Dataset Information

Comparison of serious inhaler technique errors made by device-naive patients using three different dry powder inhalers: a randomised, crossover, open-label study.

ABSTRACT: Serious inhaler technique errors can impair drug delivery to the lungs. This randomised, crossover, open-label study evaluated the proportion of patients making predefined serious errors with Pulmojet compared with Diskus and Turbohaler dry powder inhalers.Patients ?18 years old with asthma and/or COPD who were current users of an inhaler but naïve to the study devices were assigned to inhaler technique assessment on Pulmojet and either Diskus or Turbohaler in a randomised order. Patients inhaled through empty devices after reading the patient information leaflet. If serious errors potentially affecting dose delivery were recorded, they repeated the inhalations after watching a training video. Inhaler technique was assessed by a trained nurse observer and an electronic inhalation profile recorder.Baseline patient characteristics were similar between randomisation arms for the Pulmojet-Diskus (n?=?277) and Pulmojet-Turbohaler (n?=?144) comparisons. Non-inferiority in the proportions of patients recording no nurse-observed serious errors was demonstrated for both Pulmojet versus Diskus, and Pulmojet versus Turbohaler; therefore, superiority was tested. Patients were significantly less likely to make ?1 nurse-observed serious errors using Pulmojet compared with Diskus (odds ratio, 0.31; 95 % CI, 0.19-0.51) or Pulmojet compared with Turbohaler (0.23; 0.12-0.44) after reading the patient information leaflet with additional video instruction, if required.These results suggest Pulmojet is easier to learn to use correctly than the Turbohaler or Diskus for current inhaler users switching to a new dry powder inhaler.ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT01794390 (February 14, 2013).

SUBMITTER: Chrystyn H

PROVIDER: S-EPMC4712500 | biostudies-literature | 2016 Jan

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Comparison of serious inhaler technique errors made by device-naïve patients using three different dry powder inhalers: a randomised, crossover, open-label study.

Chrystyn Henry H Price David B DB Molimard Mathieu M Haughney John J Bosnic-Anticevich Sinthia S Lavorini Federico F Efthimiou John J Shan Dawn D Sims Erika E Burden Anne A Hutton Catherine C Roche Nicolas N

BMC pulmonary medicine 20160114

<h4>Background</h4>Serious inhaler technique errors can impair drug delivery to the lungs. This randomised, crossover, open-label study evaluated the proportion of patients making predefined serious errors with Pulmojet compared with Diskus and Turbohaler dry powder inhalers.<h4>Methods</h4>Patients ≥18 years old with asthma and/or COPD who were current users of an inhaler but naïve to the study devices were assigned to inhaler technique assessment on Pulmojet and either Diskus or Turbohaler in ...[more]

PMID: 26769482

Similar Datasets

Project description: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.

Project description:BackgroundIn patients receiving inhaled medication, dissatisfaction with and difficulty in using the inhaler can affect treatment adherence. The incidence of handling errors is typically higher in the elderly than in younger people. The aim of the study was to assess inhaler preference for and handling errors with the ELLIPTA® dry powder inhaler (DPI), (GSK), compared with the established BREEZHALER™, a single-dose capsule DPI (Novartis), in inhalation device-naïve Japanese volunteers aged ≥40 years.MethodsIn this open-label, nondrug interventional, crossover DPI preference study comparing the ELLIPTA DPI and BREEZHALER, 150 subjects were randomized to handle the ELLIPTA or BREEZHALER DPIs until the point of inhalation, without receiving verbal or demonstrative instruction (first attempt). Subjects then crossed over to the other inhaler. Preference was assessed using a self-completed questionnaire. Inhaler handling was assessed by a trained assessor using a checklist. Subjects did not inhale any medication in the study, so efficacy and safety were not measured.ResultsThe ELLIPTA DPI was preferred to the BREEZHALER by 89% of subjects (odds ratio [OR] 70.14, 95% confidence interval [CI] 33.69-146.01; P-value not applicable for this inhaler) for ease of use, by 63% of subjects (OR 2.98, CI 1.87-4.77; P<0.0001) for ease of determining the number of doses remaining in the inhaler, by 91% for number of steps required, and by 93% for time needed for handling the inhaler. The BREEZHALER was preferred to the ELLIPTA DPI for comfort of the mouthpiece by 64% of subjects (OR 3.16, CI 1.97-5.06; P<0.0001). The incidence of handling errors (first attempt) was 11% with ELLIPTA and 68% with BREEZHALER; differences in incidence were generally similar when analyzed by age (< or ≥65 years) or sex.ConclusionThese data, obtained in an inhalation device-naïve population, suggest that the ELLIPTA DPI is preferred to an established alternative based on its ease-of-use features and is associated with fewer handling errors.

Dataset Information

Comparison of serious inhaler technique errors made by device-naive patients using three different dry powder inhalers: a randomised, crossover, open-label study.

Publications

Comparison of serious inhaler technique errors made by device-naïve patients using three different dry powder inhalers: a randomised, crossover, open-label study.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets