9
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found
      Is Open Access

      From the infant to the geriatric patient—Strategies for inhalation therapy in asthma and chronic obstructive pulmonary disease

      review-article

      Read this article at

      ScienceOpenPublisherPMC
          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

          Inhalation therapy represents the standard of care in children, adolescents as well as in young, middle‐aged and geriatric adults with asthma or chronic obstructive pulmonary disease. However, there are only few recommendations for the choice of inhalation devices, which consider both, age‐specific limitations in young and geriatric patients. Transition concepts are lacking. In this narrative review, the available device technologies and the evidence for age‐specific problems are discussed.

          Pressurized metered‐dose inhalers may be favoured in patients who fulfill all cognitive, coordinative and manual power requirements. Breath‐actuated metered‐dose inhalers, soft‐mist inhalers or the use of add‐on devices such as spacers, face masks and valved holding chambers may be suitable for patients with mild to moderate impairments of these variables. In these cases, available resources of personal assistance by educated family members or caregivers should be used to allow metered‐dose inhaler therapy. Dry powder inhalers may be reserved for patients with a sufficient peak inspiratory flow and good cognitive and manual abilities. Nebulizers may be indicated in persons who are either unwilling or unable to use handheld inhaler devices. After initiation of a specific inhalation therapy, close monitoring is essential to reduce handling mistakes.

          An algorithm is developed that considers age and relevant comorbidities to support the decision‐making process for the choice of an inhaler device.

          Abstract

          Inhalation therapy is a highly individualized concept of therapy. Age, maturity and comorbidities have to be considered when choosing a specific inhalation device. Standardized algorithms may support this decision process. A close monitoring is essential as it may detect handling mistakes and the need to modify the device concept. A routine reevaluation of the inhalation concept should be implemented with age, maturation and new occurring comorbidities.

          Related collections

          Most cited references34

          • 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.
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: found
            Is Open Access

            Critical inhaler errors in asthma and COPD: a systematic review of impact on health outcomes

            Background Inhaled drug delivery is the cornerstone treatment for asthma and chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD). However, use of inhaler devices can be challenging, potentially leading to critical errors in handling that can significantly reduce drug delivery to the lungs and effectiveness of treatment. Methods A systematic review was conducted to define ‘critical’ errors and their impact on health outcomes and resource use between 2004 and 2016, using key search terms for inhaler errors in asthma and COPD (Search-1) and associated health-economic and patient burden (Search-2). Results Search-1 identified 62 manuscripts, 47 abstracts, and 5 conference proceedings (n = 114 total). Search-2 identified 9 studies. We observed 299 descriptions of critical error. Age, education status, previous inhaler instruction, comorbidities and socioeconomic status were associated with worse handling error frequency. A significant association was found between inhaler errors and poor disease outcomes (exacerbations), and greater health-economic burden. Conclusions We have shown wide variations in how critical errors are defined, and the evidence shows an important association between inhaler errors and worsened health outcomes. Given the negative impact diminished disease outcomes impose on resource use, our findings highlight the importance of achieving optimal inhaler technique, and a need for a consensus on defining critical and non-critical errors. Electronic supplementary material The online version of this article (10.1186/s12931-017-0710-y) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: not found

              Objective Assessment of Adherence to Inhalers by Patients with Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease.

              Objective adherence to inhaled therapy by patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) has not been reported.

                Author and article information

                Contributors
                lars.hagmeyer@klinik-bethanien.de
                Journal
                Clin Respir J
                Clin Respir J
                10.1111/(ISSN)1752-699X
                CRJ
                The Clinical Respiratory Journal
                John Wiley and Sons Inc. (Hoboken )
                1752-6981
                1752-699X
                13 April 2023
                June 2023
                : 17
                : 6 ( doiID: 10.1111/crj.v17.6 )
                : 487-498
                Affiliations
                [ 1 ] Institute of Pneumology at the University of Cologne Solingen Germany
                [ 2 ] Clinic for Pneumology and Allergology, Center of Sleep Medicine and Respiratory Care, Bethanien Hospital Solingen Solingen Germany
                [ 3 ] Faculty of Medicine University of Cologne, Pediatric Pulmonology, Allergology and Cystic Fibrosis Center, Children's Hospital Cologne Germany
                [ 4 ] Center for Rare Diseases, Faculty of Medicine University of Cologne, Children's Hospital Cologne Germany
                Author notes
                [*] [* ] Correspondence

                Lars Hagmeyer, Clinic for Pneumology and Allergology, Center of Sleep Medicine and Respiratory Care, Bethanien Hospital Solingen, Aufderhöherstraße 169, 42699, Solingen, Germany.

                Email: lars.hagmeyer@ 123456klinik-bethanien.de

                Author information
                https://orcid.org/0000-0003-4285-1244
                Article
                CRJ13610
                10.1111/crj.13610
                10265176
                37054701
                75f33e86-3388-4584-b7cf-f2eaea57fef3
                © 2023 The Authors. The Clinical Respiratory Journal published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd.

                This is an open access article under the terms of the http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ License, which permits use, distribution and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.

                History
                : 26 February 2023
                : 07 September 2022
                : 24 March 2023
                Page count
                Figures: 1, Tables: 2, Pages: 12, Words: 7423
                Categories
                Review Article
                Review Article
                Custom metadata
                2.0
                June 2023
                Converter:WILEY_ML3GV2_TO_JATSPMC version:6.2.9 mode:remove_FC converted:14.06.2023

                Respiratory medicine
                age,comorbidity,inhalation device,obstructive airway disease
                Respiratory medicine
                age, comorbidity, inhalation device, obstructive airway disease

                Comments

                Comment on this article

                Related Documents Log