Critical Error Frequency and the Impact of Training with Inhalers Commonly used for Maintenance Treatment in Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease

Characteristics of Users and New Initiators of Single- and Multiple-Inhaler Triple Therapy for Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease in Germany

Purpose

To assess patient characteristics of users and new initiators of triple therapy for chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) in Germany.

Patients and Methods

Retrospective cohort study of patients with COPD and ≥1 prescription for single-inhaler triple therapy (SITT; fluticasone furoate/umeclidinium/vilanterol [FF/UMEC/VI] or beclomethasone dipropionate/glycopyrronium bromide/formoterol [BDP/GLY/FOR]) or multiple-inhaler triple therapy (MITT), using data from the AOK PLUS German sickness fund (1 January 2015-31 December 2019). The index date was the first date of prescription for FF/UMEC/VI or BDP/GLY/FOR (SITT users), or the first date of overlap of inhaled corticosteroid, long-acting β2-agonist, and long-acting muscarinic antagonist (MITT users). Two cohorts were defined: the prevalent cohort included all identified triple therapy users; the incident cohort included patients newly initiating triple therapy for the first time (no prior use of MITT or SITT in the last 2 years). Patient characteristics and treatment patterns were assessed on the index date and during the 24-month pre-index period.

Results

In total, 18,630 patients were identified as prevalent triple therapy users (MITT: 17,945; FF/UMEC/VI: 700; BDP/GLY/FOR: 908; non-mutually exclusive) and 2932 patients were identified as incident triple therapy initiators (MITT: 2246; FF/UMEC/VI: 311; BDP/GLY/FOR: 395; non-mutually exclusive). For both the prevalent and incident cohorts, more than two-thirds of patients experienced ≥1 moderate/severe exacerbation in the preceding 24 months; in both cohorts more BDP/GLY/FOR users experienced ≥1 moderate/severe exacerbation, compared with FF/UMEC/VI and MITT users. Overall, 97.9% of prevalent triple therapy users and 86.4% of incident triple therapy initiators received maintenance treatment in the 24-month pre-index period.

Conclusion

In a real-world setting in Germany, triple therapy was most frequently used after maintenance therapy in patients with recent exacerbations, in line with current treatment recommendations.

Clinical Management of COPD in the Real World: Can Studies Reveal Errors in Management and Pathways to Improve Patient Care?

Real world data comprise information on health care that is derived from multiple sources outside typical clinical research settings. This review focuses on what real world evidence tells us about problems with the diagnosis of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD), problems with the initial and follow-up pharmacological and non-pharmacological management, problems with the management of exacerbations and problems with palliative care. Data from real world studies show errors in the management of COPD with delays to diagnosis, lack of confirmation of the diagnosis with spirometry, lack of holistic assessment, lack of attention to smoking cessation, variable adherence to management guidelines, delayed implementation of appropriate interventions, under-recognition of patients at higher risk of adverse outcomes, high hospitalisation rates for exacerbations and poor implementation of palliative care. Understanding that these problems exist and considering how and why they occur is fundamental to developing solutions to improve the diagnosis and management of patients with COPD.

In Vitro Drug Delivery of a Fixed-Dose Combination of Fluticasone Furoate/Umeclidinium/Vilanterol from a Dry Powder Inhaler

Background: Dry powder inhalers (DPIs) require patients to impart sufficient energy through inhalation to ensure adequate dose emission, medication deaggregation, and resultant particle sizes suitable for lung deposition. There is an ongoing debate regarding the level of inspiratory effort, and therefore inspiratory flow rate, needed for optimal dose delivery from DPIs. Materials and Methods: The delivered dose (DD) and fine particle fraction (FPF) for each component of fluticasone furoate/umeclidinium/vilanterol (FF/UMEC/VI) 100/62.5/25 μg and FF/UMEC/VI 200/62.5/25 μg ELLIPTA DPIs were assessed at flow rates of 30, 60, and 90 L/min. Electronic lung (eLung) (eLung; an electronic breathing simulator) assessments were conducted to replicate inhalation profiles representing a wide range of inhalation parameters and inhaled volumes achieved by patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) or asthma of all severity levels. Timing and duration of dose emission were assessed using a particle detector located at the entrance of an anatomical throat cast attached to the eLung. Results: During DD assessment, a mean of >80% of the nominal blister content (nbc) was emitted from the ELLIPTA DPI at all flow rates. In Next Generation Impactor assessments, the observed mean DD across flow rates for FF/UMEC/VI 100/62.5/25 μg ranged from 85.9% to 97.0% of nbc and 84.0% to 93.5% for FF/UMEC/VI 200/62.5/25 μg. In eLung assessments, 82.8% to 95.5% of nbc was delivered across the PIF range, 43.5 to 129.9 L/min (COPD), and 85.1% to 92.3% across the PIF range, 67.4 to 129.9 L/min (asthma). The FPF (mass <5 μm; % nbc) for each component was comparable across all flow rates and inhalation profiles. Dose emission timings indicated that near-complete dose emission occurs before reaching PIF. Conclusions: Dose delivery assessments across all flow rates and inhalation profiles indicate that patients with all severity levels of COPD or asthma can achieve the required inspiratory effort for efficient delivery of all components of FF/UMEC/VI from the ELLIPTA DPI. Dose emission profiles suggest rapid and near-complete dose delivery from the ELLIPTA DPI before reaching PIF.

The Impact of 52-Week Single Inhaler Device Triple Therapy versus Dual Therapy on the Mortality of COPD Patients: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials

There are more single inhaler device triple therapy available for COPD patients now. However, the effect of long-term triple therapy fixed dose combination (FDC) on mortality remains unclear. This study aimed to evaluate the impact of one-year single inhaler device triple therapy, including long-acting β2-agonists (LABAs), long-acting muscarinic receptor antagonists (LAMAs), and inhaled corticosteroids (ICSs), with dual therapies, comprised of either LABA/LAMA or ICS/LABA, on the mortality of patients with COPD. We searched the PubMed, Cochrane library, Web of Science, Embase databases, and clinical trial registry of clinicaltrials.gov and WHO ICTRP. Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) compared single inhaler device triple and dual therapies for 52 weeks were selected for the meta-analysis. The primary endpoint was all-cause mortality. A total of 6 RCTs were selected for the meta-analysis, including 10,274 patients who received single inhaler device triple therapy (ICS/LABA/LAMA FDC) and 12,395 patients who received ICS/LABA or LABA/LAMA dual therapy. Risk of death was significantly lower in the ICS/LABA/LAMA FDC group compared to the LABA/LAMA group (RR = 0.69, 95% CI = 0.53–0.90, p = 0.007). There was no significant difference in mortality between the ICS/LABA/LAMA FDC and ICS/LABA therapy groups (RR = 0.94, 95% CI = 0.72–1.24, p = 0.66). In addition, patients receiving ICS/LABA/LAMA FDC therapy had less moderate or severe exacerbations compared with the dual therapy groups (RR = 0.76, 95% CI = 0.73–0.80, p < 0.001 for LABA/LAMA; RR = 0.84, 95% CI = 0.78–0.90, p < 0.001 for ICS/LABA). By contrast, the risk of pneumonia in the ICS/LABA/LAMA FDC group was higher than in the LABA/LAMA group (RR = 1.43, 95% CI = 1.21–1.68, p < 0.001). In conclusion, ICS/LABA/LAMA FDC therapy could help improve the clinical outcomes of patients with COPD. However, triple therapy could increase the risk of pneumonia in comparison with LABA/LAMA dual therapy.

Critical inhaler technique errors in Swedish patients with COPD: a cross-sectional study analysing video-recorded demonstrations

A correct use of inhaler devices is essential in chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) treatment. Critical errors were studied by analysing 659 video-recorded demonstrations of inhaler technique from 364 COPD patients using six different inhaler device models. The majority of the included patients used two (55%) or more (20%) device models. Overall, 66% of the patients made ≥1 critical error with at least one device model. The corresponding numbers for patients using 1, 2 and ≥3 device models were 43%, 70% and 86%, respectively. The only factor associated with making ≥1 critical error was simultaneous use of two (adjusted odds ratios (aOR) 3.17, 95% confidence interval (95% CI) 1.81, 5.64) or three or more (aOR 8.97, 95% CI 3.93, 22.1) device models. In conclusion, the proportion of patients making critical errors in inhaler technique was substantial, particularly in those using several different device models. To obtain optimal COPD treatment, it is important to assess a patient's inhaler technique and to minimise the number of inhaler device models.

Inhaler Use Technique in Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease Patients: Errors, Practices and Barriers

Background

Inhaled medications are the main therapeutic treatment of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) and inhaler technique remained important that can increase medication efficacy, reducing dose and side effects. Poor inhaler technique is multi-factorial and the quality of inhaler technique has not previously assessed in Pakistan. We conducted a study to examine a range of competing factors that impact COPD patient willingness, practices, and preference in using their inhalers.

Methods

A cross-sectional of 765 patients with COPD were interviewed and assessed by qualitative questionnaires. Objective inhalation technique and steps assessment was performed; satisfaction, preferences, perception, and practice of different types of inhaler devices were evaluated at a single cross-sectional visit at the study enrolment.

Results

The study included 765 participants of mean age 58.7 years (SD ±7.8); 32% males and 68% females. Almost all of the females were exposed to biomass fuel smoke exposure (99%) and pipe (Huka) smokers 53%, while most male participants were cigarette smokers (92%). Only 6.3% of participants were able to perform correct steps of inhaler use, and few educated patients completed 7-steps. 66% of patients were using dry powder inhalers (DPI) inhaler devices and mostly performed the steps 1, 2, and 4 (98%) correctly, while 44% who were using metered-dose inhalers (MDI) completed only steps 2 and 4 correctly (88%). The majority of participants reported the particular inhaler devices was prescribed by the visiting consultants (54%). Interestingly, they were using two inhalers together (47%) relieving symptoms of dyspnea (83%) and cough (73%). The inhaler use technique was demonstrated to most of the patients by the pharmacy salesman (38.4%), while 15.8% reported that their doctors taught them the inhaler technique. 54.2% reported reason for poor adherence to inhaler use as they understand it might not work lately and 75.2% were not aware of any side effects associated with the regular use of an inhaler.

Conclusions

Poor inhaler technique is highly prevalent and the associated errors did not appear to be dependent on device type. Most of the participants had not receive proper training about the correct use and were not involved in decision making about the choice of inhaler device.