Dataset Information

Systematic review of association between critical errors in inhalation and health outcomes in asthma and COPD.

ABSTRACT: Inhaled medications are the cornerstone of treatment and management of asthma and COPD. However, inhaler device errors are common among patients and have been linked with reduced symptom control, an increased risk of exacerbations, and increased healthcare utilisation. These observations have prompted GINA (Global INitiative for Asthma) and GOLD (Global initiative for chronic Obstructive Lung Disease) to recommend regular assessment of inhaler technique in a bid to improve therapeutic outcomes. To better define the relationship between device errors and health outcomes (clinical outcomes, quality of life, and healthcare utilisation) in asthma and COPD, we conducted a systematic review of the literature, with a particular focus on the methods used to assess the relationship between device errors and outcomes. Sixteen studies were identified (12 in patients with asthma, one in patients with COPD, and three in both asthma and COPD) with varying study designs, endpoints, and patient populations. Most of the studies reported that inhalation errors were associated with worse disease outcomes in patients with asthma or COPD. Patients who had a reduction in errors over time had improved outcomes. These findings suggest that time invested by healthcare professionals is vital to improving inhalation technique in asthma and COPD patients to improve health outcomes.

SUBMITTER: Kocks JWH

PROVIDER: S-EPMC6240098 | biostudies-literature | 2018 Nov

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Systematic review of association between critical errors in inhalation and health outcomes in asthma and COPD.

Kocks Janwillem W H JWH Chrystyn Henry H van der Palen Job J Thomas Mike M Yates Louisa L Landis Sarah H SH Driessen Maurice T MT Gokhale Mugdha M Sharma Raj R Molimard Mathieu M

NPJ primary care respiratory medicine 20181116 1

Inhaled medications are the cornerstone of treatment and management of asthma and COPD. However, inhaler device errors are common among patients and have been linked with reduced symptom control, an increased risk of exacerbations, and increased healthcare utilisation. These observations have prompted GINA (Global INitiative for Asthma) and GOLD (Global initiative for chronic Obstructive Lung Disease) to recommend regular assessment of inhaler technique in a bid to improve therapeutic outcomes. ...[more]

PMID: 30446655

Similar Datasets

Project description:Inhaler device errors are common and may impact the effectiveness of the delivered drug. There is a paucity of up-to-date systematic reviews (SRs) or meta-analyses (MAs) of device errors in asthma and chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) patients. This SR and MA provides an estimate of overall error rates (both critical and non-critical) by device type and evaluates factors associated with inhaler misuse. The following databases from inception to July 23, 2014 (Embase®, MEDLINE®, MEDLINE® In-Process and CENTRAL) were searched, using predefined search terms. Studies in adult males and females with asthma or COPD, reporting at least one overall or critical error, using metered dose inhalers and dry powder inhalers were included. Random-effect MAs were performed to estimate device error rates and to compare pairs of devices. Overall and critical error rates were high across all devices, ranging from 50-100% and 14-92%, respectively. However, between-study heterogeneity was also generally >90% (I-squared statistic), indicating large variability between studies. A trend towards higher error rates with assessments comprising a larger number of steps was observed; however no consistent pattern was identified. This SR and MA highlights the relatively limited body of evidence assessing device errors and the lack of standardised checklists. There is currently insufficient evidence to determine differences in error rates between different inhaler devices and their impact on clinical outcomes. A key step in improving our knowledge on this topic would be the development of standardised checklists for each device.Chronic lung diseasesCALL TO STANDARDISE RESEARCH INTO INHALER DEVICE ERRORS: Researchers should adopt a standardised approach to investigate the incorrect use of inhalers and its associated clinical implications. Henry Chrystyn at Plymouth University, together with scientists across the UK and the Netherlands, conducted a review of research related to inhaled medication errors made by patients with asthma or chronic obstructive pulmonary disease. It is widely acknowledged that many patients with lung conditions don't use their inhaler devices correctly, which affects drug effectiveness and disease control. While Chrystyn's team found high critical error rates reported across all devices, their meta-analysis and systematic review highlighted significant gaps in knowledge regarding different inhalers and associated error rates, and how these affect clinical outcomes. The researchers call for in-depth studies into device use, alongside standardised checklists and definitions for such studies to use to ensure consistency.

Project description:BackgroundCorrect 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.ObjectiveTo 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.MethodsThe 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.ResultsErrors 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.ConclusionIn 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 registrationhttps://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT04532853 (31/08/2020).

Project description:While poor inhaler technique in asthma and chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) can compromise the effectiveness of inhaled medications, identifying and quantifying these errors may suggest ways to improve inhalation technique and patient outcomes. The objective of this international, multicentre care improvement programme was to investigate errors in inhaler use (handling errors and inhalation errors) made by patients in handling two dry powder inhalers; DuoResp® Spiromax® and Symbicort® Turbuhaler®. Patients with asthma or COPD aged between 18 and 80 years attending the allergology/pneumology departments of 14 hospitals in Spain and Portugal were included. All assessments were performed during one regular scheduled visit to the study clinic. Among 161 eligible patients (138 with asthma; 23 with COPD), inhalation errors were the most common type of error, with no significant difference between devices in overall total error rate, handling error rate or inhalation error rate. Significantly fewer total errors per patient (1.4 vs. 1.9; p < 0.001) and handling errors per patient (0.5 vs. 0.8; p < 0.001) were observed with DuoResp® Spiromax® compared with Symbicort® Turbuhaler®. The mean number of attempts for patients using DuoResp® Spiromax® to perform two correct procedures was 1.9 (0.6) compared with 2.1 (0.9) attempts for patients using Symbicort® Turbuhaler® (p = 0.016). Compared with Symbicort® Turbuhaler®, DuoResp® Spiromax® was found to be easy to learn how to use (p < 0.001), easy to prepare (p < 0.001), easy to use (p < 0.001), comfortable in terms of weight and size (p = 0.001), and patients felt that they were using the device correctly (p < 0.001). Overall, 79.5% of patients stated that they preferred DuoResp® Spiromax® as their first option over Symbicort® Turbuhaler®. The findings of this study may be useful in developing effective inhaler training programmes and thus improve outcomes in asthma and COPD.

Project description:Asthma and chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) cause significant morbidity and mortality worldwide, primarily through exacerbations. Exacerbations are often treated with antibiotics but their optimal course duration is uncertain. Reducing antibiotic duration may influence antimicrobial resistance but risks treatment failure. The objective of this article is to review published literature to investigate whether shorter antibiotic therapy duration affects clinical outcomes in the treatment of asthma and COPD exacerbations. We systematically searched electronic databases (MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL, World Health Organisation International Clinical Trial Registry Platform, the Cochrane library, and ISRCTN) with no language, location, or time restrictions. We retrieved observational and controlled trials comparing different durations of the same oral antibiotic therapy in the treatment of acute exacerbations of asthma or COPD in adults. We found no applicable studies for asthma exacerbations. We included 10 randomized, placebo-controlled trials for COPD patients, all from high-income countries. The commonest studied antibiotic class was fluoroquinolones. Antibiotic courses shorter than 6 days were associated with significantly fewer overall adverse events (risk ratio (RR): 0.84, 95% confidence interval (CI): 0.75-0.93, p = 0.001) when compared with those of 7 or more days. There was no statistically significant difference for clinical success or bacteriological eradication in sputum (RR: 1.00, 95% CI: 0.88-1.13 and RR: 1.06, 95% CI: 0.79-1.44, respectively). Shorter durations of antibiotics for COPD exacerbations do not seem to confer a higher risk of treatment failure but are associated with fewer adverse events. This is in keeping with previous studies in community acquired pneumonia, but studies were heterogeneous and differed from usual clinical practice. Further observational and prospective work is needed to explore the significance of antibiotic duration in the treatment of asthma and COPD exacerbations.

Project description:BackgroundMale circumcision reduces men's risk of acquiring HIV and some sexually transmitted infections from heterosexual exposure, and is essential for HIV prevention in sub-Saharan Africa. Studies have also investigated associations between male circumcision and risk of acquisition of HIV and sexually transmitted infections in women. We aimed to review all evidence on associations between male circumcision and women's health outcomes to benefit women's health programmes.MethodsIn this systematic review we searched for peer-reviewed and grey literature publications reporting associations between male circumcision and women's health outcomes up to April 11, 2016. All biomedical (not psychological or social) outcomes in all study types were included. Searches were not restricted by year of publication, or to sub-Saharan Africa. Publications without primary data and not in English were excluded. We extracted data and assessed evidence on each outcome as high, medium, or low consistency on the basis of agreement between publications; outcomes found in fewer than three publications were indeterminate consistency.Findings60 publications were included in our assessment. High-consistency evidence was found for five outcomes, with male circumcision protecting against cervical cancer, cervical dysplasia, herpes simplex virus type 2, chlamydia, and syphilis. Medium-consistency evidence was found for male circumcision protecting against human papillomavirus and low-risk human papillomavirus. Although the evidence shows a protective association with HIV, it was categorised as low consistency, because one trial showed an increased risk to female partners of HIV-infected men resuming sex early after male circumcision. Seven outcomes including HIV had low-consistency evidence and six were indeterminate.InterpretationScale-up of male circumcision in sub-Saharan Africa has public health implications for several outcomes in women. Evidence that female partners are at decreased risk of several diseases is highly consistent. Synergies between male circumcision and women's health programmes should be explored.FundingUS Centers for Disease Control and Prevention and Jhpiego.

Dataset Information

Systematic review of association between critical errors in inhalation and health outcomes in asthma and COPD.

Publications

Systematic review of association between critical errors in inhalation and health outcomes in asthma and COPD.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets