Cargando…

Acceptability and preference of three inhalation devices assessed by the Handling Questionnaire in asthma and COPD patients

BACKGROUND: The patients’ criteria of preference for inhalation devices can affect the extent of their adherence to treatment and outcomes. Aim of this study was to assess and compare the patients’ preference and acceptability (PPA) for Breezhaler and Genuair (both Dry Powder Inhalers), and for Resp...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Dal Negro, Roberto W., Povero, Massimiliano
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: BioMed Central 2016
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4748681/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/26865979
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s40248-016-0044-5
_version_ 1782415167944916992
author Dal Negro, Roberto W.
Povero, Massimiliano
author_facet Dal Negro, Roberto W.
Povero, Massimiliano
author_sort Dal Negro, Roberto W.
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: The patients’ criteria of preference for inhalation devices can affect the extent of their adherence to treatment and outcomes. Aim of this study was to assess and compare the patients’ preference and acceptability (PPA) for Breezhaler and Genuair (both Dry Powder Inhalers), and for Respimat (a Soft Mist Inhaler) in asthma and COPD out-patients by means of the Handling Questionnaire. METHODS: The Handling Questionnaire is a validated instrument which allows the investigation of different domains of PPA; it also takes into account the patients’ age and gender, together with their previous experience with the inhalation devices and their previous education approach to them. Differences in terms of preference, acceptance and usability were assessed by linear and logistic regressions in order to evaluate factors influencing the proper actuation. RESULTS AND DISCUSSION: Data from 333 patients were collected: Genuair and Respimat were the most liked and perceived as the easiest to use at glance by patients, but also as the least problematic according to the patients’ and nurse’s judgments. Mean number of attempts for achieving the first effective actuation was the highest with Breezhaler (2.6 vs 1.6; p <0.0001). Linear regressions showed that longer the explanation, higher was the number of attempts to the first proper actuation (0.58 additional attempts every 10 s increase in the first explanation, p <0.0001). Devices requiring less manoeuvres for the actuation were used properly after less attempts (0.38 increase in the number of attempts every additional manoeuvres, p <0.0001). Respimat proved to be the most indicated in COPD patients since it was the most liked and its successful rate at first attempt was the highest. Logistic regressions confirmed these data. Previous experience with DPIs and/or MDIs did not affect the patient preference and acceptability, independently whether suffering from asthma or COPD. CONCLUSIONS: Substantial differences are existing in patient’s preference and acceptability for inhalation devices, mainly related to the handling and the understanding of the different devices.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-4748681
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2016
publisher BioMed Central
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-47486812016-02-11 Acceptability and preference of three inhalation devices assessed by the Handling Questionnaire in asthma and COPD patients Dal Negro, Roberto W. Povero, Massimiliano Multidiscip Respir Med Original Research Article BACKGROUND: The patients’ criteria of preference for inhalation devices can affect the extent of their adherence to treatment and outcomes. Aim of this study was to assess and compare the patients’ preference and acceptability (PPA) for Breezhaler and Genuair (both Dry Powder Inhalers), and for Respimat (a Soft Mist Inhaler) in asthma and COPD out-patients by means of the Handling Questionnaire. METHODS: The Handling Questionnaire is a validated instrument which allows the investigation of different domains of PPA; it also takes into account the patients’ age and gender, together with their previous experience with the inhalation devices and their previous education approach to them. Differences in terms of preference, acceptance and usability were assessed by linear and logistic regressions in order to evaluate factors influencing the proper actuation. RESULTS AND DISCUSSION: Data from 333 patients were collected: Genuair and Respimat were the most liked and perceived as the easiest to use at glance by patients, but also as the least problematic according to the patients’ and nurse’s judgments. Mean number of attempts for achieving the first effective actuation was the highest with Breezhaler (2.6 vs 1.6; p <0.0001). Linear regressions showed that longer the explanation, higher was the number of attempts to the first proper actuation (0.58 additional attempts every 10 s increase in the first explanation, p <0.0001). Devices requiring less manoeuvres for the actuation were used properly after less attempts (0.38 increase in the number of attempts every additional manoeuvres, p <0.0001). Respimat proved to be the most indicated in COPD patients since it was the most liked and its successful rate at first attempt was the highest. Logistic regressions confirmed these data. Previous experience with DPIs and/or MDIs did not affect the patient preference and acceptability, independently whether suffering from asthma or COPD. CONCLUSIONS: Substantial differences are existing in patient’s preference and acceptability for inhalation devices, mainly related to the handling and the understanding of the different devices. BioMed Central 2016-02-10 /pmc/articles/PMC4748681/ /pubmed/26865979 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s40248-016-0044-5 Text en © Dal Negro and Povero. 2016 Open AccessThis article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license, and indicate if changes were made. The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver (http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated.
spellingShingle Original Research Article
Dal Negro, Roberto W.
Povero, Massimiliano
Acceptability and preference of three inhalation devices assessed by the Handling Questionnaire in asthma and COPD patients
title Acceptability and preference of three inhalation devices assessed by the Handling Questionnaire in asthma and COPD patients
title_full Acceptability and preference of three inhalation devices assessed by the Handling Questionnaire in asthma and COPD patients
title_fullStr Acceptability and preference of three inhalation devices assessed by the Handling Questionnaire in asthma and COPD patients
title_full_unstemmed Acceptability and preference of three inhalation devices assessed by the Handling Questionnaire in asthma and COPD patients
title_short Acceptability and preference of three inhalation devices assessed by the Handling Questionnaire in asthma and COPD patients
title_sort acceptability and preference of three inhalation devices assessed by the handling questionnaire in asthma and copd patients
topic Original Research Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4748681/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/26865979
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s40248-016-0044-5
work_keys_str_mv AT dalnegrorobertow acceptabilityandpreferenceofthreeinhalationdevicesassessedbythehandlingquestionnaireinasthmaandcopdpatients
AT poveromassimiliano acceptabilityandpreferenceofthreeinhalationdevicesassessedbythehandlingquestionnaireinasthmaandcopdpatients