ArticleBMC pulmonary medicine2025
Technical evaluation of Turbuhaler
Article in BMC pulmonary medicine, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Budesonide/formoterol for pediatric asthma: bridging the gap between evidence and practice in Maintenance and Reliever Therapy.Frontiers in medicine · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
10 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundThe Turbuhaler
methodsThis study recruited asthmatic children aged 4 to 14 years who were using the Turbuhaler
resultsOf the 141 enrolled patients, 50 (35.5%) scored 10 points on the checklist. Overall, 105 (74.4%), 28 (19.9%) and 8 (5.7%) patients performed good, moderate, and poor inhaler technique, respectively. The three common improper steps were ''exhale to residual volume'' (35.5%), "inhale forcefully and deeply" (13.5%), "rinse mouth after inhalation" (13.5%). The three common inappropriate inhalation parameters were "Effective inspiratory time(EIT) < 2s" (90.8%), "Peak inspiratory flow rate(PIFR) < 60L/min" (41.8%), and "Breath-hold time(BHT) < 5s" (27.0%). In the three groups with good, moderate, poor inhaler techniques, 0, 2 (7.1%), and 2 (25.0%) patients did not reach the minimum PIFR. Meanwhile, 38 (36.2%), 15 (53.6%), and 6 (75.0%) patients did not reach the optimal PIFR, respectively. The results of ordered logistic regression analysis indicated that low medication adherence (P = 0.045), PIFR (P = 0.041), BHT (P = 0.003) and the duration of Turbuhaler
conclusionThe improper use of inhalers and inappropriate inhalation parameters are common among asthmatic children. Using checklist and inhalation parameters enables a more comprehensive evaluation of the patients' inhalation maneuvers and inspiratory effort.
trial registrationThis study is registered at Chictr.org with the identifier number ChiCTR2200056579.
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.