Dataset Information

Evaluation of inhaler handling-errors, inhaler perception and preference with Spiromax, Easyhaler and Turbuhaler devices among healthy Finnish volunteers: a single site, single visit crossover study (Finhaler).

ABSTRACT: Correct inhaler technique and device preference are positively correlated with improved adherence and clinical outcomes. This study was designed to investigate inhaler technique mastery and device preference for three different dry powder inhalers, Spiromax, Easyhaler and Turbuhaler.This was a single site, single visit, crossover study assessing device mastery, handling errors and preference using empty Spiromax, Easyhaler and Turbuhaler devices in healthy adult Finnish volunteers. Inhaler naïve adult participants were observed by healthcare professionals (HCPs) to evaluate the proportion of participants achieving device mastery (defined as an absence of HCP observed errors) using a three-step approach: (1) intuitive use (with no instructions), (2) after reading the patient information leaflet and (3) after HCP instruction. HCPs monitored and recorded errors based on device-specific handling error checklists. At the end of the study, participants completed a device preference questionnaire and rated their satisfaction with the three devices.Spiromax was correctly used by 37.5% and 93.3% of participants in steps 1 and 2, respectively, compared with 0% and 58.3% with Easyhaler, and 9.2% and 76.7% with Turbuhaler. All three devices showed high mastery (>95%) in step 3. The most common error reported with Spiromax was related to the orientation of the device. Not shaking the device was the most common error with Easyhaler. Errors in priming the device were the most common with Turbuhaler. Spiromax, Easyhaler and Turbuhaler were rated as the 'easiest device to use' by 73.1%, 12.6% and 14.3% of participants, respectively. The HCP instructions clearly improved the use of all devices.Higher levels of device mastery, including intuitive/ease of use, were reported by naïve users when using Spiromax compared with Easyhaler and Turbuhaler.

SUBMITTER: Sandler N

PROVIDER: S-EPMC4809147 | biostudies-other | 2016

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-other

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundAdministering maintenance COPD therapy with a combination of multiple inhalers may increase inhaler errors. This study evaluated the potential benefits of using a single Ellipta dry powder inhaler (DPI) compared with two combinations of DPIs commonly used to deliver triple maintenance therapy.MethodsPatients receiving inhaled COPD medication were enrolled in this multicenter, randomized, open-label, placebo-device, crossover study with a 2×2 complete block design (NCT0298218), which comprised two substudies: Ellipta vs Diskus + HandiHaler (substudy 1) or Turbuhaler + HandiHaler (substudy 2). Patients demonstrated inhaler use after reading the relevant patient information leaflet (PIL). A trained investigator assessed user errors (critical errors [errors likely to result in no or significantly reduced medication being inhaled] and overall errors). The primary endpoint was the proportion of patients making ≥1 critical error after reading the PIL. The secondary endpoints included error rates during ≤2 reassessments following investigator instruction (if required), instruction time, and patient preference.ResultsAfter reading the PIL, significantly fewer patients made critical errors with Ellipta compared with Diskus + HandiHaler (9% [7/80] vs 75% [60/80], respectively; P<0.001) or Turbuhaler + HandiHaler (9% [7/79] vs 73% [58/79], respectively; P<0.001). The number of patients making overall errors was also lower with Ellipta vs tested inhaler combinations (P<0.001 for each substudy). The median instruction time needed for error-free use was shorter with Ellipta in substudies 1 and 2 (2.7 and 2.6 minutes, respectively) vs either combination (10.6 [Diskus + HandiHaler] and 11.3 minutes [Turbuhaler + HandiHaler], respectively). Significantly more patients preferred Ellipta over Diskus + HandiHaler or Turbuhaler + HandiHaler overall for taking their COPD medication (81% vs 9% and 84% vs 4%, respectively) and per the number of steps for taking their COPD medication (89% vs 8% and 91% vs 5%, respectively).ConclusionFewer patients with COPD made critical errors with the single DPI, and patients required less instruction time, compared with each dual DPI combination.

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.

Project description:BackgroundIt is a recurring theme in clinical practice that patients using inhaled medications via an inhaler do not use their device to a standard that allows for optimum therapeutic effect, and some studies have shown that up to 90% of people do not use their inhalers properly. Observation and correction of the inhaler technique by health care professionals is advised by both national and international guidelines and should be performed at every opportunity to ensure that the optimum inhaler technique is achieved by the user. This study will provide a greater understanding of the most frequent technique errors made by people using 13 different inhaler types.ObjectiveThis study aims to identify and compare inhaler technique errors and their prevalence in adults, using device-specific checklists in accordance with manufacturers' guidelines, for 13 specific inhaler types across all lung conditions and to correlate these errors with possible determinants of poor technique. It also aims to assess the error frequency at each step in the device-specific questionnaires and compare the error rates among device types.MethodsIn a single visit, participants using an inhaler included in the inclusion criteria will have their inhaler technique observed using an identical placebo device, which will be recorded using device-specific checklists, and technique-optimized, or switched to a suitable inhaler.ResultsThe study is already underway, and it is anticipated that the results will be available by 2022.ConclusionsThe SCORES (Study to Investigate the Prevalence of Device-Specific Errors in Inhaler Technique in Adults With Airway Disease) study will ascertain the prevalence of device-specific inhaler technique errors at each step in the device-specific checklists, compare error rates among 13 device types, and correlate these errors with possible determinants of poor technique. Future work will involve the clarification and classification of these errors into critical and noncritical categories.Trial registrationClinicalTrials.gov NCT04262271; https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT04262271.International registered report identifier (irrid)DERR1-10.2196/26350.

Dataset Information

Evaluation of inhaler handling-errors, inhaler perception and preference with Spiromax, Easyhaler and Turbuhaler devices among healthy Finnish volunteers: a single site, single visit crossover study (Finhaler).

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets