Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32920532›Full record

ArticleEuropean journal of hospital pharmacy : science and practice2021

Rational selection of inhalation devices in the treatment of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease by means of the System of Objectified Judgement Analysis (SOJA).

Robert Janknegt, Johan Kooistra, Esther Metting, Richard Dekhuijzen

Open access · greenAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in European journal of hospital pharmacy : science and practice, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing papers in PubMed
0.3field-weighted citation impact, top 38% of its field
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

1 citing paper in PubMed, 3 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. An innovative tool to prioritize the assessment of investigational COVID-19 therapeutics: A pilot project.Canada communicable disease report = Releve des maladies transmissibles au Canada · 2024
    Article
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

4 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.

Robert JanknegtZuyderland Medical Centre Sittard-Geleen, Sittard-Geleen, Netherlands rob.janknegt@ziggo.nl.
Johan KooistraMaarssen, Netherlands.
Esther MettingGroningen University Department of Health Sciences, Groningen, Groningen, Netherlands.
Richard DekhuijzenUniversity Medical Center Nijmegen, Nijmegen, Gelderland, Netherlands.
Radboud University Medical Center · NLUniversity of Groningen · NLZuyderland Medisch Centrum · NL

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectivesThe large number of available medicines and devices makes it almost impossible to have sufficient knowledge of each individual medicine and device, especially for general practitioners. This may lead to suboptimal treatment, more exacerbations, hospitalisations and higher treatment costs. Reducing the number of medicines and devices, based on rational criteria, allows physicians and pharmacists to build experience with a more limited set of medicines and to standardise the inhalation instructions.

methodsIn this study inhalers are compared by means of the System of Objectified Judgement Analysis (SOJA) method. The following selection criteria were applied: uniformity in device, number of steps per inhalation, risk of errors, hygienic aspects, feedback mechanism, and risk of inhalation with an empty inhaler.

resultsSubstantial differences were seen in the overall scores, with the Ellipta device showing the highest score, followed by Diskus/Accuhaler, Genuair and Nexthaler. Several devices require more or less identical techniques, such Ellipta and Diskus/Accuhaler as well as Genuair and Novolizer. When patients use these devices in combination this increases their uniformity, because additional medicines become available for the devices: starting therapy with Diskus or Novolizer and follow-up with Ellipta or Genuair. The resistance of Respimat and Breezhaler is lower than that of other devices, which makes these devices suitable for patients who cannot generate sufficient inhalation flow.

conclusionsA substantial reduction of inhalers, combined with optimal and standardised instructions, should improve the care of patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease.

Indexed as

Nebulizers and VaporizersPulmonary Disease, Chronic ObstructiveAdministration, InhalationEquipment DesignHumansclinical pharmacydrug formulary managementdrug procurementhealth economicsthoracic medicine

Identifiers

PMID32920532
PMCPMC7907694
OpenAlexW3085996135

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.