthma education is a rewarding service to offer asthma patients and helps to develop loyalty as well as overall better health care for patients.

The Community Pharmacist—A Vital Link in Caring for the Asthma Patient

Pharmacists in a variety of settings are in a pivotal position to contribute to effective management of asthma patients. As part of the health care team, pharmacists can identify patients with poorly controlled asthma and educate patients on asthma medications, appropriate administration technique, and how to monitor therapy. By assisting with the management of the asthma patient, pharmacists can help optimize the care asthma patients receive, while decreasing overall health care expenditures.

Drug treatment of COPD

Anticholinergics (in particular, ipratropium bromide [Atrovent]) are first-line therapy in patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD). Although more studies are needed to support the use of combination therapy, adding an inhaled beta agonist to the therapeutic regimen is reasonable in patients who remain symptomatic and need quick relief. Patients frequently receive inadequate amounts of drug with standard doses delivered by metered-dose inhalers, often as the result of improper technique, so symptomatic patients may require higher doses. Caution is recommended when the dose of inhaled sympathomimetics is increased in COPD patients with ischemic heart disease or tachyarrhythmias. The addition of an oral sympathomimetic is seldom necessary. Theophylline may be considered in outpatients who remain symptomatic despite their use of inhaled bronchodilators, but heart disease, seizure disorders, and gastroesophageal reflux are contraindications. Corticosteroid therapy remains controversial but can be helpful in patients who still have severe disease despite maximum bronchodilator therapy. Antibiotics can be of benefit in COPD patients undergoing an exacerbation who have increasing dyspnea, cough, and phlegm production.

Systematic Review of Errors in Inhaler Use: Has Patient Technique Improved Over Time?

BACKGROUND

Problems with the use of inhalers by patients were noted shortly after the launch of the metered-dose inhaler (MDI) and persist today. We aimed to assess the most common errors in inhaler use over the past 40 years in patients treated with MDIs or dry powder inhalers (DPIs).

METHODS

A systematic search for articles reporting direct observation of inhaler technique by trained personnel covered the period from 1975 to 2014. Outcomes were the nature and frequencies of the three most common errors; the percentage of patients demonstrating correct, acceptable, or poor technique; and variations in these outcomes over these 40 years and when partitioned into years 1 to 20 and years 21 to 40. Analyses were conducted in accordance with recommendations from Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses and Strengthening the Reporting of Observational Studies in Epidemiology.

RESULTS

Data were extracted from 144 articles reporting on a total number of 54,354 subjects performing 59,584 observed tests of technique. The most frequent MDI errors were in coordination (45%; 95% CI, 41%-49%), speed and/or depth of inspiration (44%; 40%-47%), and no postinhalation breath-hold (46%; 42%-49%). Frequent DPI errors were incorrect preparation in 29% (26%-33%), no full expiration before inhalation in 46% (42%-50%), and no postinhalation breath-hold in 37% (33%-40%). The overall prevalence of correct technique was 31% (28%-35%); of acceptable, 41% (36%-47%); and of poor, 31% (27%-36%). There were no significant differences between the first and second 20-year periods of scrutiny.

CONCLUSIONS

Incorrect inhaler technique is unacceptably frequent and has not improved over the past 40 years, pointing to an urgent need for new approaches to education and drug delivery.

[Inhaled therapy in asthma]

Because of its advantages, inhaled administration of aerosolized drugs is the administration route of choice for the treatment of asthma and COPD. Numerous technological advances in the devices used in inhaled therapy in recent decades have boosted the appearance of multiple inhalers and aerosolized drugs. However, this variety also requires that the prescribing physician is aware of their characteristics. The main objective of the present review is to summarize the current state of knowledge on inhalers and inhaled drugs commonly used in the treatment of asthma. The review ranges from theoretical aspects (fundamentals and available devices and drugs) to practical and relevant aspects for asthma care in the clinical setting (therapeutic strategies, education, and adherence to inhalers).

Genuair® Usability Test: Results of a National Public Survey of the Elderly

Proper use of inhaler devices may be problematic in elderly patients due to age-related difficulties. A survey was administered to elderly patients to investigate the usability of the Genuair® device and patients' subjective viewpoint on the device. A representative sample of the Italian population aged ≥ 65 years was completed with a pre-defined sample of 89 patients with hand arthritis/arthrosis. Of 526 respondents, 88 were not self-sufficient. Only the replies of the 438 self-sufficient respondents were analyzed. A total of 107 participants (24%) reported having respiratory diseases, and 81 of these (76%) were users of inhaler devices. After the first test, the device was considered "practical/handy" by 90% of patients and "easy to use" by 89%. After the second test, in which patients received a demonstration of the correct inhalation maneuver, the percentage of patients scoring ≥ 7 increased to 93% for the first characteristic and was confirmed for the second, with no differences between the groups in terms of age, educational level, use of devices, and presence of arthritis/arthrosis. The mean time to explain the inhaler technique and to perform a correct inhalation was 1'38"± 1'37", and 70% of the respondents required less than 2 minutes, with no differences between the groups in terms of age, education level, use of devices, and presence of arthritis/arthrosis. In conclusion, Genuair® was well accepted and easy to use in a representative sample of the Italian population aged ≥ 65 years. These characteristics make it a valid choice in the elderly, thus enabling patients to better cope with the problems and difficulties that are common to this age group.

Nurses' knowledge of inhaler technique in the inpatient hospital setting

PURPOSE/OBJECTIVES

High rates of inhaler misuse in patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease and asthma contribute to hospital readmissions and increased healthcare cost. The purpose of this study was to examine inpatient staff nurses' self-perception of their knowledge of proper inhaler technique compared with demonstrated technique and frequency of providing patients with inhaler technique teaching during hospitalization and at discharge.

DESIGN

A prospective, descriptive study.

SETTING

A 495-bed urban academic medical center in the Midwest United States.

SAMPLE

A convenience sample of 100 nurses working on inpatient medical units.

METHODS

Participants completed a 5-item, 4-point Likert-scale survey evaluating self-perception of inhaler technique knowledge, frequency of providing patient education, and responsibility for providing education. Participants demonstrated inhaler technique to the investigators using both a metered dose inhaler (MDI) and Diskus device inhaler, and performance was measured via a validated checklist.

FINDINGS

Overall misuse rates were high for both MDI and Diskus devices. There was poor correlation between perceived ability and investigator-measured performance of inhaler technique. Frequency of education during hospitalization and at discharge was related to measured level of performance for the Diskus device but not for the MDI.

CONCLUSIONS

Nurses are a key component of patient education in the hospital; however, nursing staff lack adequate knowledge of inhaler technique.

IMPLICATIONS

Identifying gaps in nursing knowledge regarding proper inhaler technique and patient education about proper inhaler technique is important to design interventions that may positively impact patient outcomes. Interventions could include one-on-one education, Web-based education, unit-based education, or hospital-wide competency-based education. All should include return demonstration of appropriate technique.

The challenge of delivering therapeutic aerosols to asthma patients

The number of people with asthma continues to grow around the world, and asthma remains a poorly controlled disease despite the availability of management guidelines and highly effective medication. Patient noncompliance with therapy is a major reason for poor asthma control. Patients fail to comply with their asthma regimen for a wide variety of reasons, but incorrect use of inhaler devices is amongst the most common. The pressurised metered-dose inhaler (pMDI) is still the most frequently used device worldwide, but many patients fail to use it correctly, even after repeated tuition. Breath-actuated inhalers are easier to use than pMDIs. The rationale behind inhaler choice should be evidence based rather than empirical. When choosing an inhaler device, it is essential that it is easy to use correctly, dosing is consistent, adequate drug is deposited in both central and peripheral airways, and that drug deposition is independent of airflow. Regular checking of inhalation technique is crucial, as correct inhalation is one of the cornerstones of successful asthma management.

Inhaler devices - from theory to practice

This brief overview of the factors determining lung deposition of aerosols provides background information required by health care providers when instructing patients to use their prescribed inhalers. We discuss differences in the optimal inhalation manoeuvres for each type of aerosol generator and the difficulties patients face. Provision of short, clear instructions with demonstration of critical steps and checking technique during later clinical visits are necessary if these aerosolised medications are to be fully beneficial.

Inhaler competence in asthma: common errors, barriers to use and recommended solutions

Whilst the inhaled route is the first line administration method in the management of asthma, it is well documented that patients can have problems adopting the correct inhaler technique and thus receiving adequate medication. This applies equally to metered dose inhalers and dry powder inhalers and leads to poor disease control and increased healthcare costs. Reviews have highlighted these problems and the recent European Consensus Statement developed a call to action to seek solutions. This review takes forward the challenge of inhaler competence by highlighting the issues and suggesting potential solutions to these problems. The opportunity for technological innovation and educational interventions to reduce errors is highlighted, as well as the specific challenges faced by children. This review is intended as a policy document, as most issues faced by patients have not changed for half a century, and this situation should not be allowed to continue any longer. Future direction with respect to research, policy needs and practice, together with education requirements in inhaler technique are described.

Inhaler technique maintenance: gaining an understanding from the patient's perspective

BACKGROUND

The aim of this study was to determine the patient-, education-, and device-related factors that predict inhaler technique maintenance.

METHODS

Thirty-one community pharmacists were trained to deliver inhaler technique education to people with asthma. Pharmacists evaluated (based on published checklists), and where appropriate, delivered inhaler technique education to patients (participants) in the community pharmacy at baseline (Visit 1) and 1 month later (Visit 2). Data were collected on participant demographics, asthma history, current asthma control, history of inhaler technique education, and a range of psychosocial aspects of disease management (including adherence to medication, motivation for correct technique, beliefs regarding the importance of maintaining correct technique, and necessity and concern beliefs regarding preventer therapy). Stepwise backward logistic regression was used to identify the predictors of inhaler technique maintenance at 1 month.

RESULTS

In total 145 and 127 participants completed Visits 1 and 2, respectively. At baseline, 17% of patients (n = 24) demonstrated correct technique (score 11/11) which increased to 100% (n = 139) after remedial education by pharmacists. At follow-up, 61% (n = 77) of patients demonstrated correct technique. The predictors of inhaler technique maintenance based on the logistic regression model (X(2) (3, N = 125) = 16.22, p = .001) were use of a dry powder inhaler over a pressurized metered-dose inhaler (OR 2.6), having better asthma control at baseline (OR 2.3), and being more motivated to practice correct inhaler technique (OR 1.2).

CONCLUSION

Contrary to what is typically recommended in previous research, correct inhaler technique maintenance may involve more than repetition of instructions. This study found that past technique education factors had no bearing on technique maintenance, whereas patient psychosocial factors (motivation) did.

Retention by children of device technique for inhaled asthma drugs between visits

This study determined retention by children of drug delivery device technique between visits. Patients had asthma requiring the daily use of at least one medication delivery device. Seventy-two patients completed the study; 24 used only the metered dose inhaler (MDI) (group 1), while 48 used the MDI and 1 other device (group 2). Patients or caregivers were initially instructed on and demonstrated the correct use of their medication delivery device(s). At their next visit, they demonstrated their technique for each device. At follow-up, 36% correctly performed all components of the MDI. Group 1 (50%) was higher than group 2 (29%). The percent of correct MDI components for group 1 (84) was also higher than group 2 (78) but not significantly. For both groups and devices, breathing out before inhalation and breath holding was problematic. This study reinforces the need to demonstrate and observe the correct use of inhalation devices at each clinic visit.

Use of dry powder inhalers in COPD

INTRODUCTION

This was a study of 30 chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) patients to assess the ease of use and preference of four dry powder inhalers -- accuhaler, aerolizer, handihaler, turbohaler -- the accuhaler and turbohaler are multidose devices, whereas the aerolizer and handihaler are single dose devices.

METHOD

None of the subjects had previous experience of dry powder inhalers. The correct technique for each inhaler was divided into 12 steps including one critical step that if not performed would result in no drug delivery. Subjects were shown the correct technique for each inhaler in a random order and were assessed immediately and 1 h later. Each subject was asked to rank the four devices for preference and ease of use, as well as to assess how comfortable it felt to inhale through the device using a visual analogue scale.

RESULTS

The numbers of perfect scores were not significantly different between devices, but the number of fatal errors that would result in no drug delivery was significantly more common in single dose devices (p < 0.01). There were significant differences in the rankings of each device (Friedman test, p < 0.005) with the turbohaler being ranked first most often and the handihaler last. The turbohaler scored highest for comfort of inhalation and the accuhaler lowest, but differences were small.

CONCLUSIONS

In COPD patients starting on dry powder inhalers, multidose devices appear to be preferred, have fewer problems and are easier to use effectively.

Interactive small-group asthma education in the community pharmacy setting: a pilot study

BACKGROUND

This study aimed to compare the effects of two small-group asthma education interventions (one delivered by specially trained pharmacists (group A) and one delivered by a pharmacist researcher trained as an asthma educator (group B)) with usual care provided by community pharmacists (group C) on clinical and humanistic outcomes for people with asthma.

METHODS

Pharmacies were randomly selected to provide either group A, B, or C interventions. Data were collected at baseline, post intervention (groups A and B) and at 6 and 12 weeks (final visit).

RESULTS

Forty-eight people with asthma were recruited into groups A (n = 16), B (n = 16), and C (n = 16) and there were no significant differences between the groups at baseline. At 12 weeks there was a significant decrease in the proportion of patients with severe asthma/poor control in groups A and B compared with group C (56%, 44% and 50% to 25%, 13% and 50% [n = 48, p < 0.05], respectively). In Groups A and B, the proportion of patients with optimal metered dose inhaler (MDI) technique improved from 9% and 14%, respectively, at baseline to 82% and 93% (n = 11, p = 0.02, n = 14, p < 0.001), respectively, at 12 weeks. The proportion of patients with optimal dry powder inhaler (DPI) technique improved in Groups A and B from 0% and 8%, respectively, at baseline to 86% and 92% (n = 7, p < 0.001; n = 13, p = 0.002), respectively, at 12 weeks. No change in inhaler technique was observed for Group C. There were significant improvements in asthma knowledge scores in Groups A and B compared to Group C over time.

CONCLUSIONS

Small-group asthma education delivered by pharmacists appears to be more effective than usual care in improving clinical and humanistic asthma outcomes.

Assessment of inhalation technique and determinants of incorrect performance among children with asthma

The objective of our study was to evaluate the pressurized metered dose inhaler (pMDI) with holding chamber technique of asthmatic children attending out patient pediatric chest clinic and determine factors associated with incorrect technique. All patients had previously received instructions regarding inhalation technique. The inhalation technique was assessed on a five-point checklist, four of which were considered essential. Two hundred and thirteen children (mean +/- SD age, 7.3 +/- 3.8 years; 151 boys) completed the study. Children were using their inhaler for a median duration of 6 months (range 1-96 months). One hundred and eighty-eight patients (88.3%) performed all essential steps correctly. The commonest mistake among the essential steps was not shaking the inhaler (n = 21, 9.9%) followed by inability to make a tight seal around the mouthpiece of the holding chamber (n = 12, 5.6%). Correct technique was not affected by gender, asthma severity and socio-economic indices: education level of parents, percapita monthly income, rural or urban background. Our study indicates that a large majority of children from a developing country setting, irrespective of lower education and income levels can be successfully educated to appropriately use inhalation device. Inhalation performance is not affected by socio-economic background of the patients. Comprehensive inhalation instructions and monitoring at each visit are however critical to ensure reliable and consistent performance of correct technique among asthmatic children.

Proficiency of pediatricians in the use of inhaled medication delivery systems for the management of asthma

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the proficiency of pediatricians in the demonstration of the proper use of metered-dose inhalers (MDIs) and to assess their theoretical knowledge of inhalation devices used in the management of asthma.

DESIGN

Prospective cross-sectional survey.

SETTING

Two university-affiliated hospitals.

PARTICIPANTS

Seventy-one pediatricians and pediatric house staff.

INTERVENTION

Each pediatrician's technique was graded by two trained observers using a checklist of six essential steps recommended by national guidelines. Theoretical knowledge of asthma devices was evaluated by a written questionnaire.

RESULTS

Twenty (35.2%) pediatricians performed at least five steps correctly, 28 (39.4%) performed three or four steps correctly, and 18 (25.4%) performed two steps or less correctly. The most common errors were failure to start inhalation from functional residual capacity, failure to inhale slowly, and failure to wait at least 20 seconds before the next puff. Senior pediatricians were more skillful in the practical use of MDIs than were pediatric house staff (p = 0.03). The most common deficiencies in theoretical knowledge were related to estimation of the amount of medication in the canister (8.5% correct) and how valved holding chambers (VHCs) improve drug delivery to the lung (15.5% correct).

CONCLUSION

Pediatricians in Kuwait have significant deficiencies regarding the practical and theoretical aspects of MDIs and other inhalation devices.

Paediatric pulmonary drug delivery: considerations in asthma treatment

Aerosol therapy, the preferred route of administration for glucocorticosteroids and short-acting beta(2)-adrenergic agonists in the treatment of paediatric asthma, may be given via nebulisers, metered-dose inhalers and dry powder inhalers. For glucocorticosteroids, therapy with aerosolised medication results in higher concentrations of drug at the target organ with minimal systemic side effects compared with oral treatments. The dose of drug that reaches the airways in children with asthma is dependent on both the delivery device and patient-related factors. Factors that affect aerosol drug delivery are reviewed briefly. Advantages and disadvantages of each device and device-specific factors that influence patient preferences are examined. Although age-based device recommendations have been made, the optimal choice for drug delivery is the one that the patient or caregiver prefers to use, can use correctly and is most likely to use consistently.

Prescription bias and factors associated with improper use of inhalers

Many different inhalers are available for delivering aerosol therapy in respiratory medicine. As a consequence, the prescribing physicians may have some difficulty tailoring the most suitable inhaler to each patient. This multicenter, observational study using a self-administered questionnaire analyzed the characteristics of a large sample of patients (n = 1,305; 55% females; mean age 57.4, with a range of 15-88 years; most suffering from asthma or chronic obstructive pulmonary disease [COPD]) familiar with several different types of inhalers in relation to their most commonly used delivery device. Data on the inhalation technique for 2,057 observations of 1,126 patients using device-specific checklists and factors associated to misuse were also evaluated. Prevalent usage of newer dry powder inhalers (DPIs) was significantly associated with male sex, higher education, better respiratory function, and prescription from a respiratory physician. Patients using DPIs had received less instruction by health caregivers and were more likely to have read the instruction leaflet than users of metered dose inhalers (MDIs). Under these conditions, inhaler misuse was common and similar for both pressurized metered dose inhalers (pMDIs) and DPIs. For both types of inhalers, misuse was significantly and equally associated to increased age, less education, and less instruction by health care personnel. We conclude that many doctors are not familiar with the relevant characteristics of currently available inhalers. The prescription of newer DPIs may be subjected to gender, socio-economic, and instruction bias. The simple change of device from the pMDI to the newer DPIs is not associated with improved inhalation technique.

Influence of particle size and patient dosing technique on lung deposition of HFA-beclomethasone from a metered dose inhaler

The objective of this study was to determine the lung delivery of HFA-134a-beclomethasone dipropionate (HFA-BDP) from a breath-activated inhaler (QVAR Autohaler) compared with proper and improper press and breathe (QVAR P&B) metered dose inhaler (MDI) technique. The hypothesis was that that the smaller particles of BDP from HFA-BDP would stay suspended longer in the inspiratory air of patients and thus reduce the deleterious effects of inhaler discoordination. The study was an open label, four period, cross-over design. Asthmatic patients (n = 7) with a history of asthma symptoms, an FEV-1 of >70% of predicted normal, and a history of reversibility to a beta-agonist of >or=12% were utilized. BDP was radiolabeled with technetium-99m and delivered from the QVAR Autohaler or QVAR P&B device in patients trained to reproducibly utilize coordinated and discoordinated P&B MDI technique. Patients using Autohaler MDI exhibited 60% lung deposition of BDP. Patients using coordinated technique with the P&B MDI exhibited 59% lung deposition. Patients trained to consistently actuate the P&B MDI before inhaling exhibited 37% lung deposition. Patients trained to consistently actuate the P&B MDI late in the inspiration (i.e., 1.5 sec into a 3-sec inspiration) exhibited 50% lung deposition. In conclusion, the breath-activated Autohaler automatically provided optimal BDP lung deposition of 60%. Patients with good P&B MDI technique also received optimal lung deposition of 59%. The degree of lung deposition was decreased as patients demonstrated poor inhaler technique. However patients with poor technique still received a large lung dose of BDP (i.e., >or=37%) compared with lung deposition values of 4-7% for CFC-BDP MDIs previously published and confirmed in this study.

Factors associated with medication nonadherence in patients with COPD

STUDY OBJECTIVES

To identify the predictors of medication adherence in patients with COPD and contrast the health beliefs, experiences, and behaviors of COPD patients self-reporting good adherence with those of patients reporting suboptimal adherence to their medications.

DESIGN

Cross-sectional self-administered questionnaire.

SETTING

Ambulatory care.

PARTICIPANTS

Patients with chronic respiratory ailments identified through respiratory support groups and from a pulmonary rehabilitation database.

MEASUREMENTS AND RESULTS

A 30-item questionnaire comprising items pertaining to health beliefs, experiences, and behaviors along with a valid self-reported measure of adherence-the medication adherence report scale (MARS)-was administered to 525 ambulatory patients with chronic lung conditions. A total of 276 usable responses were received (52.6%). The mean age of the respondents was 71 years, and there were slightly more male patients (54.4%). COPD was the underlying disease condition in 90.6% of the respondents; two thirds of the respondents had comorbid conditions. The respiratory condition was managed by both general practitioners and respiratory specialists in 61.2% of cases. One third of the respondents self-reported complementary and alternative medicine use. The mean score (+/- SD) on the MARS among the respondents was 23.37 +/- 2.09. One hundred two patients self-reported perfect adherence on the MARS. Differences in knowledge about the illness and treatment, faith in and satisfaction with the treatment and doctors, concerns about the treatment, and intentional and unintentional deviations from the recommended treatment were detected between the adherent and less adherent groups. In multivariate analysis, "I vary my recommended management based on how I am feeling" and "I get confused about my medications" were found to be significant independent predictors of nonadherence.

CONCLUSIONS

Patients' acceptance of the disease process and recommended treatment, knowledge about and faith in the treatment, effective patient-clinician interaction, and routinization of drug therapy are critical for optimal medication adherence in patients with COPD.

[Pharmacists' role in the management of asthma: a survey of 120 pharmacists in Bas-Rhin]

INTRODUCTION

The pharmacist plays an essential role in the management of the asthmatic patients on account of their frequent visits to the pharmacy to obtain their medication.

METHODS

In order to evaluate the practice and knowledge of asthma among the pharmacists of the department of Bas-Rhin, 120 pharmacists were selected at random to reply to a standardised questionnaire.

RESULTS

The 86 pharmacists who replied to the questionnaire had a good general understanding of asthma and its treatment. However, only 26.4% knew all the criteria of the severity of an attack of asthma. Among the 57 pharmacists who gave a demonstration of the use of inhaler devices, 16.3% showed all the steps in the use of a metered dose aerosol. These results are comparable to those of non-specialist doctors and nurses in whom poor techniques were found in 63-100% and 65-96% respectively. The mean scores of the pharmacists were 10.5/12 (+/- 1.2) steps for metered dose aerosols, 10.4/11 (+/- 1.0) for the Tubuhaler, 9.3/12 (+/- 1.7) for the Autohaler and 8.1/9 (+/- 0.9) for the Volumatic spacer. The asthmatic patient's main expectation of the pharmacist concerned the use of the prescribed systems (87.2%), underlining the lack of information received by the patient at the time of prescription.

CONCLUSIONS

An improvement in the knowledge of the signs of severity of asthma and the use of inhaled devices could usefully be one of the objectives in the training of a dispensing pharmacist.

Device Selection and Outcomes of Aerosol Therapy: Evidence-Based Guidelines

BACKGROUND

The proliferation of inhaler devices has resulted in a confusing number of choices for clinicians who are selecting a delivery device for aerosol therapy. There are advantages and disadvantages associated with each device category. Evidence-based guidelines for the selection of the appropriate aerosol delivery device in specific clinical settings are needed.

AIM

(1) To compare the efficacy and adverse effects of treatment using nebulizers vs pressurized metered-dose inhalers (MDIs) with or without a spacer/holding chamber vs dry powder inhalers (DPIs) as delivery systems for beta-agonists, anticholinergic agents, and corticosteroids for several commonly encountered clinical settings and patient populations, and (2) to provide recommendations to clinicians to aid them in selecting a particular aerosol delivery device for their patients.

METHODS

A systematic review of pertinent randomized, controlled clinical trials (RCTs) was undertaken using MEDLINE, EmBase, and the Cochrane Library databases. A broad search strategy was chosen, combining terms related to aerosol devices or drugs with the diseases of interest in various patient groups and clinical settings. Only RCTs in which the same drug was administered with different devices were included. RCTs (394 trials) assessing inhaled corticosteroid, beta2-agonist, and anticholinergic agents delivered by an MDI, an MDI with a spacer/holding chamber, a nebulizer, or a DPI were identified for the years 1982 to 2001. A total of 254 outcomes were tabulated. Of the 131 studies that met the eligibility criteria, only 59 (primarily those that tested beta2-agonists) proved to have useable data.

RESULTS

None of the pooled metaanalyses showed a significant difference between devices in any efficacy outcome in any patient group for each of the clinical settings that was investigated. The adverse effects that were reported were minimal and were related to the increased drug dose that was delivered. Each of the delivery devices provided similar outcomes in patients using the correct technique for inhalation.

CONCLUSIONS

Devices used for the delivery of bronchodilators and steroids can be equally efficacious. When selecting an aerosol delivery device for patients with asthma and COPD, the following should be considered: device/drug availability; clinical setting; patient age and the ability to use the selected device correctly; device use with multiple medications; cost and reimbursement; drug administration time; convenience in both outpatient and inpatient settings; and physician and patient preference.