ArticleERJ open research2023
Patient attitudes to nebulised antibiotics in the treatment of bronchiectasis: a mixed-methods study.
Article in ERJ open research, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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
4 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Management of Adult Bronchiectasis: Consensus-Based Guidelines of the German Respiratory Society.Respiration; international review of thoracic diseases · 2026Guideline
- Inhaled Antibiotic and Biologic Formulations TargetingPharmaceutics · 2026Review
- Pulmonary Delivery of Antibiotics to the Lungs: Current State and Future Prospects.Pharmaceutics · 2025Review
- Primary Ciliary Dyskinesia in Adult Bronchiectasis: Data from the German Bronchiectasis Registry PROGNOSIS.Chest · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
11 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Regular daily nebulised antibiotics are widely used in managing bronchiectasis. This patient population typically has severe bronchiectasis requiring multiple other medications. Given that little is known about patients' views and preferences for such therapies, this was the focus of our study. Methods: To explore patient lived-experience using nebulised antibiotics, focus groups and semi-structured interviews were conducted with patients and carers; these were audio-recorded and transcribed to enable thematic analysis. QSR NVivo software facilitated data management. The themes developed from the qualitative data analysis were then used to co-design a questionnaire to capture attitudes and preferences towards nebulised therapy. Questionnaires were completed by patients and statistical analysis was performed. Ethical approval was obtained (13/WS/0036). Results: The study's focus groups comprised 13 patients and carers, and 101 patients completed the questionnaire. Patients described nebulised therapy as an imposition on their daily routine, in turn affecting reported rates of adherence. Results demonstrated that 10% of all patients using nebulised antibiotics found these hard/very hard to administer. Further, 53% of participants strongly agreed/agreed that they would prefer an antibiotic delivered by an inhaler over a nebuliser, if it were as effective at preventing exacerbations. Notably, only 10% of participants wished to remain on nebulised therapy. Conclusions: Inhaled antibiotics delivered
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.