Abstract
Background
Correct inhaler use depends on a complex interplay of factors, including device preparation and generating sufficient inspiratory flow. It is currently unknown which inhalation ...technique errors can be considered critical in Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease (COPD) patients on Dry Powder Inhaler (DPI) maintenance therapy.
Objective
To investigate the association between inhalation technique errors and health status or exacerbations in patients with COPD. Additionally, the association between the number of errors and COPD outcomes was determined.
Methods
The PIFotal study is a cross-sectional multi-country observational study in a primary care setting, including 1434 COPD patients aged ≥ 40 years (50.1% female; mean age 69.2 yrs) using a DPI for their maintenance therapy. Inhalation technique was video recorded and scored by two independent researchers using inhaler-specific checklists. Health status was assessed with two questionnaires; the Clinical COPD Questionnaire (CCQ) and the COPD Assessment Test (CAT). The number of moderate and severe exacerbations in the past 12 months was recorded. Critical errors were identified based on their association with health status or exacerbations through multi-level prediction models adjusted for identified confounding.
Results
Errors in inhalation technique steps ‘Breathe in’, ‘Hold breath’, and ‘Breathe out calmly after inhalation’ were significantly associated with poorer CCQ and CAT outcomes and thus deemed critical. None of the errors were significantly associated with moderate exacerbations. Patients with errors ‘Preparation’, ‘Hold inhaler in correct position during inhalation’, and ‘Breathe in’ had significantly more severe exacerbations, and therefore these errors were also deemed critical. 81.3% of patients with COPD made at least one critical error. Specific combinations of errors were associated with worse outcomes. The more inhalation technique errors identified, the poorer the health status and the higher the exacerbation rate.
Conclusion
In this study, we identified multiple critical inhalation technique errors in COPD patients using DPIs each associated with poorer outcomes. Explorative analysis revealed that specific combinations of errors may be of clinical relevance, especially those related to the inhalation manoeuvre. COPD outcomes worsened with increasing error count. These results warrant further prospective longitudinal studies to establish the effect of correcting these errors on COPD control.
Trial registration
https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT04532853
(31/08/2020)
Smart inhalers are electronic monitoring devices which are promising in increasing medication adherence and maintaining asthma control. A multi-stakeholder capacity and needs assessment is ...recommended prior to implementation in healthcare systems. This study aimed to explore perceptions of stakeholders and to identify anticipated facilitators and barriers associated with the implementation of smart digital inhalers in the Dutch healthcare system. Data were collected through focus group discussions with female patients with asthma (n = 9) and healthcare professionals (n = 7) and through individual semi-structured interviews with policy makers (n = 4) and smart inhaler developers (n = 4). Data were analysed using the Framework method. Five themes were identified: (i) perceived benefits, (ii) usability, (iii) feasibility, (iv) payment and reimbursement, and (v) data safety and ownership. In total, 14 barriers and 32 facilitators were found among all stakeholders. The results of this study could contribute to the design of a tailored implementation strategy for smart inhalers in daily practice.
The study aimed to determine the associations of Peak Inspiratory Flow (PIF), inhalation technique and adherence with health status and exacerbations in participants with COPD using DPI maintenance ...therapy. This cross-sectional multi-country observational real-world study included COPD participants aged ≥40 years using a DPI for maintenance therapy. PIF was measured three times with the In-Check DIAL G16: (1) typical PIF at resistance of participant's inhaler, (2) maximal PIF at resistance of participant's inhaler, (3) maximal PIF at low resistance. Suboptimal PIF (sPIF) was defined as PIF lower than required for the device. Participants completed questionnaires on health status (Clinical COPD Questionnaire (CCQ)), adherence (Test of Adherence to Inhalers (TAI)) and exacerbations. Inhalation technique was assessed by standardised evaluation of video recordings. Complete data were available from 1434 participants (50.1% female, mean age 69.2 years). GOLD stage was available for 801 participants: GOLD stage I (23.6%), II (54.9%), III (17.4%) and IV (4.1%)). Of all participants, 29% had a sPIF, and 16% were shown able to generate an optimal PIF but failed to do so. sPIF was significantly associated with worse health status (0.226 (95% CI 0.107-0.346), worse units on CCQ; p = 0.001). The errors 'teeth and lips sealed around mouthpiece', 'breathe in', and 'breathe out calmly after inhalation' were related to health status. Adherence was not associated with health status. After correcting for multiple testing, no significant association was found with moderate or severe exacerbations in the last 12 months. To conclude, sPIF is associated with poorer health status. This study demonstrates the importance of PIF assessment in DPI inhalation therapy. Healthcare professionals should consider selecting appropriate inhalers in cases of sPIF.
Over 1400 patients using dry powder inhalers (DPIs) to deliver COPD maintenance therapies were recruited across Europe and Australia. Their peak inspiratory flow (PIF) was measured, inhaler technique ...was observed, and adherence to treatment assessed. From relating the findings with patient health status, and thereby identifying critical errors, key clinical recommendations for primary care clinicians were determined, namely - measure PIF before prescribing a DPI to ensure inhalation manoeuvre ability is well-matched with the device. Some patients could benefit from inhalation training whereas others should have their DPI changed for one better suited to their inspiratory ability or alternatively be prescribed an active device (such as a soft mist inhaler or pressurized metered dose inhaler). Observing the inhalation technique was valuable however this misses suboptimal PIF (approaching one fourth of patients with a satisfactory observed manoeuvre had a suboptimal PIF for their DPI). Assess adherence as deliberate non-adherence can point to a mismatch between a patient and their inhaler (deliberate non-adherence was significantly associated with PIFs below the minimum for the DPI). In-person observation of inhalation technique was found to be inferior to video rating based on device-specific checklists. Where video assessments are not possible, observation training for healthcare professionals would therefore be valuable particularly to improve the ability to identify the critical errors associated with health status namely 'teeth and lips sealed around mouthpiece', 'breathe in' and 'breathing out calmly after inhalation'. However, it is recommended that observation alone should not replace PIF measurement in the DPI selection process.Trial registration: https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT04532853 .
Abstract Background and Aims Although guidelines recommend opportunistic screening for chronic kidney disease (CKD) in individuals with established risk factors, such as diabetes, hypertension, or ...cardiovascular disease, screening for CKD in these individuals remains suboptimal. This study aimed to evaluate the effectiveness of an additional systematic home-based albuminuria screening program in patients at risk for CKD in a primary care setting. Method A cross-sectional screening study was performed in 10 general practices and 5 pharmacies in the Netherlands between Nov 2021-Nov 2023. A random selection of patients aged 45-80 years with risk factors for CKD progression was invited for home-based albuminuria screening. These patients were registered at their general practitioner (GP) or at the pharmacy. Patients in the GP-group were identified based on the following risk factors: diabetes, cardiovascular disease, hypertension, hypercholesterolemia, or obesity. Patients were excluded in case of a normal albuminuria status (ACR (albumin-creatinine ratio) <3.0 mg/mmol) within 18 months prior to the screening. Patients in the pharmacy-group were identified based on drug prescriptions for the aforementioned risk factors in the last 6 months. Home-based albuminuria screening was performed using a urine collection device that was sent by post to a central laboratory for ACR measurement. If the test result was positive upon confirmation (i.e. ≥two tests ACR ≥3 mg/mmol), patients were invited for an elaborate visit in the general practice or pharmacy, to assess presence of CKD and cardiovascular risk factors. Main outcomes were participation rate and yield of the home-based albuminuria screening in the total study population and in both screening groups separately. Secondary outcomes were the yield of persistent albuminuria despite treatment with RAS-inhibition in both screening groups and the yield of previously undiagnosed albuminuria in the GP-group. Results We invited 6 380 patients (2 578 via pharmacy registries and 3 802 via GP registries), of whom 2 147 completed the home-based screening, corresponding to a participation rate of 33.7%. The participation rate among GP patients was 41.4% (1 575/3 802), compared to 22.2% (572/2 578) among pharmacy patients (P < .001). Albuminuria was confirmed in 8.5% (134/3 802) and 5.6% (32/2 578) of the participants in the GP- and pharmacy-group, respectively. Among participants in the GP-group, 59.7% (80/134) had a positive albuminuria test within one year prior to the screening; the remaining 40.3% either had no albuminuria test (or a normal albuminuria test within one year prior to the screening. Of those with increased albuminuria in the GP- and pharmacy-group, 85.8% (115/134) and 81.3% (26/32) attended the elaborate screening visit, respectively. In the GP-group, 72.2% (83/115) had an eGFR >60 and only 19.1% (22/115) an adequate blood pressure (<130/80 mmHg), compared to 69.2% (18/26) and 19.2% (5/26) in the pharmacy-group. Of the albuminuric participants in the GP- and pharmacy-group, respectively, 44.3% (51/115) and 23.1% (6/26) were not treated with RAS inhibition, and 94.8% (109/115) and 96.2% (25/26), respectively, were not treated with an SGLT2 inhibitor. Many patients were not aware of having albuminuria before participating in the systematic home-based screening program 42.6% (109/115) in the GP-group vs. 61.5% (16/26) in the pharmacy-group). Conclusion In conclusion, systematic albuminuria screening in the primary care setting when added to regular opportunistic screening has an acceptable participation rate and yield when performed via GPs, but is less effective when performed via pharmacies. It identifies patients with yet unknown albuminuria and most of the identified patients may benefit of initiation or optimization of albuminuria-lowering treatment. The introduction of such systematic albuminuria screening programs via GPs merits further study.
Purpose: To assess the relationship between suboptimal Peak Inspiratory Flow (sPIF), inhalation technique errors, and nonadherence, with Healthcare Resource Utilisation (HCRU) in Chronic Obstructive ...Pulmonary Disease (COPD) patients receiving maintenance therapy via a Dry Powder Inhaler (DPI). Patients and methods: The cross-sectional, multi-country PIFotal study included 1434 COPD patients (greater than or equal to 40 years) using a DPI for maintenance therapy. PIF was measured with the In-Check DIAL G16, and sPIF was defined as a typical PIF lower than required for the device. Inhalation technique was assessed by standardised evaluation of video recordings and grouped into 10 steps. Patients completed the "Test of Adherence to Inhalers" questionnaire. HCRU was operationalised as COPD-related costs for primary healthcare, secondary healthcare, medication, and total COPD-related costs in a 1-year period. Results: Participants with sPIF had higher medication costs compared with those with optimal PIF (cost ratio CR: 1.07, 95% CI 1.01, 1.14). Multiple inhalation technique errors were associated with increased HCRU. Specifically, "insufficient inspiratory effort" with higher secondary healthcare costs (CR: 2.20, 95% CI 1.37, 3.54) and higher total COPD-related costs (CR: 1.16, 95% CI 1.03-1.31). "no breath-hold following the inhalation manoeuvre (<6 s)" with higher medication costs (CR: 1.08, 95% CI 1.02, 1.15) and total COPD-related costs (CR 1.17, 95% CI 1.07, 1.28), and "not breathing out calmly after inhalation" with higher medication costs (CR: 1.19, 95% CI 1.04, 1.37). Non-adherence was not significantly associated with HCRU. Conclusion: sPIF and inhalation technique errors were associated with higher COPD-related healthcare utilisation and costs in COPD patients on DPI maintenance therapy. Keywords: chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, Dry Powder Inhaler, health economics, cost analysis, healthcare resource utilisation
