ArticlePragmatic and observational research2026
Evaluating Satisfaction and Quality of Life with Elpenhaler: A Pooled Analysis of Real-Life Studies.
Article in Pragmatic and observational research, 2026. 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
Purpose: Patient adherence and satisfaction are critical for effective asthma and chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) management, as adherence strongly influences symptoms and prognosis. Patient-reported outcomes, including treatment satisfaction and quality of life, provide valuable insights into the effectiveness of therapeutic interventions from the perspective of individual patients. This study evaluated patient satisfaction with the Elpenhaler device and its impact on quality of life in routine clinical practice. Patients and methods: Individual participant data were pooled from seven real-life studies of fixed-dose combinations delivered via the Elpenhaler device (asthma, budesonide/formoterol: BOREAS, SKIRON, COMPLETE, NOTOS; COPD, salmeterol/fluticasone: AEOLOS, AHEAD, RETRIEVE). Patient satisfaction was assessed with the Feeling of Satisfaction with Inhaler (FSI-10) questionnaire in the four studies in which it was administered, and quality of life in asthma with the mini Asthma Quality of Life Questionnaire (mAQLQ) at baseline, 3 and 6 months. The minimum clinically important difference (MCID) was defined as a change of at least 0.5 units in the mAQLQ total score. Results: In 4333 patients with evaluable FSI-10 score, overall satisfaction was high (mean total score 44.1, standard deviation 5.4), with 94.5% of patients expressing confidence in correct usage. Multivariable analysis showed that age ≥65 years, male sex and lower education level were independently associated with lower satisfaction, whereas never smoking predicted higher satisfaction. In 4212 patients with asthma, mAQLQ total score improved from 4.52 at baseline to 6.06 at 3 months and 6.27 at 6 months; the MCID was achieved by 83.4% and 87.8% of evaluable patients, respectively. Never smoking and lower education level predicted MCID achievement. Conclusion: Treatment delivered via the Elpenhaler is associated with high patient satisfaction and with significant and sustained improvements in quality of life, supporting its effectiveness in real-world respiratory care. The identification of factors associated with satisfaction and quality of life improvement may help in personalising treatment and optimising care.
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.