Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33522304›Full record

ArticleChronic respiratory disease

Patient perceptions of the re-usable Respimatt

Michael Dreher, David Price, Asparuh Gardev, Pascale Peeters, Satish Arora, Simone van der Sar-van der Brugge, Richard Dekhuijzen, Omar S Usmani

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Chronic respiratory disease. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing papers in PubMed
–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

2 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Review
  2. Observational
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.

Michael DreherDepartment of Pneumology and Intensive Care Medicine, 39058University Hospital Aachen; RWTH Aachen University, Aachen, Germany.ORCID 0000-0002-3452-5329
David PriceObservational and Pragmatic Research Institute, Singapore.
Asparuh Gardev60325Boehringer Ingelheim International GmbH, Ingelheim am Rhein, Germany.
Pascale Peeters54886IQVIA RDS France, La Défense, France.
Satish AroraLambertseter Medical Centre, Oslo, Norway.
Simone van der Sar-van der Brugge89411Amphia Hospital, Breda, The Netherlands.ORCID 0000-0001-6462-075X
Richard Dekhuijzen6029Radboud University Medical Center, Nijmegen, The Netherlands.
Omar S UsmaniNational Heart and Lung Institute (NHLI), 4615Imperial College London, London, UK.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

plain language summaryInhalers are often used to treat patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD). However, there are many available, which can lead to confusion and poor inhaler technique. It is important for a patient to be happy with their inhaler. This study looked at how patients liked the re-usable Respimat® Soft Mist™ inhaler vs. their previous inhaler. It also asked whether they would be willing to continue using the device at the end of the study period.After 4-6 weeks of using the re-usable device, patients reported that they were happy with the inhaler and most would be willing to carry on using it.Overall, these results show that doctors can prescribe Respimat re-usable to patients, even if the patient has not used the inhaler before.

Indexed as

Bronchodilator AgentsPulmonary Disease, Chronic ObstructiveAdministration, InhalationHumansNebulizers and VaporizersPerceptionBronchodilator AgentsCOPDease of handlingPASAPQpreferenceRespimatswitch

Identifiers

PMID33522304
PMCPMC7868496

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.