Abbonarsi

Changes in critical inhaler technique errors in inhaled COPD treatment – A one-year follow-up study in Sweden - 11/05/22

Doi : 10.1016/j.rmed.2022.106849 
Johanna Sulku a, b, ⁎ , Christer Janson c, Håkan Melhus d, Björn Ställberg e, Kristina Bröms e, Marieann Högman c, Karin Lisspers e, Andrei Malinovschi f, Elisabet I. Nielsen a
a Department of Pharmacy, Uppsala University, Uppsala, Sweden 
b Centre for Research and Development, Uppsala University/Region Gävleborg, Gävle, Sweden 
c Department of Medical Sciences, Respiratory, Allergy and Sleep Research, Uppsala University, Uppsala, Sweden 
d Department of Medical Sciences, Clinical Pharmacogenomics and Osteoporosis, Uppsala University, Uppsala, Sweden 
e Department of Public Health and Caring Sciences, Family Medicine and Preventive Medicine, Uppsala University, Uppsala, Sweden 
f Department of Medical Sciences, Clinical Physiology, Uppsala University, Uppsala, Sweden 

∗Corresponding author. Department of Pharmacy, Faculty of Pharmacy, Uppsala University, Box 580, SE-751 23, Uppsala, Sweden.Department of PharmacyFaculty of PharmacyUppsala UniversityBox 580UppsalaSE-751 23Sweden

Abstract

Background

Critical inhaler technique errors have been associated with lower treatment efficacy in chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD). We aimed to assess and follow-up critical inhaler technique errors, and to investigate their association with COPD symptoms and exacerbations.

Methods

COPD-diagnosed primary and secondary care outpatients (n = 310) demonstrated inhaler technique with inhaler devices they were currently using. Critical errors in opening, positioning and loading the inhaler device, and exhalation through dry-powder inhalers were assessed and corrected, and the assessment was repeated one year later. COPD Assessment Test, the modified Medical Research Council dyspnoea scale and history of exacerbations were collected at both visits.

Results

The proportion of patients making ≥1 critical inhaler technique error was lower at follow-up in the total population (46% vs 37%, p = 0.01) and among patients with unchanged device models (46% vs 35%, p = 0.02), but not among patients with a new inhaler device model (46% vs 41%, p = 0.56). Not positioning the device correctly was the most common critical error at both visits (30% and 22%). Seventy-four percent of the patients had unchanged COPD treatment from baseline to follow-up. Treatment escalation, de-escalation, and switch was observed in 14%, 11%, and 1% of the patients, respectively. No association was found between critical errors and COPD symptoms or exacerbations.

Conclusions

Assessment and correction of inhaler technique was associated with a decrease in critical inhaler technique errors. This effect was most pronounced in patients using the same device models throughout the follow-up period.

Il testo completo di questo articolo è disponibile in PDF.

Highlights

•
Critical inhaler technique errors were studied in patients with COPD.
•
Assessment and correction of inhaler technique decreased critical errors.
•
Critical errors did not decrease in patients who switched inhaler devices.
•
Not positioning the inhaler correctly was the most prevalent critical error.
•
Symptoms and exacerbations were not associated with critical errors.

Il testo completo di questo articolo è disponibile in PDF.

Keywords : COPD, Inhaler technique, Critical errors, COPD treatment


Mappa


© 2022  The Authors. Pubblicato da Elsevier Masson SAS. Tutti i diritti riservati.
Aggiungere alla mia biblioteca Togliere dalla mia biblioteca Stampare
Esportazione

    Citazioni Export

  • File

  • Contenuto

Vol 197

Articolo 106849- giugno 2022 Ritorno al numero
Articolo precedente Articolo precedente
  • Potential clinical implications of targeted spirometry for detection of COPD: A contemporary population-based cohort study
  • Yunus Çolak, Børge G. Nordestgaard, Jørgen Vestbo, Shoaib Afzal, Peter Lange
| Articolo seguente Articolo seguente
  • Difference in survival between COPD patients with an impaired immune reaction versus an adequate immune reaction to seasonal influenza vaccination: The COMIC study
  • M. Brusse-Keizer, E. Citgez, M. Zuur-Telgen, H.A.M. Kerstjens, G. Rijkers, P.D.L.P.M. VanderValk, J. van der Palen

Benvenuto su EM|consulte, il riferimento dei professionisti della salute.
L'accesso al testo integrale di questo articolo richiede un abbonamento.

Già abbonato a @@106933@@ rivista ?

@@150455@@ Voir plus

Il mio account


Dichiarazione CNIL

EM-CONSULTE.COM è registrato presso la CNIL, dichiarazione n. 1286925.

Ai sensi della legge n. 78-17 del 6 gennaio 1978 sull'informatica, sui file e sulle libertà, Lei puo' esercitare i diritti di opposizione (art.26 della legge), di accesso (art.34 a 38 Legge), e di rettifica (art.36 della legge) per i dati che La riguardano. Lei puo' cosi chiedere che siano rettificati, compeltati, chiariti, aggiornati o cancellati i suoi dati personali inesati, incompleti, equivoci, obsoleti o la cui raccolta o di uso o di conservazione sono vietati.
Le informazioni relative ai visitatori del nostro sito, compresa la loro identità, sono confidenziali.
Il responsabile del sito si impegna sull'onore a rispettare le condizioni legali di confidenzialità applicabili in Francia e a non divulgare tali informazioni a terzi.


Tutto il contenuto di questo sito: Copyright © 2026 Elsevier, i suoi licenziatari e contributori. Tutti i diritti sono riservati. Inclusi diritti per estrazione di testo e di dati, addestramento dell’intelligenza artificiale, e tecnologie simili. Per tutto il contenuto ‘open access’ sono applicati i termini della licenza Creative Commons.