27
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found
      Is Open Access

      Inhaled corticosteroids for asthma: impact of practice level device switching on asthma control

      research-article

      Read this article at

      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          Background

          As more inhaled corticosteroid (ICS) devices become available, there may be pressure for health-care providers to switch patients with asthma to cheaper inhaler devices. Our objective was to evaluate impact on asthma control of inhaler device switching without an accompanying consultation in general practice.

          Methods

          This 2-year retrospective matched cohort study used the UK General Practice Research Database to identify practices where ICS devices were changed without a consultation for ≥5 patients within 3 months. Patients 6–65 years of age from these practices whose ICS device was switched were individually matched with patients using the same ICS device who were not switched. Asthma control over 12 months after the switch was assessed using a composite measure including short-acting β-agonist and oral corticosteroid use, hospitalizations, and subsequent changes to therapy.

          Results

          A total of 824 patients from 55 practices had a device switch and could be matched. Over half (53%) of device switches were from dry powder to metered-dose inhalers. Fewer patients in switched than matched cohort experienced successful treatment based on the composite measure (20% vs. 34%) and more experienced unsuccessful treatment (51% vs. 38%). After adjusting for possible baseline confounding factors, the odds ratio for treatment success in the switched cohort compared with controls was 0.29 (95% confidence interval [CI], 0.19 to 0.44; p < 0.001) and for unsuccessful treatment was 1.92 (95% CI, 1.47 to 2.56; p < 0.001).

          Conclusion

          Switching ICS devices without a consultation was associated with worsened asthma control and is therefore inadvisable.

          Related collections

          Most cited references21

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: found
          • Article: not found

          Device selection and outcomes of aerosol therapy: Evidence-based guidelines: American College of Chest Physicians/American College of Asthma, Allergy, and Immunology.

          The proliferation of inhaler devices has resulted in a confusing number of choices for clinicians who are selecting a delivery device for aerosol therapy. There are advantages and disadvantages associated with each device category. Evidence-based guidelines for the selection of the appropriate aerosol delivery device in specific clinical settings are needed. (1) To compare the efficacy and adverse effects of treatment using nebulizers vs pressurized metered-dose inhalers (MDIs) with or without a spacer/holding chamber vs dry powder inhalers (DPIs) as delivery systems for beta-agonists, anticholinergic agents, and corticosteroids for several commonly encountered clinical settings and patient populations, and (2) to provide recommendations to clinicians to aid them in selecting a particular aerosol delivery device for their patients. A systematic review of pertinent randomized, controlled clinical trials (RCTs) was undertaken using MEDLINE, EmBase, and the Cochrane Library databases. A broad search strategy was chosen, combining terms related to aerosol devices or drugs with the diseases of interest in various patient groups and clinical settings. Only RCTs in which the same drug was administered with different devices were included. RCTs (394 trials) assessing inhaled corticosteroid, beta2-agonist, and anticholinergic agents delivered by an MDI, an MDI with a spacer/holding chamber, a nebulizer, or a DPI were identified for the years 1982 to 2001. A total of 254 outcomes were tabulated. Of the 131 studies that met the eligibility criteria, only 59 (primarily those that tested beta2-agonists) proved to have useable data. None of the pooled metaanalyses showed a significant difference between devices in any efficacy outcome in any patient group for each of the clinical settings that was investigated. The adverse effects that were reported were minimal and were related to the increased drug dose that was delivered. Each of the delivery devices provided similar outcomes in patients using the correct technique for inhalation. Devices used for the delivery of bronchodilators and steroids can be equally efficacious. When selecting an aerosol delivery device for patients with asthma and COPD, the following should be considered: device/drug availability; clinical setting; patient age and the ability to use the selected device correctly; device use with multiple medications; cost and reimbursement; drug administration time; convenience in both outpatient and inpatient settings; and physician and patient preference.
            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: not found

            Importance of inhaler devices in the management of airway disease.

            The delivery of drugs by inhalation is an integral component of asthma and chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) management. However, even with effective inhaled pharmacological therapies, asthma, particularly, remains poorly controlled around the world. The reasons for this are manifold, but limitations of treatment guidelines in terms of content, implementation and relevance to everyday clinical life, including insufficient patient education, access to health care and cost of medication as well as poor inhaler technique are likely to contribute. Considering that inhalation therapy is a cornerstone in asthma and COPD management, little advice is provided in the guidelines regarding inhaler selection. The pressurised metered dose inhaler (pMDI) is still the most frequently prescribed device worldwide, but even after repeated tuition many patients fail to use it correctly. In addition, the correct technique can be lost over time. Although several improvements in pMDIs such as a change in the propellant and actuation have resulted in improvements in lung deposition, many dry powder inhalers (DPIs) are easier to use. However, these devices also have limitations such as dependency of drug particle size on flow rate and loss of the metered dose if the patient exhales through the device before inhaling. Improvements in using inhalation devices more efficiently, in inhaler design for supporting patient compliance, and advances in inhaler technology to assure drug delivery to the lungs, have the potential to improve asthma and COPD management and control. New and advanced devices are considered being helpful to minimise the most important problems patients have with current DPIs.
              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: not found

              The need to improve inhalation technique in Europe: a report from the Aerosol Drug Management Improvement Team.

              Although the principles of asthma management are well established in Europe, the available data indicate that asthma in patients is not well controlled. Many patients derive incomplete benefit from their inhaled medication because they do not use inhaler devices correctly and this may compromise asthma control. The Aerosol Drug Management Improvement Team (ADMIT), incorporating clinicians from the UK, Germany, France, Italy, Spain and The Netherlands, reviewed published evidence to examine ways to improve the treatment of reversible airways disease in Europe. Data indicate that there is a clear need for specific training of patients in correct inhalation technique for the various devices currently available, and this should be repeated frequently to maintain correct inhalation technique. Devices which provide reassurance to patients and their physicians that inhalation is performed correctly should help to improve patient compliance and asthma control. Educational efforts should also focus on primary prescribers of inhaler devices. ADMIT recommends dissemination of information on the correct inhalation technique for each model of device by the use of an accessible dedicated literature base or website which would enable to match the appropriate inhaler to the individual patient. There is also a need for standardisation of prescribing practices throughout Europe. Regular checking of inhalation technique by prescribers is crucial as correct inhalation is one of the keystones of successful asthma management.
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Journal
                BMC Pulm Med
                BMC Pulmonary Medicine
                BioMed Central
                1471-2466
                2009
                2 January 2009
                : 9
                : 1
                Affiliations
                [1 ]Department of General Practice and Primary Care, University of Aberdeen, Foresterhill Health Centre, Westburn Road, Aberdeen, UK
                [2 ]Division of Pharmacy and Pharmaceutical Sciences, School of Applied Sciences, University of Huddersfield, Huddersfield, HD1 3DH, UK
                [3 ]Oxford Outcomes Ltd, Oxford, UK
                [4 ]Global Health Outcomes, GlaxoSmithKline R&D, Uxbridge, Middlesex, UK
                [5 ]Respiratory Research, Ltd, Sankence, UK
                Article
                1471-2466-9-1
                10.1186/1471-2466-9-1
                2636760
                19121204
                5e63c85e-149b-4be4-ad48-a1f285a4c362
                Copyright © 2009 Thomas et al; licensee BioMed Central Ltd.

                This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License ( http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.0), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.

                History
                : 31 January 2008
                : 2 January 2009
                Categories
                Research Article

                Respiratory medicine
                Respiratory medicine

                Comments

                Comment on this article