Evidence map›Paper›PMID 29391489›Full record

ArticleScientific reports2018

Objective Assessment of Patient Inhaler User Technique Using an Audio-Based Classification Approach.

Terence E Taylor, Yaniv Zigel, Clarice Egan, Fintan Hughes, Richard W Costello, Richard B Reilly

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Scientific reports, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 14 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
14citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

14 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Trial
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Assessing adherence to inhaled therapies in asthma and the emergence of electronic monitoring devices.European respiratory review : an official journal of the European Respiratory Society · 2022
    Review
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Sustainability in Inhaled Drug Delivery.Pharmaceutical medicine · 2020
    Review
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Mobile Health and Inhaler-Based Monitoring Devices for Asthma Management.The journal of allergy and clinical immunology. In practice
    Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

6 authors.

Terence E TaylorTrinity Centre for Bioengineering, Trinity College, The University of Dublin, Dublin, Ireland. taylorte@tcd.ie.
Yaniv ZigelTrinity Centre for Bioengineering, Trinity College, The University of Dublin, Dublin, Ireland.
Clarice EganDepartment of Medicine, Royal College of Surgeons in Ireland, Dublin, Ireland.
Fintan HughesTrinity Centre for Bioengineering, Trinity College, The University of Dublin, Dublin, Ireland.
Richard W CostelloDepartment of Medicine, Royal College of Surgeons in Ireland, Dublin, Ireland.
Richard B ReillyTrinity Centre for Bioengineering, Trinity College, The University of Dublin, Dublin, Ireland.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-8578-1245

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Many patients make critical user technique errors when using pressurised metered dose inhalers (pMDIs) which reduce the clinical efficacy of respiratory medication. Such critical errors include poor actuation coordination (poor timing of medication release during inhalation) and inhaling too fast (peak inspiratory flow rate over 90 L/min). Here, we present a novel audio-based method that objectively assesses patient pMDI user technique. The Inhaler Compliance Assessment device was employed to record inhaler audio signals from 62 respiratory patients as they used a pMDI with an In-Check Flo-Tone device attached to the inhaler mouthpiece. Using a quadratic discriminant analysis approach, the audio-based method generated a total frame-by-frame accuracy of 88.2% in classifying sound events (actuation, inhalation and exhalation). The audio-based method estimated the peak inspiratory flow rate and volume of inhalations with an accuracy of 88.2% and 83.94% respectively. It was detected that 89% of patients made at least one critical user technique error even after tuition from an expert clinical reviewer. This method provides a more clinically accurate assessment of patient inhaler user technique than standard checklist methods.

Indexed as

SoundAdministration, InhalationAdolescentAdultAgedAged, 80 and overAsthmaBronchodilator AgentsFemaleHumansMaleMiddle AgedMonitoring, PhysiologicNebulizers and VaporizersPulmonary Disease, Chronic ObstructiveYoung AdultBronchodilator Agents

Identifiers

PMID29391489
PMCPMC5794789

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.