Observational studyCanadian respiratory journal2026
Critical Errors in Inhaler Technique Among Patients With Asthma and COPD: A Cross-Sectional Study in a Real-World Setting.
Observational study in Canadian respiratory journal, 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
Abstract
backgroundThe correct use of inhalation devices is essential for achieving adequate control of asthma and COPD; however, critical errors in inhalation technique are frequent and substantially reduce treatment effectiveness. This study's objective was to evaluate the prevalence of inadequate inhalation technique among patients with asthma and COPD and to identify the most common critical errors and the factors associated with incorrect use.
methodsThis cross-sectional observational study included 575 patients (aged ≥ 18 years) with asthma and/or COPD, recruited from a university hospital outpatient pulmonology clinic and a public specialized pharmacy (Natal, Brazil). Participants completed sociodemographic questionnaires and demonstrated their inhaler technique, which was assessed using device-specific checklists to identify critical errors. Factors associated with critical errors were analyzed using multivariable logistic regression.
resultsOnly 8.2% of participants correctly performed all steps of the inhalation technique. At least one critical error was observed in 73.4% of the cohort. In multivariable analysis, advanced age (OR: 1.029; 95% CI: 1.016-1.044), use of multiple devices (OR: 2.500; 95% CI: 1.754-3.562), and type of mechanism independent of inspiration (OR: 0.262; 95% CI: 0.160-0.430; protective factor) were significantly associated with critical errors (p < 0.001).
conclusionsInadequate inhalation technique, particularly the occurrence of critical errors, was highly prevalent, especially among older patients and those using multiple devices. Inhalers dependent on inspiratory effort demonstrated greater vulnerability to incorrect use.
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.