Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33563979›Full record

ArticleNPJ primary care respiratory medicine2021

Critical inhaler technique errors in Swedish patients with COPD: a cross-sectional study analysing video-recorded demonstrations.

Johanna Sulku, Kristina Bröms, Marieann Högman, Christer Janson, Karin Lisspers, Andrei Malinovschi, Håkan Melhus, Björn Ställberg, Elisabet I Nielsen

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in NPJ primary care respiratory medicine, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 11 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
11citing 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

11 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Trial
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Behavioral Phenotypes of Inhaler Technique and Adherence in COPD: A Cross-Sectional Study.International journal of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease · 2026
    Article
  5. Article
  6. Observational
  7. Review
  8. Review
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. 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

9 authors.

Johanna SulkuDepartment of Pharmacy, Uppsala University, Uppsala, Sweden. johanna.sulku@farmaci.uu.se.ORCID 0000-0002-1444-752X
Kristina BrömsDepartment of Public Health and Caring Sciences, Family Medicine and Preventive Medicine, Uppsala University, Uppsala, Sweden.
Marieann HögmanDepartment of Medical Sciences, Respiratory, Allergy and Sleep Research, Uppsala University, Uppsala, Sweden.
Christer JansonDepartment of Medical Sciences, Respiratory, Allergy and Sleep Research, Uppsala University, Uppsala, Sweden.
Karin LisspersDepartment of Public Health and Caring Sciences, Family Medicine and Preventive Medicine, Uppsala University, Uppsala, Sweden.
Andrei MalinovschiDepartment of Medical Sciences, Clinical Physiology, Uppsala University, Uppsala, Sweden.ORCID 0000-0002-4098-7765
Håkan MelhusDepartment of Medical Sciences, Clinical Pharmacogenomics and Osteoporosis, Uppsala University, Uppsala, Sweden.
Björn StällbergDepartment of Public Health and Caring Sciences, Family Medicine and Preventive Medicine, Uppsala University, Uppsala, Sweden.ORCID 0000-0001-8497-7326
Elisabet I NielsenDepartment of Pharmacy, Uppsala University, Uppsala, Sweden.ORCID 0000-0003-0725-214X

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

A correct use of inhaler devices is essential in chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) treatment. Critical errors were studied by analysing 659 video-recorded demonstrations of inhaler technique from 364 COPD patients using six different inhaler device models. The majority of the included patients used two (55%) or more (20%) device models. Overall, 66% of the patients made ≥1 critical error with at least one device model. The corresponding numbers for patients using 1, 2 and ≥3 device models were 43%, 70% and 86%, respectively. The only factor associated with making ≥1 critical error was simultaneous use of two (adjusted odds ratios (aOR) 3.17, 95% confidence interval (95% CI) 1.81, 5.64) or three or more (aOR 8.97, 95% CI 3.93, 22.1) device models. In conclusion, the proportion of patients making critical errors in inhaler technique was substantial, particularly in those using several different device models. To obtain optimal COPD treatment, it is important to assess a patient's inhaler technique and to minimise the number of inhaler device models.

Indexed as

Nebulizers and VaporizersPulmonary Disease, Chronic ObstructiveAdministration, InhalationCross-Sectional StudiesEquipment DesignHumansSweden

Identifiers

PMID33563979
PMCPMC7873256

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.