ArticlePatient education and counseling2019
Inhaler use and education characteristics among English and non-English speaking patients: A pilot needs assessment survey.
Article in Patient education and counseling, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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.
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.
Who cites it
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- The Inhaler Technique Questionnaire (InTeQ): Development and Validation of a Brief Patient-Reported Measure.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
Abstract
objectiveIdentify inhaler use characteristics among English (ESP) and non-English speaking patients (NSP) to develop quality improvement efforts.
methodsOutpatients were surveyed for technique confidence, education, preferences and disease control. We compared characteristics between ESP and NSP.
resultsOf 197 respondents, 75% were ESP, 25% were NSP. Compared to NSP, ESP responders were more likely female (57% vs 31%, p = 0.001), used inhalers for a longer time (10 vs 6 years, p = 0.008) and had higher rates of metered dose inhaler use (85% vs. 60%, p < 0.001). Both language groups had similar confidence in inhaler use, after adjustment for age, gender and duration of use. Similar rates of inhaler technique education were reported by ESP and NSP at the initial visit. More NSP reported receiving education at subsequent visits (54% vs. 72%, p = 0.03). Education for both groups was mostly performed by a clinician. Both language groups reported low internet use for learning proper technique, low interest in a separate education session, preferred an active learning method.
conclusionsThese findings will be used to further develop quality inhaler education efforts at our institution. PRACTICAL IMPLICATIONS: Local patient preferences should be considered when designing inhaler education programs.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.