Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38444664›Full record

ArticleERJ open research2024

Development and evaluation of a tool to optimise inhaler selection prior to hospital discharge following an exacerbation of COPD.

Evleen Price, Shanaz Ahmad, Malik A Althobiani, Tareq Ayoob, Teresa Burgoyne, Anthony De Soyza, Melissa Dobson, Carlos Echevarria, Graham Martin, Renata Gonçalves Mendes and 5 more

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in ERJ open research, 2024. 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
0.4field-weighted citation impact, top 40% 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, 1 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. 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

15 authors at 10 institutions in 4 countries.

Evleen PriceTHIS Institute, Department of Public Health and Primary Care, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, UK.
Shanaz AhmadRespiratory Medicine, Royal Free London NHS Foundation Trust, London, UK.
Malik A AlthobianiUCL Respiratory, University College London, London, UK.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-2230-5708
Tareq AyoobRespiratory Medicine, Royal Free London NHS Foundation Trust, London, UK.
Teresa BurgoynePatient and public representative.
Anthony De SoyzaPopulation Health Sciences Institute, Faculty of Medical Sciences, Newcastle University, Newcastle upon Tyne, UK.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-8566-0344
Melissa DobsonOxford Respiratory Trials Unit, Nuffield Department of Medicine, University of Oxford, Oxford, UK.
Carlos EchevarriaRespiratory Department, Newcastle Upon Tyne Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust, Newcastle Upon Tyne, UK.
Graham MartinTHIS Institute, Department of Public Health and Primary Care, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, UK.
Renata Gonçalves MendesCardiopulmonary Physiotherapy Laboratory, Federal University of Sao Carlos, Sao Carlos, Brazil.
Anne-Marie PrestonRespiratory Medicine, Royal Free London NHS Foundation Trust, London, UK.
Najib M RahmanOxford Respiratory Trials Unit, Nuffield Department of Medicine, University of Oxford, Oxford, UK.
Elizabeth SapeyInstitute of Inflammation and Ageing, College of Medical and Dental Sciences, University of Birmingham, Birmingham NIHR Biomedical Research Unit, and HDR UK Medicines Driver Programme, Birmingham, UK.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-3454-5482
Omar S UsmaniNational Heart and Lung Institute, Imperial College London, London, UK.
John R HurstUCL Respiratory, University College London, London, UK.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-7246-6040
Royal Free London NHS Foundation Trust · GBUniversity College London · GBUniversity of Cambridge · GBUniversity of Oxford · GBHealth Data Research UK · GBHouse of Representatives · NLImperial College London · GBNewcastle University · GBNewcastle upon Tyne Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust · GBUniversidade Federal de São Carlos · BR

Funding

Marie Curie MCCC-RP-14-A17178Medical Research Council G0600475Medical Research Council G1001128
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Introduction: Rates of mortality and re-admission after a hospitalised exacerbation of COPD are high and resistant to change. COPD guidelines do not give practical advice about the optimal selection of inhaled drugs and device in this situation. We hypothesised that a failure to optimise inhaled drug and drug delivery prior to discharge from hospital after an exacerbation would be associated with a modifiable increased risk of re-admission and death. We designed a study to 1) develop a practical inhaler selection tool to use at the point of hospital discharge and 2) implement this tool to understand the potential impact on modifying inhaler prescriptions, clinical outcomes, acceptability to clinicians and patients, and the feasibility of delivering a definitive trial to demonstrate potential benefit. Methods: We iteratively developed an inhaler selection tool for use prior to discharge following a hospitalised exacerbation of COPD using surveys with multiprofessional clinicians and a focus group of people living with COPD. We surveyed clinicians to understand their views on the minimum clinically important difference (MCID) for death and re-admission following a hospitalised exacerbation of COPD. We conducted a mixed-methods implementation feasibility study using the tool at discharge, and collated 30- and 90-day follow-up data including death and re-admissions. Additionally, we observed the tool being used and interviewed clinicians and patients about use of the tool in this setting. Results: We completed the design of an inhaler selection tool through two rounds of consultations with 94 multiprofessional clinicians, and a focus group of four expert patients. Regarding MCIDs, there was majority consensus for the following reductions from baseline being the MCID: 30-day readmissions 5-10%, 90-day readmissions 10-20%, 30-day mortality 5-10% and 90-day mortality 5-10%. 118 patients were assessed for eligibility and 26 had the tool applied. A change in inhaled medication was recommended in nine (35%) out of 26. Re-admission or death at 30 days was seen in 33% of the switch group and 35% of the no-switch group. Re-admission or death at 90 days was seen in 56% of the switch group and 41% of the no-switch group. Satisfaction with inhalers was generally high, and switching was associated with a small increase in the Feeling of Satisfaction with Inhaler questionnaire of 3 out of 50 points. Delivery of a definitive study would be challenging. Conclusion: We completed a mixed-methods study to design and implement a tool to aid optimisation of inhaled pharmacotherapy prior to discharge following a hospitalised exacerbation of COPD. This was not associated with fewer re-admissions, but was well received and one-third of people were eligible for a change in inhalers.

Identifiers

PMID38444664
PMCPMC10910267
OpenAlexW4391845375

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.