Evaluating the technique of using MDI and DPI in patients with respiratory disease

Inhalation therapy plays a major role in treatment of respiratory diseases. Correct inhalation technique is crucial for effective clinical outcomes. The aim of this study was to evaluate and analyse technique of use of Metered Dose Inhaler (MDI) and Dry Powder Inhaler (DPI) in patients with respiratory disease. This observational study was conducted at pulmonary outpatient department of a tertiary care hospital. 30 patients were enrolled using convenience sampling. Participants’ demographic and disease specific data was recorded. Participants were asked to use their inhaler just as they would at home. The technique of device use was observed and recorded using inhaler specific checklists. Data collected was analyzed using descriptive statistics. Out of 30 patients 26 were using MDI, 23 of which (92%) performed at least 1 error. Among 4 patients using DPI, 3 (75%) performed at least 1 error. Patients using MDI for more than 1 year performed less errors compared to those who had been using MDI for less than 1 year, however the difference observed was not significant (n=26, p= 0.304). 29 patients (96%) received education about inhaler device use. The most common incorrectly performed steps were “complete exhalation” and “breath hold.” 92% of MDI and 75% of DPI users made at least one error during the inhalation maneuver despite majority being educated about inhaler technique. The most frequently performed incorrect steps for MDI and DPI were “Complete exhalation” and “Breath hold”.

Respimat as the new standard for inhalation therapy devices

The effectiveness of inhalation therapy can be significantly reduced by a number of problems. For example, inhalation technique errors can reduce the dose delivered by 22-95% compared to the optimal value in patients with technical errors in the use of the inhaler. Sub-optimal inspiratory flow rates in a number of patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease and asthma are often the cause of technical errors during inhalation. Patient education does not produce the expected results, as the underlying cause of reduced flow is high hyperinflation and weakening of the respiratory musculature. The use of technologically outdated inhalers is another significant cause of reduced therapy effectiveness. Patient education and even conversion to a different inhaler do not always increase the effectiveness of therapy. Respimat, a brand new delivery agent introduced in 2004, allows 39% to 67% of the nominal dose to be delivered to the airways, while the degree of pulmonary deposit is independent of inspiratory flow and pulmonary drug deposit does not decrease with increasing obstruction. Compared to powder inhalers, Respimat creates less resistance to airflow on inhalation. In addition, Respimat is an active device that requires no effort on the part of the patient to move the aerosol particles. These features make Respimat the new standard for inhalation therapy. This review aims to familiarise readers with the main features of the Respimat and the latest research findings

Effectiveness of inhaled corticosteroids and long-acting β-agonists combinations in real clinical practice: results of a multicenter cross-sectional study in Russian patients with asthma

Asthma management approaches are improving yearly, but the problem of asthma control is still acute. Combinations of inhaled glucocorticosteroids (ICS) and long-acting β2-agonists (LABA) play a crucial role in asthma therapy, but their effectiveness in real practice can be insufficient, and asthma control level in the population remains low. Optimizing the use of these drugs, changing the usual therapy regimens, and implementing upgraded inhalers can improve adherence to treatment and inhalation technique, which affects the effectiveness of the therapy.The study aimed to describe the key characteristics of the patient population getting asthma treatment in real clinical practice and assess factors influencing asthma control, including adherence to therapy.Methods. A single-stage cross-sectional observational study in 124 primary health care centers in 22 cities of the Russian Federation included 3,214 patients > 18 years old, with a clinical diagnosis of asthma for at least 1 year, who were able to perform a spirometry test and fill out the ACQ-5 and TAI-12 questionnaires.Results. Assessment of asthma control with the ACQ-5 questionnaire showed that most patients had uncontrolled asthma (56%). Controlled and partially controlled asthma was diagnosed in 21 and 19% of patients, respectively. 4% of patients had severe uncontrolled asthma. The TAI questionnaire revealed low adherence to therapy in more than half of the patients (53.6%). The rate of patients with controlled asthma and the average annual frequency of exacerbations were significantly lower in subgroups of patients who received therapy with extrafine ICS/LABA and ICS/formoterol in single inhaler regimen, compared with controller therapy using fixed and free combinations of ICS and LABA.Conclusion. The main causes of insufficient asthma control are low adherence to treatment, inhalation errors, monotherapy with ICS, asthma with small airways dysfunction, and adverse events associated with ICS. Prescribing the combinations of ICS/LABA in the form of extra-fine aerosol and using it in the Maintenance and Reliever Therapy (MART) regimen can significantly increase asthma control, reduce the risk of adverse events, and increase patient adherence to treatment. A potential alternative to improve asthma control is administering ICS-LABA combinations once daily.

Overuse of Oral Corticosteroids, Underuse of Inhaled Corticosteroids, and Implications for Biologic Therapy in Asthma

<b><i>Background:</i></b> Asthma patients using high cumulative doses of oral corticosteroids (OCSs) are at risk of serious adverse events and are increasingly being treated with steroid-sparing asthma biologics. However, it is unknown whether prescribing these expensive biologics is always justified. <b><i>Objectives:</i></b> This study aimed to (1) assess the prevalence of asthma patients using high cumulative doses of OCSs, (2) explore the role of suboptimal inhaler therapy, and (3) estimate the proportion of patients to whom asthma biologics might be prescribed unnecessarily. <b><i>Methods:</i></b> All adults (<i>n</i> = 5,002) with at least 1 prescription of high-dose inhaled corticosteroids (≥500–1,000 mcg/day fluticasone-equivalent) and/or OCSs (GINA step 4–5) in 2010 were selected from a pharmacy database including 500,500 Dutch inhabitants, and sent questionnaires. Of 2,312 patients who returned questionnaires, 929 had asthma. We calculated the annual cumulative OCS dose and prescription fillings and checked inhaler technique in a sample of 60 patients. Patients estimated to have good adherence and inhaler proficiency who still required high doses of OCSs (≥420 mg/year) were considered candidates for initiating biologic treatment. <b><i>Results:</i></b> 29.5% of asthma patients on GINA 4–5 therapy used high doses of OCSs, of which 78.1% were likely to have poor therapy adherence or inadequate inhaler technique. Only 21.9% were considered definitive candidates for biologic therapy. <b><i>Conclusion:</i></b> High OCS use in Dutch GINA 4–5 asthma patients was common. However, in 4 out of 5 patients adherence to inhaled corticosteroid therapy and/or inhalation technique was considered suboptimal. Since optimizing inhaler therapy may reduce the need for OCSs, this should be mandatory before prescribing expensive steroid-sparing drugs.