Comparison of serious inhaler technique errors made by device-naïve patients using three different dry powder inhalers: a randomised, crossover, open-label study

Background: Serious inhaler technique errors can impair drug delivery to the lungs. This randomised, crossover, open-label study evaluated the proportion of patients making predefined serious errors with Pulmojet compared with Diskus and Turbohaler dry powder inhalers. Methods: Patients ≥18 years old with asthma and/or COPD who were current users of an inhaler but naïve to the study devices were assigned to inhaler technique assessment on Pulmojet and either Diskus or Turbohaler in a randomised order. Patients inhaled through empty devices after reading the patient information leaflet. If serious errors potentially affecting dose delivery were recorded, they repeated the inhalations after watching a training video. Inhaler technique was assessed by a trained nurse observer and an electronic inhalation profile recorder. Results: Baseline patient characteristics were similar between randomisation arms for the Pulmojet-Diskus (n = 277) and Pulmojet-Turbohaler (n = 144) comparisons. Non-inferiority in the proportions of patients recording no nurse-observed serious errors was demonstrated for both Pulmojet versus Diskus, and Pulmojet versus Turbohaler; therefore, superiority was tested. Patients were significantly less likely to make ≥1 nurse-observed serious errors using Pulmojet compared with Diskus (odds ratio, 0.31; 95 % CI, 0.19–0.51) or Pulmojet compared with Turbohaler (0.23; 0.12–0.44) after reading the patient information leaflet with additional video instruction, if required. Conclusions These results suggest Pulmojet is easier to learn to use correctly than the Turbohaler or Diskus for current inhaler users switching to a new dry powder inhaler

Concepts for the development of person-centred, digitally-enabled, Artificial Intelligence-assisted ARIA care pathways (ARIA 2024)

The traditional healthcare model is focused on diseases (medicine and natural science) and does not acknowledge patients' resources and abilities to be experts in their own life based on their lived experiences. Improving healthcare safety, quality and coordination, as well as quality of life, are important aims in the care of patients with chronic conditions. Person-centred care needs to ensure that people's values and preferences guide clinical decisions. This paper reviews current knowledge to develop (i) digital care pathways for rhinitis and asthma multimorbidity and (ii) digitally-enabled person-centred care (1). It combines all relevant research evidence, including the so-called real-world evidence, with the ultimate goal to develop digitally-enabled, patient-centred care. The paper includes (i) Allergic Rhinitis and its Impact on Asthma (ARIA), a two-decade journey, (ii) Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE), the evidence-based model of guidelines in airway diseases, (iii) mHealth impact on airway diseases, (iv) from guidelines to digital care pathways, (v) embedding Planetary Health, (vi) novel classification of rhinitis and asthma, (vi) embedding real-life data with population-based studies, (vii) the ARIA-EAACI strategy for the management of airway diseases using digital biomarkers, (viii) Artificial Intelligence, (ix) the development of digitally-enabled ARIA Person-Centred Care and (x) the political agenda. The ultimate goal is to propose ARIA 2024 guidelines centred around the patient in order to make them more applicable and sustainable

UK prescribing practices as proxy markers of unmet need in allergic rhinitis:A retrospective observational study

Little data on UK prescribing patterns and treatment effectiveness for allergic rhinitis (AR) are available. We quantified unmet pharmacologic needs in AR by assessing AR treatment effectiveness based on the prescribing behaviour of UK general practitioners (GP) during two consecutive pollen seasons (2009 and 2010). We conducted a retrospective observational study with the data from the Optimum Patient Care Research Database. We assessed diagnoses and prescription data for patients with a recorded diagnosis of rhinitis who took rhinitis medication during the study period. We assessed the data from 25,069 patients in 2009 and 22,381 patients in 2010. Monotherapy was the initial prescription of the season for 67% of patients with seasonal AR (SAR) and 77% of patients with nonseasonal upper airways disease (NSUAD), for both years. Initial oral antihistamine (OAH) or intranasal corticosteroid (INS) monotherapy proved insufficient for 420% of SAR and 437% of NSUAD patients. Multiple therapy was the initial prescription for 33% of SAR and 23% of NSUAD in both years, rising to 45% and 450% by season end, respectively. For NSUAD, dual-therapy prescriptions doubled and triple-therapy prescriptions almost tripled during both seasons. Many patients revisited their GP regardless of initial prescription. Initial OAH or INS monotherapy provides insufficient symptom control for many AR patients. GPs often prescribe multiple therapies at the start of the season, with co-prescription becoming more common as the season progresses. However, patients prescribed multiple therapies frequently revisit their GP, presumably to adjust treatment. These data suggest the need for more effective AR treatment and management strategies

Validation of the English version of the KINDL® generic children's health-related quality of life instrument for an Asian population - Results from a pilot test

10.1007/s11136-004-2957-2Quality of Life Research1441193-1200QLRE

Effects of Depressive Symptoms on Health-Related Quality of Life in Asthma Patients

OBJECTIVE: To assess the effects of depressive symptoms on asthma patients' reports of functional status and health-related quality of life. DESIGN: Cross-sectional study. SETTING: Primary care internal medicine practice at a tertiary care center in New York City. PATIENTS: We studied 230 outpatients between the ages of 18 and 62 years with moderate asthma. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: Patients were interviewed in person in English or Spanish with two health-related quality-of-life measures, the disease-specific Asthma Quality of Life Questionnaire (AQLQ) (possible score range, 1 to 7; higher scores reflect better function) and the generic Medical Outcomes Study SF-36 (general population mean is 50 for both the Physical Component Summary [PCS] score and Mental Component Summary [MCS] score). Patients also completed a screen for depressive symptoms, the Geriatric Depression Scale (GDS), and a global question regarding current disease activity. Stepwise multivariate analyses were conducted with the AQLQ and SF-36 scores as the dependent variables and depressive symptoms, comorbidity, asthma, and demographic characteristics as independent variables. The mean age of patients was 41 ±SD 11 years and 83% were women. The mean GDS score was 11 ±SD 8 (possible range, 0 to 30; higher scores reflect more depressive symptoms), and a large percentage of patients, 45%, scored above the threshold considered positive for depression screening. Compared with patients with a negative screen for depressive symptoms, patients with a positive screen had worse composite AQLQ scores (3.9 ±SD 1.3 vs 2.8 ±SD 0.8, P < .0001) and worse PCS scores (40 ±SD 11 vs 34 ±SD 8, P < .0001) and worse MCS scores (48 ±SD 11 vs 32 ±SD 10, P < .0001) scores. In stepwise analyses, current asthma activity and GDS scores had the greatest effects on patient-reported health-related quality of life, accounting for 36% and 11% of the variance, respectively, for the composite AQLQ, and 11% and 38% of the variance, respectively, for the MCS in multivariate analyses. CONCLUSIONS: Nearly half of asthma patients in this study had a positive screen for depressive symptoms. Asthma patients with more depressive symptoms reported worse health-related quality of life than asthma patients with similar disease activity but fewer depressive symptoms. Given the new emphasis on functional status and health-related quality of life measured by disease-specific and general health scales, we conclude that psychological status indicators should also be considered when patient-derived measures are used to assess outcomes in asthma