ReviewNigerian medical journal : journal of the Nigeria Medical Association
Assessment of the Inhaler Handling Technique In Patients With Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease In A Chest Clinic.
Review in Nigerian medical journal : journal of the Nigeria Medical Association. 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: Improper handling of inhaler devices can result in errors that affect drug delivery to the lungs and ultimately influence disease outcomes. This study assessed inhaler techniques and risk factors for critical errors in COPD patients at a tertiary chest clinic in Nigeria. Methodology: Spirometry-confirmed COPD patients were evaluated using a standardized inhaler technique checklist. Demographic and clinical data were collected. Inhaler use was classified as correct/no error, non-critical errors, or critical errors. Results: Eighty patients participated, with 49 (61.3%) being males. All participants used pressurized metered dose inhalers (pMDI), and 70 (87.5%) used dry powder inhalers (DPI). Correct inhaler technique was observed in 7.5% of pMDI users, significantly lower than the 20% among DPI users (p = 0.025). Critical and non-critical errors occurred in 62.5% and 77.5% of pMDI users, and 68.6% and 65.7% of DPI users, respectively. The most common critical error among pMDI users was failure to actuate during deep slow inhalation, while among DPI users it was failure to exhale fully before inhalation. Self-reported inhaler dissatisfaction predicted critical errors among pMDI users. Among DPI users, predictors included female sex, lack of recent inhaler technique training, and lower inhaler satisfaction. Conclusion: Critical inhaler technique errors are highly prevalent among COPD patients in this setting, particularly among pMDI users. Factors such as inhaler dissatisfaction, female sex, and lack of recent inhaler training increase the risk of errors. These findings highlight the need for regular assessment of inhaler technique and personalized patient education to optimize device use and improve outcomes.
Indexed as
Identifiers
42488854PMC13391102What 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.