Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32981292›Full record

ArticleTuberculosis and respiratory diseases2021

Comparing Inhaler Use Technique Based on Inhaler Type in Elderly Patients with Respiratory Disease.

Ha Youn Lee, Jin Hwa Song, Ha-Kyeong Won, Yeonkyung Park, Keun Bum Chung, Hyo-Jeong Lim, Young Mee Ahn, Byoung Jun Lee

Open access · diamondAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Tuberculosis and respiratory diseases, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
9citing papers in PubMed
1.5field-weighted citation impact, top 14% 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

9 citing papers in PubMed, 17 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Review
  2. Observational
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Korean COPD Patients Can Get Satisfaction.Journal of Korean medical science · 2022
    Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. 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

8 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Ha Youn LeeDivision of Pulmonary and Critical Care Medicine, Department of Internal Medicine, Serim General Hospital, Incheon, Republic of Korea.
Jin Hwa SongDivision of Pulmonary, Allergy and Critical Care Medicine, Department of Internal Medicine, Veterans Health Service Medical Center, Seoul, Republic of Korea.
Ha-Kyeong WonDivision of Pulmonary, Allergy and Critical Care Medicine, Department of Internal Medicine, Veterans Health Service Medical Center, Seoul, Republic of Korea.
Yeonkyung ParkDivision of Pulmonary, Allergy and Critical Care Medicine, Department of Internal Medicine, Veterans Health Service Medical Center, Seoul, Republic of Korea.
Keun Bum ChungDivision of Pulmonary, Allergy and Critical Care Medicine, Department of Internal Medicine, Veterans Health Service Medical Center, Seoul, Republic of Korea.
Hyo-Jeong LimDivision of Pulmonary, Allergy and Critical Care Medicine, Department of Internal Medicine, Veterans Health Service Medical Center, Seoul, Republic of Korea.
Young Mee AhnDivision of Pulmonary, Allergy and Critical Care Medicine, Department of Internal Medicine, Veterans Health Service Medical Center, Seoul, Republic of Korea.
Byoung Jun LeeDivision of Pulmonary, Allergy and Critical Care Medicine, Department of Internal Medicine, Veterans Health Service Medical Center, Seoul, Republic of Korea.
Veterans Health Service Medical Center · KR

Funding

VHS Veterans Medical Research Institute
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThe aim of this study was to investigate inhaler device handling in elderly patients. Inhaler devices with respect to misuse and error correction were also compared.

methodsInhaler use technique was assessed using standardized checklists at the first visit and 3-month follow-up visit after retraining. The primary outcome was difference in the acceptable use ratio among inhaler devices. Secondary outcomes included differences in error correction, the most common step of misuse, and factors affecting the accuracy of inhaler use.

resultsA total of 251 patients (mean age, 76.4 years) were included. The handling of 320 devices was assessed in the study. All patients had been trained before. However, only 24.7% of them used inhalers correctly. Proportions of acceptable use for Evohaler, Respimat, Turbuhaler, Ellipta, and Breezhaler/Handihaler were 38.7%, 50.0%, 61.4%, 60.8%, and 43.2%, respectively (p=0.026). At the second visit, the acceptable use ratio had increased. There were no significant differences among inhaler types (Evohaler, 63.9%; Respimat, 86.1%; Turbuhaler, 74.3%; Ellipta, 64.6%; and Breezhaler/Handihaler, 65.3% [p=0.129]). In multivariate analysis, body mass index, Turbuhaler, and Ellipta showed positive correlations with acceptable use of inhalers, whereas Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease Assessment Test score showed a negative correlation.

conclusionAlthough new inhalers have been developed, the accuracy of inhaler use remains low. Elderly patients showed more errors when using pressurized metered-dose inhalers than using dry powder inhalers and soft-mist inhalers. However, there were no significant differences in misuse among inhaler devices after individual training. Results of this study suggests that repeat training is more important than inhaler type.

Indexed as

AgedAsthmaChronic Obstructive Pulmonary DiseaseInhaler

Identifiers

PMID32981292
PMCPMC7801805
OpenAlexW3087862890

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
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.