ArticleClinical epidemiology2025
Dispensing Patterns of Inhaled Asthma Medication Before and During COVID-19 Among Young Adults in the Netherlands: A Retrospective Inception Cohort Study.
Article in Clinical epidemiology, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
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: The impact of the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic on asthma medication trajectories, including changes in medication type or dosage, remains unclear. This study compared dispensing patterns among adults who initiated asthma inhalers before pandemic (cohorts 2014 and 2017) and during pandemic (cohort 2020). Methods: We performed retrospective inception cohort study using University of Groningen IADB.nl community pharmacy dispensing database. Individuals aged 16-44 years who initiated inhaled asthma treatment in 2014, 2017, or 2020 were followed for 2 years. Treatment steps (1-5) were based on the Global Initiative for Asthma (GINA) guideline. Primary outcomes included time to treatment step switch (step-up or step-down) and time to first oral prednisolone/prednisone, and were compared between cohorts using Cox regression models. Results: In 2014, 2017 and 2020, 1193, 960 and 730 patients initiated asthma inhalers, respectively. In all cohorts, more than half of the patients initiated treatment at the lowest step. During 2-year follow-up, fewer patients switched their treatment steps in 2020 when compared with 2014 (adjusted hazard ratio (aHR): 0.86 (95% confidence interval (CI): 0.76-0.99). From 2014 to 2020, the likelihood of treatment stepping-down decreased over time, with a 21% in 2017 (aHR: 0.79 (0.68-0.92)) and 24% in 2020 (aHR: 0.76 (0.64-0.90)) compared to 2014, while the likelihood of stepping-up did not change significantly. The risk of taking oral prednisolone/prednisone was also significantly lower in 2020 (aHR: 0.76 (0.61-0.94)). Conclusion: During the pandemic, fewer asthma patients switched treatment steps and took oral prednisolone/prednisone. Since 2014, fewer individuals stepping down medication, with a decrease of 21% in 2017 and 24% in 2020. Possible drivers include improved adherence, better asthma control, and increased telemedicine use-trends that predate and have been accelerated by the pandemic. Research incorporating clinical data is necessary to confirm these hypotheses.
Indexed as
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.