Acceptability and preference of three inhalation devices assessed by the Handling Questionnaire in asthma and COPD patients

Recalibrating Perceptions and Attitudes Toward Nebulizers versus Inhalers for Maintenance Therapy in COPD: Past as Prologue

Aerosol therapy administered via handheld inhaler or nebulizer device has long been standard for the treatment of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD), both for maintenance therapy and for management of acute exacerbations. Of the 2 options for drug delivery, inhaler devices are the most widely used for ambulatory patients with COPD as they are small, portable, and convenient and offer an array of medication options. They are, however, prone to suboptimal inhalation technique and use errors, which decrease the amount of medication delivered, compromise efficacy, and adversely affect clinical outcomes. Nebulizers are less often employed for aerosol delivery than inhalers, particularly in the home environment. Considered bulky and expensive, nebulizers have historically had limited medication options compared with inhalers. Nonetheless, nebulizers may be preferred over inhalers in specific patient populations, such as in patients with poor lung function, lack of hand-breath coordination, or cognitive impairment. Furthermore, technological advances and development of new nebulizer-compatible medications are shifting the benefit equation for nebulizers versus inhalers in a way that merits reconsideration of the role of nebulizers in the maintenance treatment of COPD. Using the available literature, this state-of-the-art review critically evaluates the benefits and limitations of aerosol therapy delivery via inhaler or nebulizer for patients with COPD; describes the factors that may influence the benefit equation, including current advances in nebulizer technology and future developments; and provides insights on implementation of nebulizer therapy in clinical practice.

Advances in soft mist inhalers

INTRODUCTION

Soft mist inhalers (SMIs) are propellant-free inhalers that utilize mechanical power to deliver single or multiple doses of inhalable drug aerosols in the form of a slow mist to patients. Compared to traditional inhalers, SMIs allow for a longer and slower release of aerosol with a smaller ballistic effect, leading to a limited loss in the oropharyngeal area, whilst requiring little coordination of actuation and inhalation by patients. Currently, the Respimat® is the only commercially available SMI, with several others in different stages of preclinical and clinical development.

AREAS COVERED

The primary purpose of this review is to critically assess recent advances in SMIs for the delivery of inhaled therapeutics.

EXPERT OPINION

Advanced particle formulations, such as nanoparticles which target specific areas of the lung, Biologics, such as vaccines, proteins, and antibodies (which are sensitive to aerosolization), are expected to be generally delivered by SMIs. Furthermore, repurposed drugs are expected to constitute a large share of future formulations to be delivered by SMIs. SMIs can also be employed for the delivery of formulations that target systemic diseases. Finally, digitalizing SMIs would improve patient adherence and provide clinicians with fundamental insights into patients' treatment progress.

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

Switching COPD patients from the disposable to the new reusable Respimat soft mist inhaler: a real-world study from Switzerland

OBJECTIVE

The aims of the survey were to assess first experiences of Swiss COPD patients switching from the disposable to the new reusable Respimat inhaler, and to evaluate physicians´ and patients´ views of the new training material.

METHODS

Patients with a confirmed diagnosis of COPD using a disposable Respimat inhaler for at least three months were included. Patients´ demographics, COPD stage, current treatment, and comorbidities relevant for the handling of the device were assessed. Further, patients were trained on the reusable Respimat by placebo inhaler, patient brochure, video cards/demo films and SMS reminder service. After at least one cartridge change, patients gave comprehensive feedback on their satisfaction with the reusable Respimat and physicians evaluated the need for re-training.

RESULTS

235 patients participated in the survey. Of these, 37% suffered from comorbidities restricting the handling of the Respimat. 216 (92%) patients had a better overall satisfaction with the reusable than with the disposable Respimat. Dose counter (86%), monthly preparation (81%) and daily handling (77%) were also assessed as better by most of the patients. In 80% of cases, the user ability was stated as better than for the disposable Respimat. Less than 15% of the patients required further training. Placebo inhaler was the mostly preferred training material by both, physicians (in 86% of the patients) and patients (75%). In patients with comorbidities affecting inhaler handling, overall satisfaction was also better in 86% of the patients.

CONCLUSION

The majority of patients were satisfied with the new reusable Respimat device and proper handling could be attained using the provided training material, even in patients with restricting comorbidities.

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.

Inhaler device feature preferences among patients with obstructive lung diseases: A systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Bronchodilators administered through inhalation devices are the mainstay treatment for patients with obstructive lung diseases. Patients do not view devices as interchangeable. This systematic review and meta-analysis examined device feature preferences among patients with obstructive lung diseases treated with handheld inhalers.

STUDY APPRAISAL AND SYNTHESIS METHODS

PubMed, EMBASE, PsycINFO, Cochrane, and Google Scholar were searched to identify publications between 2010 and 2019 that met the following criteria:A manual search extended the study period from 2001 to 2019. Random-effects models were used to generate pooled mean effect sizes and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) for preferred device features. Heterogeneity was measured by the I statistic.

RESULTS

Nineteen studies (n = 11,256) were included in this meta-analysis. Average age ranged from 50.4 to 74.3 years. The majority of patients were male (57%) and had chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (92%).Patients preferred the following device features: CONCLUSIONS AND IMPLICATIONS OF KEY FINDINGS:: Adults with obstructive lung diseases preferred small inhaler devices that were portable, durable, perceived as easy to use, and fast in medication administration. Healthcare providers should give due consideration to the patient's device feature preferences when developing a treatment plan that prescribes an inhalation device.

The Respimat® Soft Mist Inhaler: Implications of Drug Delivery Characteristics for Patients

Successful treatment for respiratory diseases relies on effective delivery of medication to the lungs using an inhalation device. Different inhalers have distinct characteristics affecting drug administration and patient adherence, which can impact clinical outcomes. We report on the development of the Respimat^® soft mist inhaler (SMI) and compare key attributes with metered-dose inhalers (MDIs) and dry powder inhalers (DPIs). The Respimat SMI, a pocket-sized device generating a single-breath, inhalable aerosol, was designed to enhance drug delivery to the lungs, reduce the requirements for patient coordination and inspiratory effort, and improve the patients’ experience and ease of use. The drug deposition profile with Respimat SMI is favorable compared with MDIs and DPIs, with higher drug deposition to the lung and peripheral airways. The slow velocity and long spray duration of the Respimat SMI aerosol also aid patient coordination. Clinical equivalence has been demonstrated for maintenance treatment of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease using once-daily tiotropium between Respimat SMI (5 µg) and HandiHaler DPI (18 µg). In comparative studies, patients preferred Respimat SMI to MDIs and DPIs; they reported that Respimat SMI was easy to use and felt the inhaled dose was delivered. The Respimat SMI, designed to generate a slow-moving and fine mist, is easy to use and effectively delivers drug treatment to the lungs. The patient-centered design of Respimat SMI improved patient satisfaction, and may help to promote long-term adherence and improve clinical outcomes with asthma and chronic obstructive pulmonary disease.

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.

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.

Inhaler Devices for Delivery of LABA/LAMA Fixed-Dose Combinations in Patients with COPD

Inhaled fixed-dose combinations (FDCs) of a long-acting β-agonist (LABA) and a long-acting muscarinic antagonist (LAMA) have become the cornerstone for the maintenance treatment of symptomatic COPD patients. In this regard, global COPD treatment guidelines have recognized the importance of inhaler devices as integral contributors to the effectiveness of LABA/LAMA FDCs and recommend regular assessment of inhaler device use by the patients in order to improve long-term clinical outcomes. Optimal disease control is also highly dependent upon patient preferences and adherence to inhaler devices. This review objectively examines and compares the major inhaler devices used to deliver different LABA/LAMA FDCs, discusses the inhaler device characteristics that determine drug deposition in the airways, real-life preference for inhaler devices, and handling of inhaler devices that impact the results of the long-term management of COPD. The introduction of new LABA/LAMA FDCs, new inhaler devices, and more clinical studies have created confusion among physicians in choosing the optimal inhaled therapy for COPD patients; in this context, this review attempts to provide an evidence-based framework for informed decision-making with a particular focus on the inhaler devices.Funding. The preparation of this manuscript was funded by Novartis Pharma AG.

Single Inhaler LABA/LAMA for COPD

Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) is a common disabling disease characterized by progressive airflow obstruction. Great efforts were spent in the development of drugs able to improve symptoms, quality of life, reduce exacerbations, hospitalizations and the frequency of death of patients with COPD. The cornerstones of treatment are bronchodilator drugs of two different classes: beta agonists and muscarinic antagonists. Currently the Global initiative for COPD suggests the use of long acting beta agonists (LABAs) and long acting muscarinic antagonists (LAMAs) in combination for the majority of COPD patients, thus great interest is associated with the developing of LAMA/LABA fixed combination in the maintenance treatment of stable COPD. Many LAMA/LABA fixed dose combinations have been licensed in different countries and the clinical use of these drugs stimulated the performance of many clinical trials. The purpose of this review is a complete criticism of pharmacological and clinical aspects related to the use of LAMA/LABA single inhalers for the maintenance treatment of stable COPD, with particular mention to the most debated topics and future prospects in the field.

Choosing the right inhaler for your asthma or COPD patient

Appropriate selection and correct use of inhalation devices is an integral component in the management of asthma and chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD). It is well known that there are many challenges with the use of inhalers, and no one device suits all patients. Challenges can range from difficulties related to lung disease severity and pulmonary function to physical considerations, including manual dexterity and comorbidities such as arthritis. In terms of device selection and adherence, patient engagement and satisfaction are also important factors to consider. Furthermore, problems with inhaler use can be most evident in children and older patients. Here, we discuss aspects for consideration with commonly used devices, including nebulizers, pressurized metered-dose inhalers, dry powder inhalers, and the soft mist inhaler. As each inhaler offers varying technical properties, a tailored and personalized approach to the selection of the most appropriate device for the patient is highly recommended in order to increase the likelihood of achieving improved disease outcomes and enhance persistence with device adherence. Importantly, education and support is crucial, not only to enable patients to recognize the need for optimal disease management, but also to help them develop good inhaler technique. In addition, health care professionals should also aim to increase their knowledge of the devices they prescribe, and develop systems to ensure that they offer comprehensive support to patients in clinical practice. Considering these aspects, this review discusses potential strategies to help address the challenges of inhaler use in asthma and COPD.

Improving usability and maintaining performance: human-factor and aerosol-performance studies evaluating the new reusable Respimat inhaler

PURPOSE

The Respimat is a handheld, propellant-free, soft-mist inhaler. Observations by patients and physicians prompted development of an improved second-generation Respimat inhaler. Human-factor studies assessing the usability of the new inhaler and in vitro assessment of aerosol performance are important to demonstrate functionality of the updated inhaler.

METHODS

Studies were performed to assess any possible impact of the reusable Respimat inhaler design on aerosol performance (delivered dose [DD] and fine-particle dose [FPD]) and iteratively assess and improve usability of the new design. The tiotropium-olodaterol inhalation solution for Respimat was used as a model. The DD and FPD of the reusable Respimat inhaler (across multiple cartridges) and the disposable Respimat inhaler were determined by laser diffraction and with an alternative Andersen cascade impactor. Usability was measured across three studies involving health care professionals and patients with diagnoses of COPD, asthma, or combined disease (with and without experience with the Respimat inhaler). These studies measured performance of handling tasks and collected subjective feedback directly related to the inhaler's new or altered features, which fed into optimization of the inhaler.

RESULTS

DDs of tiotropium and olodaterol were stable up to 15 cartridges and consistently within the upper and lower limits of the disposable Respimat inhaler. The FPD was also found to be batch-consistent over the cartridges and comparable with the reference. The usability of the reusable Respimat inhaler compared with the disposable inhaler was improved in terms of assembly and daily use. Cartridge exchange was rated as intuitive and easy to very easy.

CONCLUSION

The new reusable Respimat is a medical inhaler developed with enhanced features that meets health care professionals' and patients' needs. Drug delivery across multiple cartridges is not affected by the design. Compared with the original disposable inhaler, the usability of the reusable inhaler has been improved, and cartridge exchange was rated as easy to perform. The reusable Respimat provides greater convenience for patients vs the disposable inhaler, with reduced environmental impact.

Aclidinium bromide in fixed-dose combination with formoterol fumarate in the management of COPD: an update on the evidence base

Aclidinium bromide/formoterol fumarate (AB/FF) 400/12 µg is a twice-daily long-acting muscarinic receptor antagonist and long-acting β2 agonist (LAMA/LABA) dual-bronchodilator maintenance therapy used to relieve symptoms and reduce future risk of exacerbations in adults with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD). To date, there have been several clinical studies and post hoc analyses of AB/FF, assessing treatment outcomes in patients with moderate-to-severe COPD. These studies have looked at a range of outcomes, including lung function parameters, patient-reported symptom scores, quality-of-life measures assessing impaired health and perceived well-being, and the frequency, duration, and severity of exacerbations. In light of the major 2017 revision to the Global initiative for chronic Obstructive Lung Disease (GOLD) recommendations, and the subsequent updates, we present an update on the latest evidence supporting the efficacy and safety of AB/FF. This review discusses the clinical relevance of the improvements in lung function, symptoms, quality of life, and exacerbations in patients with COPD reported in the phase III and IV trials of AB/FF. Given the current concerns over unnecessary inhaled corticosteroid (ICS) use in COPD, we also touch briefly on the use of blood eosinophils as a biomarker for identifying those patients with COPD already using LAMA/LABA therapy for whom the addition of ICS might be of benefit.

Evaluation of the preference, satisfaction and correct use of Breezhaler® and Respimat® inhalers in patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease - INHALATOR study

The INHALATOR study was a randomized, multicentre, open label, two-period of 7 days each, crossover study, with 7 days of washout in-between, aiming to evaluate the correct use, satisfaction and preference between Breezhaler^® and Respimat^® devices in patients under daily use of open Spiriva^® or open Onbrize^®, as monotherapy for treatment of mild or moderate COPD. Patients aged ≥40 years with a smoking history of at least 10 pack-year were included in the study. Primary endpoint was the rate of correct use of each device at the first day of treatment after reading the drug leaflet information and was evaluated under the supervision of a trained evaluator. At the end of each treatment phase, the inhaler use was re-evaluated and a satisfaction questionnaire was completed. The patients' preference for the inhaler devices was assessed at the end of the study. After exclusions due to screening failures, 140 patients were randomized: 136 received at least one dose of Breezhaler^® and 135 of Respimat^®. At treatment start, the rate of correct inhaler use was 40.4% (95%CI: 32.2%-48.7%) for Breezhaler^® and 36.3% (95%CI: 28.2%-44.4%) for Respimat^® (p = 0.451). After 7 days, the rates were 68.9% (95%CI: 61.1%-76.7%) and 60.4% (95%CI: 52.2%-68.7%), respectively (p = 0.077). According to the Feeling of Satisfaction with Inhaler Questionnaire - FSI 10 patients were more satisfied using Breezhaler^® than Respimat^® and 57.1% preferred using Breezhaler^® (p = 0.001) while 30.1% preferred Respimat^® (p < 0.001).

The Nurse Practitioners' Perspective on Inhaler Education in Asthma and Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease

Asthma and chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) can be debilitating conditions adversely affecting a person's quality of life. Effective treatments are available, but common errors in the use of inhalers compound the issue of disease control. The beliefs and concerns of a patient can also have an impact on treatment adherence, the consequences of which are diminished disease control and the occurrence of exacerbations. Once a treatment has been prescribed, it is often nurses who manage the patient long-term, and they may even be the main care provider. This puts nurses in a key position to monitor inhaler technique, communicate with the patient to improve adherence, and even suggest alternative treatments if the patient and therapy are incompatible. This review examines the central role that nurses play in disease management and emphasizes how effective inhaler education can make a difference to disease control. Good communication between the nurse and patient is vital if this is to be achieved. Recent updates to asthma and COPD guidelines are reviewed, and key resources available to help manage patients are highlighted. Finally, with regard to inhaler education, we reconsider the nursing keystones of "Know it," "Show it," "Teach it," and "Review it."

Inhaler usability of a pressurized metered dose inhaler and a soft mist inhaler in patients with COPD: A simulated-use study

The objective of this study was to evaluate task performance and handling errors with soft mist inhalers (SMIs) or pressurized metered-dose inhalers (pMDIs) among patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) experienced with, but not recently trained in, using these devices. This exploratory, noninterventional, simulated-use study (D5970R00004) assessed handling/usability of SMIs and pMDIs in inhaler-experienced patients with COPD (40–78 years; diagnosis ≥6 months). Patients received a device and instruction-for-use leaflet but no training and were recorded while performing tasks required for checking the device, priming, and dosing. Errors that could substantially affect the lung-delivered dose were considered critical. Sixteen of 61 patients (52% male) had used SMIs and 55 had used pMDIs. Thirty-one patients received an SMI and 30 a pMDI. Overall, 79% made ≥5 performance errors (SMI 94%; pMDI 63%) and 49% made ≥5 critical errors (SMI 68%; pMDI 30%). All patients made ≥1 error; three (all pMDI) made no critical errors. Regardless of the device used and previous inhaler experience, patient-centered training, education, and continuous retraining on correct inhaler use should be key aspects of routine patient care in COPD.

Satisfaction, preference and error occurrence of three dry powder inhalers as assessed by a cohort naïve to inhaler operation

Background

Inhaled medication is central to the treatment of COPD. Various types of inhaler devices, which directly deliver medication to the lung, have been developed. However, patients often exhibit incorrect techniques of inhaler usage. Effectiveness of therapy may be affected by the ease of device usage, size, convenience of use, durability, clarity of instructions and device preferences of patients. This study compares the satisfaction and preference, as well as error occurrence, with the use of Genuair^®, Ellipta™ and Breezhaler™ by healthy subjects in Hong Kong.

Subjects and methods

One hundred and thirty healthy Hong Kong Chinese subjects aged ≥40 years without a previous diagnosis of COPD and asthma and with no experience of using dry powder inhalers (DPIs) were recruited. Subjects learned to use the three DPIs by initially reading the instructions and then observing a demonstration with verbal explanation. The number of errors committed was evaluated. Subjects also completed a questionnaire to indicate their satisfaction and preference.

Results

The satisfaction score of comfort for Breezhaler was significantly higher than that for Ellipta (p≤0.05), while the satisfaction score on confidence to have inhaled the entire dose was highest for Genuair compared with Ellipta (p≤0.0001) or Breezhaler (p≤0.05). The overall satisfaction score was significantly higher for Genuair than Ellipta (p≤0.05) or Breezhaler (p≤0.01). After reading the instructions, the highest number of subjects committing one or more critical errors was with Breezhaler (97) followed by Genuair (70) and then Ellipta (33). Demonstration reduced the number of critical errors made by subjects for each DPI to one third or lower.

Conclusion

Breezhaler seemed to be more comfortable and easy to carry, but users made less critical errors when using Ellipta after reading the instructions only. Genuair provided the clearest indication of correct dose preparation and inhalation.

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.

Inhalation device options for the management of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease

Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) is characterized by chronic respiratory symptoms and airflow limitation, resulting from abnormalities in the airway and/or damage to the alveoli. Primary care physicians manage the healthcare of a large proportion of patients with COPD. In addition to determining the most appropriate medication regimen, which usually includes inhaled bronchodilators with or without inhaled corticosteroids, physicians are charged with optimizing inhalation device selection to facilitate effective drug delivery and patient adherence. The large variety of inhalation devices currently available present numerous challenges for physicians that include: (1) gaining knowledge of and proficiency with operating different device classes; (2) identifying the most appropriate inhalation device for the patient; and (3) providing the necessary education and training for patients on device use. This review provides an overview of the inhalation device types currently available in the United States for delivery of COPD medications, including information on their successful operation and respective advantages and disadvantages, factors to consider in matching a device to an individual patient, the need for device training for patients and physicians, and guidance for improving treatment adherence. Finally, the review will discuss established and novel tools and technology that may aid physicians in improving education and promoting better adherence to therapy.

A Network Meta-Analysis of Long-Acting Muscarinic Antagonist (LAMA) and Long-Acting β2-Agonist (LABA) Combinations in COPD

INTRODUCTION

Comparative data on the efficacies of long-acting muscarinic antagonist (LAMA) and long-acting β2-agonist (LABA) combinations for the treatment of moderate-to-very-severe chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) are limited. The aim of this Bayesian network meta-analysis (NMA) is to assess the relative efficacies of available open combinations (delivered via separate inhalers) and fixed-dose combinations (FDCs, delivered via a single inhaler).

METHODS

We conducted a systematic literature review with the aim of identifying randomized controlled trials (RCTs) of ≥8-week duration in adults aged ≥40 years with COPD that compared LAMA + LABA combinations with each other, with tiotropium (TIO), or with placebo. Data on changes from baseline in trough forced expiratory volume in 1 s (FEV1) and on St George's Respiratory Questionnaire (SGRQ) total score, the Transition Dyspnea Index (TDI) focal score, and rescue medication use at 12 and 24 weeks were extracted from these RCTs and analyzed using a NMA in a Bayesian framework.

RESULTS

Data from 44 RCTs were included in the NMA. All FDCs showed improvements relative to placebo in terms of trough FEV1, SGRQ total score, and TDI focal score above clinically relevant thresholds, with the exception of TIO/olodaterol and aclidinium/formoterol, both of which failed to show clinically relevant improvements in SGRQ score at 24 weeks. All FDCs demonstrated reduced rescue medication use versus placebo. Open combinations demonstrated improved efficacy in all outcomes versus placebo, but these improvements did not consistently exceed clinically relevant thresholds for SGRQ and TDI scores. All once-daily FDCs showed improved efficacy versus TIO, but improvements were less consistently observed versus TIO with open dual combinations and combinations containing formoterol or salmeterol administered twice daily. Relative probabilities of improvement between FDCs highlighted potential between-class differences for trough FEV1 but suggested little potential for differences in patient-reported outcomes.

CONCLUSION

LAMA + LABA combinations generally showed improved outcomes versus placebo and TIO. FDCs appeared to perform better than open dual combinations. A potential effectiveness gradient was observed between FDCs for objectively assessed functional outcomes, although further prospective trials are required to confirm these findings.

FUNDING

GSK.

Optimising inhaler technique in chronic obstructive pulmonary disease: a complex issue

Inhaled therapies play a central role in the management of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD); however, studies indicate that many patients do not use their inhaled medication as directed, resulting in decreased medication delivery and suboptimal disease control. Key factors that should be considered when evaluating whether patients are achieving optimal outcomes with inhaled therapies are: if patients are using a correct inhalation technique; if patients have adequate dexterity to use the prescribed inhaler; if patients have sufficient inspiratory flow rate to achieve adequate lung deposition (for dry powder inhalers); and if the inhaler is accepted by the patient. There are many different types of dry powder inhalers available for COPD medications and their specific features can affect ease of use and suitability and acceptability for individual patients and patients' preferences.

Patient Focus and Regulatory Considerations for Inhalation Device Design: Report from the 2015 IPAC-RS/ISAM Workshop

This article reports on discussions at the 2015 workshop cosponsored by the International Pharmaceutical Aerosol Consortium on Regulation and Science (IPAC-RS) and the International Society for Aerosols in Medicine (ISAM), entitled "Regulatory and Patient Considerations for Inhalation Device Design, Development and Use." Key topics addressed at the workshop and presented here include patient-focused device design for orally inhaled products (OIPs), instructions for use (IFU), human factors, regulatory considerations in the United States and Europe, development of generic inhalers, quality-by-design, and change management of OIP devices. Workshop participants also identified several areas for further consideration and emphasized the need for increased focus on the patient to create therapeutic products (inclusive of device design, IFU, education, training) that support adherence with an individual patient's treatment regimen. Advances in patient-centric product development will require engagement and collaboration by industry, regulators, patients, physicians, and other stakeholders. The article includes summaries of presented talks as well as of panel and audience discussions.

Need of education for dry powder inhaler storage and retention - a patient-reported survey

BACKGROUND

Dry powder inhalers (DPIs) are the most commonly used devices in asthma treatment in the Nordic countries. As new DPIs become available, patients are likely to be exposed to more than one type of device, with variable optimal handling. The aim was to examine real life storage and retention of multidose DPIs in patients with asthma.

METHODS

This patient-reported survey on real life storage and retention of DPIs included asthma patients using multidose DPIs. Basic patient characteristics, information on inhaler use and storage, check of expiry date, and concurrent inhaler use was examined using an on line questionnaire.

RESULTS

A total of 738 patients were included with a median age of 41 years, out of which 83 % were women. Sixty-three per cent reported storage conditions pre-defined as risk locations for their maintenance inhaler and 38 % of the responding patients had more than one maintenance inhaler in use at the same time. Two thirds of the study population checked inhaler expiry date less than monthly or not at all. Use after expiry date was frequently reported. Two thirds of the patients had not received information on DPI storage, either from their doctor and/or nurse or at the pharmacy.

CONCLUSIONS

This patient reported survey indicates that two thirds of the patients store their inhaler devices in suboptimal conditions, and only a minority had received instruction regarding inhaler handling. Non awareness of inhalers' expiry dates and use of more than one maintenance inhaler simultaneously was common. As inhaler mishandling may impact device functionality, improved communication and patient education is needed.

The economic impact of educational training assessed by the Handling Questionnaire with three inhalation devices in asthma and Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease patients

Background

The usability of inhalation devices depends on several factors, eg, the drug to inhale, device handling, and patients’ training. Usability is then presumed to have economic consequences.

Aim

To assess and compare the cost of patients’ training for proper usability of Breezhaler and Genuair (both dry powder inhalers) and Respimat (a soft mist inhaler) in asthma and chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) outpatients.

Methods

The acceptance and handling of the three devices were investigated by means of the Handling Questionnaire. The time spent in specific training for ensuring a proper actuation and the corresponding costs were also calculated. Linear and logistic regressions were used in order to investigate the factors influencing proper handling of the devices. A significance level of P<0.05 was accepted.

Results

According to both the patients’ and the nurse’s judgments, Genuair and Respimat were perceived as the easiest devices to use, while Breezhaler required the highest number of attempts for achieving the first proper actuation (2.6 vs 1.6; P<0.0001). The total training cost per patient (including the nurse’s time for demonstration and that for attending the patients’ maneuvers) was €1.38±€1.21. Breezhaler was found to be the most expensive as the cost per patient was €2.35±€1.26, which was three to four times higher than that of Genuair and Respimat (both devices involved a cost of <€1 per patient, with negligible differences between each other). Asthma and COPD patients showed a similar trend, with better outcomes reported for asthma patients probably due to lower age.

Conclusion

Substantial differences were found to exist in patients’ acceptability and handling of the three devices. The economic impact of specific training was also different and strictly related to the comprehension of the procedure for actuation of each device. Respimat as a soft mist inhaler and Genuair as an metered-dose inhaler proved to be the most convenient in economic terms also.