Patient preferences for dry powder inhaler attributes in asthma and chronic obstructive pulmonary disease in France: a discrete choice experiment

Consideration and Assessment of Patient Factors When Selecting an Inhaled Delivery System in COPD

Because guidelines and strategies for pharmacologic treatment of COPD focus on specific classes of inhaled medications, there is an unmet need for information to guide health care professionals for selecting an inhaled medication delivery system that matches the unique characteristics of individual patients. This article provides guidance for selecting an inhaled medication delivery system based on three "key" patient factors: cognitive function, manual dexterity/strength, and peak inspiratory flow. In addition, information is provided about specific tests to assess these patient factors. Cognitive impairment with an estimated prevalence of 25% among patients with COPD adversely affects patients' ability to correctly use a handheld device. To our knowledge, the prevalence of impaired manual dexterity/strength has not been reported in those with COPD. However, 79% of patients with COPD have reported one or more physical impediments that could influence their ability to manipulate an inhaler device. The measurement of peak inspiratory flow against the simulated resistance (PIFr) of a dry powder inhaler establishes whether the patient has the inhalation ability for creating optimal turbulent energy within the device. A suboptimal PIFr for low to medium-high resistance dry powder inhalers has been reported in 19% to 84% of stable outpatients with COPD. Health care professionals should consider cognitive function, manual dexterity/strength, and PIFr in their patients with COPD when prescribing inhaled pharmacotherapy. Impairments in these patient factors are common among those with COPD and can affect the individual's competency and effectiveness of using inhaled medications delivered by handheld devices.

Feedback systems in multi-dose dry powder inhalers

Dry powder inhalers (DPIs) are a large, highly diverse group of inhalation devices. DPIs differentiate the process of measuring the dose of the drug and preparing the inhaler for use, but also the way of transmitting and the scope of feedback on the inhalation process that the user receives. The functioning of simple and technologically advanced systems of feedback on the inhalation process in the most commonly used multi-dose DPIs is discussed. All these DPIs have a dose counter. Only three DPIs - Novolizer^®, Genuair^® and NEXThaler^® provide feedback to the patient in the form of auditory and visual signals confirming the correctness of the inhalation performed. This is important for the correct use of the inhaler, and thus for obtaining the expected therapeutic effects.

People living with Moderate-to-Severe COPD Prefer Improvement of Daily Symptoms Over the Improvement of Exacerbations: A Multi-Country Patient Preference Study

Introduction

This patient preference study sought to quantify the preferences of people living with COPD regarding symptom improvement in the UK, USA, France, Australia and Japan.

Methods

The inclusion criteria were people living with COPD aged 40 years or older who experienced ≥1 exacerbation in the previous year with daily symptoms of cough and excess mucus production. The study design included: 1) development of an attributes and levels grid through qualitative patient interviews; and 2) implementation of the main online quantitative survey, which included a discrete choice experiment (DCE) to allow assessment of attributes and levels using hypothetical health state profiles. Preference weights (utilities) were derived from the DCE using hierarchical Bayesian analysis. A preference simulator was developed that enabled different health state scenarios to be evaluated based on the predicted patient preferences.

Results

1050 people living with moderate-to-severe COPD completed the survey. All attributes were considered important when patients determined their preferences in the DCE. In a health state preference simulation, two hypothetical health states (comprising attribute levels) with qualitatively equivalent improvements in A) cough and mucus and B) shortness of breath (SOB) resulted in a clear preference for cough and mucus improved profile. When comparing two profiles with C) daily symptoms improved and D) exacerbations improved, there was a clear preference for the daily symptoms improved profile.

Conclusions

People living with moderate-to-severe COPD prefer to reduce cough and mucus production together over improvement of SOB and would prefer to reduce combined daily symptoms over an improvement in exacerbations.

There is a need for symptom-focused therapies to deliver meaningful outcomes for people living with COPDhttps://bit.ly/3KqcSur

Comparison of Two pMDIs in Adult Asthmatics: A Randomized Double-blinded Double-dummy Clinical Trial

Background

Only a few studies directly compared the therapeutic efficacy and safety of two pressurized metered-dose inhalers (pMDIs) in asthma. We analyzed the asthma treatment outcomes, safety, and patient preferences using formoterol/beclomethasone (FORM/BDP), a pMDI with extra-fine particles, compared with formoterol/budesonide (FORM/BUD), another pMDI with non-extra-fine particles.

Methods

In this randomized, double-blind, double-dummy parallel group study, 40 adult asthmatics were randomized to FORM/BDP group (n=18; active FORM/BDP and placebo FORM/BUD) or FORM/BUD group (n=22; active FORM/BUD and placebo FORM/BDP). During the two visits (baseline and end of 8-week treatment), subjects were asked to answer questionnaires including asthma control test (ACT), asthma control questionnaires (ACQ), and Quality of Life Questionnaire for Adult Korean Asthmatics (QLQAKA). Lung function, compliance with inhaler, and inhaler-handling skills were also assessed.

Results

Ten subjects in the FORM/BDP group and 14 in the FORM/BUD group completed follow-up visits. ACT, ACQ, QLQAKA (a primary outcome), and adverse events did not differ between two groups. We found that the increase in forced expiratory volume in 1 second/forced vital capacity and forced expiratory flow at 25% to 75% of the pulmonary volume in the FORM/BDP group was higher than in the FORM/BUD group. Regarding preference, subjects responded that the flume velocity of FORM/BDP was higher, but more adequate than that of FORM/BUD. They also answered that FORM/BDP reached the trachea and bronchus and irritated them significantly more than FORM/BUD.

Conclusion

The use of pMDI with extra-fine particles may relieve small airway obstruction more than the one with non-extra-fine particles despite no significant differences in overall treatment outcomes. Some asthmatics have a misconception about the adequacy of high flume velocity of pMDIs.

A Systematic and Critical Review of Discrete Choice Experiments in Asthma and Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease

Background

Regulators have called for greater emphasis on the role of the patient voice to inform medical product development and decision making, and expert guidelines and reports for asthma and chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) both explicitly recommend the consideration of patient preferences in the management of these diseases. Discrete choice experiments (DCEs) are commonly used to quantify stakeholders’ treatment preferences and estimate the trade-offs they are willing to make between outcomes such as treatment benefits and risks.

Objective

The aim of this systematic literature review is to provide an up-to-date and critical review of DCEs published in asthma and COPD; specifically, we aim to evaluate the subject of preference studies conducted in asthma and COPD, what attributes have been included, stakeholders’ preferences, and the consistency in reporting of instrument development, testing and reporting of results.

Methods

A systematic review of published DCEs on asthma and COPD treatments was conducted using Embase, Medline and the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews. Studies were included if they included a DCE conducted in a relevant population (e.g. patients with asthma or COPD or their caregivers, asthma or COPD-treating clinicians, or the general population), and reported quantitative outcomes on participants’ preferences. Study characteristics were summarised descriptively, and descriptive analyses of attribute categories, consistency in reporting on key criteria, and stakeholder preferences were undertaken.

Results

A total of 33 eligible studies were identified, including 28 unique DCEs. The majority (n = 20; 71%) of studies were conducted in a patient sample. Studies focused on inhaler treatments, and included attributes in five key categories: symptoms and treatment benefits (n = 23; 82%), treatment convenience (n = 19; 68%), treatment cost (n = 17; 61%), treatment risks (n = 13; 46%), and other (n = 10; 36%). Symptoms and treatment benefits were the attributes most frequently ranked as important to patients (n = 26, 72%), followed by treatment risks (n = 7, 39%). Several studies (n = 9, 32%) did not qualitatively pre-test their DCE, and a majority did not report the uncertainty in estimated outcomes (n = 18; 64%).

Conclusions

DCEs in asthma and COPD have focused on treatment benefits and convenience, with less evidence generated on participants’ risk tolerance. Quality criteria and reporting standards are needed to promote study quality and ensure consistency in reporting between studies.

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s40271-021-00536-w.

Exploring quality of life and satisfaction with treatment in asthmatic patients receiving dry powder inhalers: a multinational survey

INTRODUCTION

The quality of life (QoL) and device needs have not been characterized in asthmatic patients treated via dry powder inhalers (DPIs). The aim of this study was to assess the impact of asthma on health-related QoL, device satisfaction, and preference in adult asthmatic patients using DPI devices, and to identify any DPI-associated unmet needs.

METHODS

An online survey was conducted between November and December 2019 on eligible patients from the Cint consumer panel across Europe. Newly designed, as well as validated questionnaires were used to collect data on QoL and inhaler satisfaction.

RESULTS

A total of 1063 asthmatic patient took part in the survey; 66% of the patients reported medium or high impact of asthma on the overall QoL. The majority of patients (61%) reported high level of satisfaction with their current device. The patients with medium-to-high impact of asthma on QoL were significantly less likely to be satisfied with their current device (55%) than those who reported low-to-medium impact of asthma on QoL (67%; p-value < 0.001). "Higher number of available doses," "usability," "clear dose counter," and "feedback on correct inhalation" were the attributes mostly requested from a new device. The demand for user-friendly devices that provide feedback on correct drug administration was identified as an unmet need.

CONCLUSIONS AND CLINICAL RELEVANCE

In asthmatic patients with medium to high impact of asthma on the overall QoL, the satisfaction with the device is highly affected.

Preferences of patients with asthma or COPD for treatments in pulmonary rehabilitation

INTRODUCTION

Pulmonary rehabilitation (PR) aims to improve disease control in patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) and asthma. However, the success of PR-programs depends on the patients' participation and willingness to cooperate. Taking the patients' preferences into consideration might improve both of these factors. Accordingly, our study aims to analyze patients' preferences regarding current rehabilitation approaches in order to deduce and discuss possibilities to further optimize pulmonary rehabilitation.

METHODS AND ANALYSIS

At the end of a 3 weeks in-house PR, patients' preferences concerning the proposed therapies were assessed during two different time slots (summer 2015 and winter 2015/2016) in three clinics using a choice-based conjoint analysis (CA). Relevant therapy attributes and their levels were identified through literature search and expert interviews. Inclusion criteria were as follows: PR-inpatient with asthma and/or COPD, confirmed diagnosis, age over 18 years, capability to write and read German, written informed consent obtained. The CA analyses comprised a generalized linear mixed-effects model and a latent class mixed logit model.

RESULTS

A total of 542 persons participated in the survey. The most important attribute was sport and exercise therapy. Rehabilitation preferences hardly differed between asthma and COPD patients. Health-related quality of life (HRQoL) as well as time since diagnosis were found to have a significant influence on patients' rehabilitation preferences.

CONCLUSIONS

Patients in pulmonary rehabilitation have preferences regarding specific program components. To increase the adherence to, and thus, the effectiveness of rehabilitation programs, these results must be considered when developing or optimizing PR-programs.

Prioritization and Refinement of Patient-Informed Value Elements as Attributes for Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease Treatment Preferences

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE

Formative research studies can inform stated-preference instrument development to quantify the importance of various attributes of healthcare treatments. The objective of this study was to elicit from patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease the prioritization of an established set of patient-informed value elements.

METHODS

Using an iterative mixed-methods study design, we engaged individuals living with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease in Phase 1 value element elicitation and Phase 2 language refinement. Study participants were recruited from March to July 2019. Four guided activities, administered in an online instrument, elicited individual preferences for 40 disease-agnostic value elements that were aligned with treatment, outcomes, or care process. Responses from the guided activities were summarized and then presented to a patient advocate and additional patient participants for further refinement of the value elements and the phrasing.

RESULTS

Twenty-three participants, 18 male and five female, mean age of 66 years (standard deviation = 7) were enrolled in Phase 1. Participant responses informed the selection of eight elements as the key candidates for the Phase 2 language refinement: Side Effects, New Therapeutic Option, Available Treatment, Appropriateness of Care, Predictable Healthcare Needs, Physical Activities: Endurance and Symptom Control, and Explanation of Treatment. With feedback from a patient advocate and additional patient participants, elements were refined, rephrased, or modified and this list was narrowed to six value elements (Side Effects, New Therapeutic Option, Willingness to Pay, Physical Activities, Explanation of Treatment, and Access to Care) to serve as attributes in a conceptual framework for a future quantitative stated-preference instrument.

CONCLUSIONS

This patient-engaged formative work identified patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease key attributes of value-based decision making that underpin benefit-risk trade-offs between physical endurance, treatment side effects, care access, and cost. This study illustrates an iterative process for eliciting and refining a comprehensive list of value elements, resulting in a subgroup of elements important to a specific patient population.

Treatment Preferences of Patients with Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease: Results from Qualitative Interviews and Focus Groups in the United Kingdom, United States, and Germany

BACKGROUND

A wide range of therapeutic regimens, including single-inhaler triple therapies (SITTs), are now available for the maintenance treatment of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD). Thus, an improved understanding of patient preferences may be valuable to inform physician prescribing decisions. This study was performed to assess the factors considered by patients when making decisions about their COPD treatments using qualitative techniques.

METHODS

In the United Kingdom, United States and Germany, individual qualitative interviews (n=10 per country) and focus groups (1 per country; [United Kingdom, n=4; United States, n=6; Germany, n=6 participants]) were conducted. Interviews and focus groups were semi‑structured, lasting approximately 60 minutes, and focused on treatment preferences. Data were analyzed according to emerging themes identified from the interviews; qualitative thematic analysis of the data was performed using specialist software.

RESULTS

In interviews and focus groups, efficacy, ease of use, and lower frequency of use were favored attributes for current treatment, while side effects, medication taste, and more complex administration techniques were key dislikes. In interviews, most participants would consider a switch in medication, mainly for improved efficacy, but also to reduce medication frequency or following physician advice. Overall, efficacy and ease of use were the 2 most important attributes reported in interviews in all 3 countries.

CONCLUSION

Patients with COPD have preferences for certain attributes of medication, highlighting the multi-faceted nature of treatment effectiveness and the importance of the delivery device.These results were subsequently used to inform the design of a discrete choice experiment.

Choosing the right inhaler for the right patient: Considerations for effective management of patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease or asthma

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE

Effective management of chronic respiratory disorders such as chronic obstructive pulmonary disease and asthma necessitates that patients inhale their medication. However, lack of detailed guidelines on the technological and mechanical functions of inhalers limits the ability of health care providers (HCPs) to personalize inhaler choice for patients. Numerous types of inhalers are currently available which offer their own distinct advantages and disadvantages. Independent of the drug class, the choice of inhaler may be influenced by many factors (e.g., inhaler attributes and the efficiency with which it delivers the medication, patient characteristics and preferences, dosing regimen, clinical setting, and support available for both patients and HCPs). This article attempts to summarize the inhalation technology and factors influencing inhaler choice and use and to provide an approach for matching the right inhaler to the right patient.

CONCLUSIONS

Identifying factors related to inhaler choice is critical to ensuring adherence to treatment and patients' ability to use their inhaler correctly.

IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE

This review will help HCPs engage their patients in decision-making for inhaler choice and facilitate selection of the correct inhaler for each patient (i.e., one that they will use).

Maintenance inhaler therapy preferences of patients with asthma or chronic obstructive pulmonary disease: a discrete choice experiment

BACKGROUND

A variety of maintenance inhaler therapies are available to treat asthma and COPD. Patient-centric treatment choices require understanding patient preferences for the alternative therapies.

METHODS

A self-completed web-based discrete choice experiment was conducted to elicit patient preferences for inhaler device and medication attributes. Selection of attributes was informed by patient focus groups and literature review.

RESULTS

The discrete choice experiment was completed by 810 patients with asthma and 1147 patients with COPD. Patients with asthma most valued decreasing the onset of action from 30 to 5 min, followed by reducing yearly exacerbations from 3 to 1. Patients with COPD most and equally valued decreasing the onset of action from 30 to 5 min and reducing yearly exacerbations from 3 to 1. Both patients with asthma and patients with COPD were willing to accept an additional exacerbation in exchange for a 15 min decrease in onset of action and a longer onset of action in exchange for a lower risk of adverse effects from inhaled corticosteroids. Patients with asthma and COPD valued once-daily over twice-daily dosing, pressurised inhalers over dry powder inhalers and non-capsule priming over single-use capsules, although these attributes were not valued as highly as faster onset of action or reduced exacerbations.

CONCLUSIONS

The most important maintenance inhaler attributes for patients with asthma and COPD were fast onset of symptom relief and a lower rate of exacerbations. Concerns about safety of inhaled corticosteroids and device convenience also affected patient preferences but were less important.

Inhaler devices in asthma and COPD patients - a prospective cross-sectional study on inhaler preferences and error rates

Background

Inhalation therapy is the backbone of asthma and COPD control. However, inhaler adherence and device mishandling continue to be a problem in real life. Some studies have shown that using a patient-preferred inhaler may reduce device handling errors and improve adherence to prescribed chronic inhaler drug therapy. The aim of this study was to compare the preferences for commonly used inhaler devices in Germany in patients with chronic obstructive respiratory disease. We also pursued the question which properties of an inhaler device are particularly important to the user and what effects age, gender and type of disease (asthma or COPD) may have on device preference and handling errors.

Methods

Prospective, open-label cross-sectional study in which 105 patients with asthma (58%) or COPD (42%) participated. Validated checklists were used to objectively assess inhaler technique and errors with 10 different placebo devices. For each device, patients were asked to test the handling, to assess the device properties and to name the device that they would most or least prefer.

Results

Across the 10 placebo inhaler devices tested, patients needed an average of 1.22 attempts to error-free use. The device with the lowest mean number of attempts was the Turbohaler® (1.02), followed by the Nexthaler® (1.04), the Diskus® (1.07) and the Spiromax® (1.10). Patients over 60 years vs. younger age (p = 0.002) and COPD vs. asthma patients (p = 0.016) required more attempts to ensure correct use. 41% of the study participants chose one of the devices they already used as the most preferred inhaler. Overall, 20% opted for the Spiromax®, 15% for the Nexthaler® and 14% for the Turbohaler® or a pMDI. The least preferred device was the Elpenhaler® (0%). From a selection of 7 predefined inhaler attributes, patients stated easy handling as the most important for them. This was followed by short inhalation time and low inhalation resistance.

Conclusions

Patient preference may vary between inhaler devices. The lowest number of attempts to error-free use was reported for the Turbohaler® and the Nexthaler®. The Spiromax® and the Nexthaler® achieved the best overall ratings and were the devices most preferred by patients.

Reporting Quality of Marginal Rates of Substitution in Discrete Choice Experiments That Elicit Patient Preferences

BACKGROUND

Discrete choice experiments (DCEs) are commonly used to elicit patient preferences as marginal rates of substitution (MRSs) between treatment or health service attributes. Because these studies are increasing in importance, it is vital that uncertainty around MRS estimates is reported.

OBJECTIVE

To review recently published DCE studies that elicit patient preferences in relation to MRS reporting and to explore the accuracy of using other reported information to estimate the uncertainty of the MRSs.

METHODS

A systematic literature review of DCEs conducted with patients between 2014 and July 2019 was performed. The number of studies reporting coefficients, MRSs, standard errors (SEs), and confidence intervals was recorded. If all information was reported, studies were included in an analysis to determine the impact of estimating the SEs of MRSs using coefficients and assuming zero covariance, to determine the impact of this assumption.

RESULTS

Two hundred and thirty-two patient DCEs were identified in the review; 34.1% (n = 79) reported 1 or more MRS and, of these, only 62.0% (n = 49) provided an estimate of the uncertainty. Of these studies, 16 contained enough information for inclusion in the analysis, providing 116 datapoints. Actual SEs were smaller than estimated SEs in 75.0% of cases (n = 87), and estimated SEs were within 25% of the actual SE in 59.5% of cases (n = 69).

CONCLUSION

Uncertainty of MRS estimates is unreported in a substantial proportion of recently published DCE studies. Estimating the SE of a MRS by solely using the SEs of the utility coefficients is likely to lead to biased estimates of the precision of patient trade-offs.

Incorporating the Environmental Impact into a Budget Impact Analysis: The Example of Adopting RESPIMAT® Re-usable Inhaler

BACKGROUND

RESPIMAT® re-usable enables patients to re-use the inhaler and its availability therefore reduces the number of inhalers and associated wastage.

OBJECTIVE

The objective of this study was to perform an economic evaluation that incorporates the ecological impact of adopting RESPIMAT re-usable into the healthcare system in Germany.

METHODS

Inhaler costs and environmental impact over 5 years in Germany in a scenario with RESPIMAT re-usable compared to a scenario without RESPIMAT re-usable were estimated using a budget impact model. The carbon emissions were derived for each treatment pattern considering the whole life cycle (cradle-to-grave) of the inhaler product. The cost of carbon emissions was estimated using a societal cost per ton of carbon emission.

RESULTS

By introducing RESPIMAT re-usable in Germany, it was estimated that by 2023, the number of inhalers used would have decreased by 5,748,750 compared to a scenario without RESPIMAT re-usable. In addition, this measure would reduce the environmental burden of inhaler use while at the same time reducing medical cost of inhalers.

CONCLUSIONS

Adopting RESPIMAT® re-usable to the national healthcare services may be a cost-saving option, which has the additional benefit of reducing the societal cost of carbon emissions.

Inhaler Devices in a Geriatric Patient Population: A Prospective Cross-Sectional Study on Patient Preferences

PURPOSE

The aim of this study was to examine the perception and preference of geriatric patients for commonly used inhaler devices in Germany.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

This was a prospective, open-label cross-sectional study with inpatient inhaler-naïve geriatric volunteers (age ≥ 70 years). All 106 participants were interviewed and subjected to a geriatric examination for cognitive, motor and fine motor skills before demonstrating the use of nine inhalers in random order. For each device, patients were asked to test the handling, to assess the device properties and to name the device that they would most or least prefer.

RESULTS

The mean age of the patients was 80.8 years. From a selection of 7 predefined general inhaler attributes, ease of use, discrete handling and inhalation resistance were the most important for the geriatric participants. Across all inhaler devices, the volunteers needed an average of 2.47 attempts to error-free use. The device with the lowest mean number of attempts was the Nexthaler^® (1.75; SD ± 0.903), followed by Spiromax^® (1.96; SD ± 0.965) and Genuair^® (2.05; SD ± 1.027). There was a weak to moderate correlation between the number of attempts required to ensure the correct use of these three inhalers and the patient's cognitive and fine motor skills. Fifty-nine patients (56%) chose the Nexthaler as the inhalation device that they would most prefer (p<0.001 vs other devices). This was followed by Spiromax (n=23; 22%) and Genuair (n=12; 11%). The device that was least favored was the Elpenhaler^® (p<0.001 vs other devices).

CONCLUSION

Patient preference and frequency of inhaler handling-errors may vary between inhaler devices. The Nexthaler was the easiest-to-use and most popular device among inhaler-naïve patients.

A Budget Impact Model to Estimate the Environmental Impact of Adopting RESPIMAT® Re-usable in the Nordics and Benelux

Introduction

The healthcare sector contributes 5–8% of the global greenhouse gas emissions. Global and regional organizations and governments have started to design and implement measures to reduce global greenhouse gas emissions in the healthcare sector, e.g. by green public procurement policies and inclusion of ecological considerations in the decision-making process for purchasing and funding of healthcare technologies. The objective of this study was to perform budget impact analysis of adopting RESPIMAT re-usable in the Nordics and Benelux that considered both the traditional healthcare costs as well as the environmental impact.

Methods

Inhaler costs and environmental impact over 5 years in the Nordics and Benelux in a scenario with RESPIMAT re-usable compared to a scenario without RESPIMAT re-usable were estimated using an budget impact model. RESPIMAT re-usable enables patients to re-use the inhaler device and its availability therefore reduces the number of inhalers and associated wastage. The carbon emissions were derived for each treatment pattern considering the whole life cycle (cradle-to-grave) of the inhaler product. The cost of carbon emissions was estimated using a societal cost per ton of carbon emission.

Results

Progressively introducing RESPIMAT re-usable in the Nordics and Benelux was estimated to decrease the number of inhalers used by 2023 by 7,466,621 compared to a scenario without RESPIMAT re-usable, which would result in a reduction of the environmental burden of inhaler use of 4717 tCO₂e and a decrease in societal cost of €205,888.

Conclusions

Adopting RESPIMAT re-usable would lead to a substantial reduction in CO₂ emissions, leading to savings from a societal perspective.

Funding

Boehringer Ingelheim.

Electronic supplementary material

The online version of this article (10.1007/s12325-019-01114-1) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

Determinants and Differences in Satisfaction with the Inhaler Among Patients with Asthma or COPD

BACKGROUND

Satisfaction with the inhaler is an important determinant of treatment adherence in patients with asthma and chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD). However, few studies have compared these 2 groups to identify the factors associated with satisfaction with the inhaler.

OBJECTIVE

To assess and compare satisfaction with the inhaler in patients with asthma or COPD and to determine the variables associated with high inhaler satisfaction.

METHODS

A multicenter, cross-sectional study of 816 patients (406 with asthma and 410 with COPD) was conducted. Satisfaction was assessed with the Feeling of Satisfaction with Inhaler (FSI-10) questionnaire. All participants completed the Test of Adherence to Inhalers and either the Asthma Control Test (ACT) or the COPD Assessment Test (CAT).

RESULTS

Overall, the asthma group was significantly more satisfied with the inhaler (mean [standard deviation] FSI-10 scores: 44.1 [6.5] vs 42.0 [7.7]; P < .001) and more satisfied on most (7 of 10; 70%) items. Patients with asthma were significantly more satisfied with the inhaler regardless of the adherence level or the type of nonadherence pattern. Younger age, good disease control (ACT ≥20 or CAT ≤10), previous inhaler training, and absence of unwitting nonadherence were all independently and significantly associated with high inhaler satisfaction.

CONCLUSIONS

Age, disease control, and training in inhalation technique all play a more significant role than the specific diagnosis in explaining satisfaction with the device in patients with asthma and COPD. These findings underscore the need to provide better training and more active monitoring of the inhalation technique to improve patient satisfaction, treatment adherence, and clinical outcomes.

Genuair®/Pressair® Inhaler in COPD: The Patient Perspective

This article reviews the latest data pertaining to the Genuair^®/Pressair^® device, a breath-actuated, multi-dose dry-powder inhaler with a two-step inhalation process, which is marketed for the delivery of aclidinium alone or in combination with formoterol for long-term maintenance bronchodilation treatment in chronic obstructive pulmonary disease. It contains multiple feedback mechanisms to guide effective use, and safety features to avoid double-dosing or attempted use when empty. In addition to describing the design of Genuair^®, the article will provide an update on inhaler operability and performance, focusing on recent patient preference and satisfaction studies. The evidence suggests that patients find Genuair^® easy to use, with patients requiring less training and making fewer inhalation errors than with other inhalers, and that patient satisfaction with the device is high.

Maintenance inhaler preference, attribute importance, and satisfaction in prescribing physicians and patients with asthma, COPD, or asthma-COPD overlap syndrome consulting for routine care

Background

In respiratory disorders, patient- and physician-perceived satisfaction with the maintenance inhaler device is an important factor driving treatment compliance and outcomes. We examine inhaler preferences in asthma and COPD from patient and physician perspectives, particularly focusing on the relative importance of individual device attributes and patient characteristics guiding inhaler choice.

Materials and methods

Real-world data from >7,300 patients with asthma, COPD, or asthma–COPD overlap syndrome (ACOS) consulting for routine care were derived from respiratory Disease Specific Programs conducted in Europe, USA, Japan, and China. Outcome variables included current pattern of inhaled maintenance therapy and device type, physician preference, patient-reported device attribute importance, and satisfaction.

Results

The most commonly prescribed inhalers for maintenance therapy of asthma, COPD, and ACOS were dry powder inhalers (62.8%–88.5% of patients) and pressurized metered dose inhalers (18.9%–35.3% of patients). One-third of physicians stated no preference for maintenance device when prescribing treatment, and less than one-third of patients reported being “extremely satisfied” with any attribute of their device. Instructions being “simple and easy to follow” was the inhaler attribute most commonly selected as important. For approximately one-third of patients across all groups, “ease of use/suitability of inhaler device” was a reason for the prescribing decision, as stated by the physician. Device characteristics were more likely to impact the prescribing decision in older patients (in asthma and COPD; P<0.01) and those with worse disease severity (in COPD; P<0.001).

Conclusion

A relatively high proportion of physicians had no preference for inhaler type across asthma, COPD, and ACOS. Simplicity of use was the most important inhaler attribute from a patient’s perspective. Physicians appeared to place most importance on ease of use and device suitability when selecting inhalers for older patients and those with more severe disease, particularly in COPD.