ArticleFrontiers in allergy2025
Use of a digital rescue inhaler and at-home spirometer among inner-city children with asthma: a real-world experience.
Article in Frontiers in allergy, 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
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Across all age groups, asthma disproportionally affects inner-city underserved populations. Studies on the use of at-home spirometry and digital inhalers have limited real-world evaluation in pediatric asthma. Objectives: In this prospective exploratory study, we assessed how an integrated digital rescue inhaler and at-home spirometer would affect proper inhaler use, medication adherence, and asthma outcomes using a minimalistic real-world approach. Methods: In total, 21 pediatric patients with asthma (8-17 years of age) were asked to replace rescue medications with the ProAir Digihaler and perform at-home gamified spirometry daily. Lung function and questionnaires were obtained at baseline and at 3-4 months. Results: The participants were mostly male (81%), Latino/Hispanic (71%), and obese (88th ±16 percentile). Proper rescue inhaler step identification by survey did not change, but inhalation technique based on digital inhaler flow measurements improved for all participants. At-home spirometry was sporadic and reported controller adherence did not change. Younger children (age 8-11) were more severe at baseline [Composite Asthma Severity Index (CASI) of 4.8] compared to older children (CASI of 2.9). For younger children, overall asthma control test scores increased by 3.1, CASI decreased by 0.70, and the Pediatric Quality of Life Inventory scores increased by 14 and 11 for participants and parents, respectively. Conclusions: Proper rescue inhaler step identification by survey did not change, but actual inhalation technique based on digital inhaler flow measurements improved. At-home spirometry was sporadic and reported medication adherence did not change. Younger children used the spirometer more frequently and demonstrated improvements in asthma control, severity, and quality of life. These improvements were not observed in older children.
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.