Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38845621›Full record

ArticleFuture healthcare journal2024

Evaluating inhaler technique, patient preferences and opportunities for improvement in hospitals in the UK.

Evie Rothwell, Joseph McElvaney, Alice Fitzpatrick, Maria van Hove, Anya Gopfert, Lewis Standing, Sarah Catherine Walpole

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Future healthcare journal, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
6citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–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

6 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Trial
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Contributions of Medical Greenhouse Gases to Climate Change and Their Possible Alternatives.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2024
    Review
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

7 authors.

Evie RothwellUniversity College London Hospitals, UK.
Joseph McElvaneyNHS Greater Glasgow and Clyde/University of Glasgow, UK.
Alice FitzpatrickValens Medical Partnership & Faculty of Medical Sciences, Newcastle University, UK.
Maria van HoveDepartment of Public Health and Sports Sciences, University of Exeter, UK.
Anya GopfertDepartment of Public Health and Sports Sciences, University of Exeter, UK.
Lewis StandingUniversity Hospital of North Teeside, UK.
Sarah Catherine WalpoleMicrobiology and Infectious diseases, James Cook University Hospital, Faculty of Medical Sciences, Newcastle University, UK.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Inhalers are a key aspect of managing airways disease. With effective use, they can reduce symptoms, reduce the frequency of exacerbations and thus reduce usage of healthcare services. Inhalers are associated with a significant carbon footprint, accounting for 3% of NHS' carbon emissions. We aimed to audit inhaler technique, patient preferences and inhaler prescribing and disposal to identify areas for improving the sustainability of respiratory care. An audit tool was created, and patient interviews conducted across eight different sites. Our data demonstrate that inhaler users, while self-reporting high levels of confidence in their inhaler technique, frequently make errors in inhaler technique. Additionally, the majority of patients considered the carbon footprint of their inhalers important and would consider changing to a lower carbon alternative. The majority of patients surveyed were not disposing of their inhalers correctly. This short audit has identified key areas for improvement in the quality and sustainability of respiratory care.

Identifiers

PMID38845621
PMCPMC11153909

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
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.