ArticleERJ open research2026
Inhaler mastery and retention after stepwise training in cognitively impaired older COPD.
Article in ERJ open research, 2026. 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.
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
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: In older COPD patients with cognitive impairment, inhaler technique errors are common, but may be reduced by simplified designs and structured training. Methods: We conducted a prospective, crossover study with follow-up at 5±1 weeks in device-naïve COPD patients aged ≥70 years with moderate cognitive impairment (Mini Mental State Examination score 10-24). Physical function was assessed (Fried's Frailty Phenotype and Barthel Index). Participants demonstrated technique with a multidose dry powder inhaler (mDPI), a capsule-based DPI (cDPI), and a pressurised metered-dose inhaler (pMDI) after reading the patient information leaflet, then received a standardised stepwise training programme. Co-primary end-points were mastery after reading the patient information leaflet and after expert tuition. Secondary end-points included time to mastery, 1-month technique retention, and satisfaction (10-item Feeling of Satisfaction with Inhaler questionnaire). Results: 96 patients completed the study (mean age 79 years; 42% women; 66% pre-frail, 14% frail). After reading the patient information leaflet, correct technique was achieved by 29% with mDPI, 13% with cDPI, and 7% with pMDI. Errors were more frequent (p<0.001) with the pMDI (n=137) and cDPI (n=98) than with the mDPI (n=65). Training enabled all patients to achieve mastery, with shorter (p<0.001) times for the mDPI (3.1±1.1 min) than the cDPI (8.5±2.1 min) or pMDI (9.1±3.3 min). After 1 month, 85% maintained correct technique, higher (p<0.05) for the mDPI (97%) than pMDI (77%). Satisfaction scores favoured (p<0.01) the mDPI. Conclusions: Structured training allows older cognitively impaired COPD patients to master and retain inhaler technique. The mDPI was simpler, faster to learn, and better retained, supporting its use in geriatric COPD care.
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.