38
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
1 collections
    0
    shares

      International Journal of COPD (submit here)

      This international, peer-reviewed Open Access journal by Dove Medical Press focuses on pathophysiological processes underlying Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease (COPD) interventions, patient focused education, and self-management protocols. Sign up for email alerts here.

      39,063 Monthly downloads/views I 2.893 Impact Factor I 5.2 CiteScore I 1.16 Source Normalized Impact per Paper (SNIP) I 0.804 Scimago Journal & Country Rank (SJR)

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

      Patient preferences for inhaler devices in chronic obstructive pulmonary disease: experience with Respimat ® Soft Mist Inhaler

      review-article

      Read this article at

      ScienceOpenPublisherPMC
      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

          Current guidelines for the management of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) recommend the regular use of inhaled bronchodilator therapy in order to relieve symptoms and prevent exacerbations. A variety of inhaler devices are currently available to COPD patients, and the choice of device is an important consideration because it can influence patients’ adherence to treatment, and thus potentially affect the long-term outcome. The Respimat ® Soft Mist Inhaler (SMI) generates a slow-moving aerosol with a high fine particle fraction, resulting in deposition of a higher proportion of the dose in the lungs than pressurized metered-dose inhalers (pMDIs) or some dry powder inhalers (DPIs). We review clinical studies of inhaler satisfaction and preference comparing Respimat ® SMI against other inhalers in COPD patients. Using objective and validated patient satisfaction instruments, Respimat ® SMI was consistently shown to be well accepted by COPD patients, largely due to its inhalation and handling characteristics. In comparative studies with pMDIs, the patient total satisfaction score with Respimat ® SMI was statistically and clinically significantly higher than with the pMDI. In comparative studies with DPIs, the total satisfaction score was statistically significantly higher than for the Turbuhaler ® DPI, but only the performance domain of satisfaction was clinically significantly higher for Respimat ® SMI. Whether the observed higher levels of patient satisfaction reported with Respimat ® SMI might be expected to result in improved adherence to therapy and thus provide benefits consistent with those recently shown to be associated with sustained bronchodilator treatment in patients with COPD remains to be proven.

          Most cited references51

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

          Adherence to Medication

          New England Journal of Medicine, 353(5), 487-497
            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: not found

            A 4-year trial of tiotropium in chronic obstructive pulmonary disease.

            Previous studies showing that tiotropium improves multiple end points in patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) led us to examine the long-term effects of tiotropium therapy. In this randomized, double-blind trial, we compared 4 years of therapy with either tiotropium or placebo in patients with COPD who were permitted to use all respiratory medications except inhaled anticholinergic drugs. The patients were at least 40 years of age, with a forced expiratory volume in 1 second (FEV(1)) of 70% or less after bronchodilation and a ratio of FEV(1) to forced vital capacity (FVC) of 70% or less. Coprimary end points were the rate of decline in the mean FEV(1) before and after bronchodilation beginning on day 30. Secondary end points included measures of FVC, changes in response on St. George's Respiratory Questionnaire (SGRQ), exacerbations of COPD, and mortality. Of a total of 5993 patients (mean age, 65+/-8 years) with a mean FEV(1) of 1.32+/-0.44 liters after bronchodilation (48% of predicted value), we randomly assigned 2987 to the tiotropium group and 3006 to the placebo group. Mean absolute improvements in FEV(1) in the tiotropium group were maintained throughout the trial (ranging from 87 to 103 ml before bronchodilation and from 47 to 65 ml after bronchodilation), as compared with the placebo group (P<0.001). After day 30, the differences between the two groups in the rate of decline in the mean FEV(1) before and after bronchodilation were not significant. The mean absolute total score on the SGRQ was improved (lower) in the tiotropium group, as compared with the placebo group, at each time point throughout the 4-year period (ranging from 2.3 to 3.3 units, P<0.001). At 4 years and 30 days, tiotropium was associated with a reduction in the risks of exacerbations, related hospitalizations, and respiratory failure. In patients with COPD, therapy with tiotropium was associated with improvements in lung function, quality of life, and exacerbations during a 4-year period but did not significantly reduce the rate of decline in FEV(1). (ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT00144339.) 2008 Massachusetts Medical Society
              Bookmark
              • 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

                Author and article information

                Journal
                Int J Chron Obstruct Pulmon Dis
                International Journal of COPD
                International Journal of Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease
                Dove Medical Press
                1176-9106
                1178-2005
                2009
                2009
                29 October 2009
                : 4
                : 381-390
                Affiliations
                [1 ]Divisions of Pulmonary and Critical Care, University of Ottawa, Ottawa, Ontario, Canada;
                [2 ]Department of General Practice and Primary Care, University of Aberdeen, Aberdeen, Scotland
                Author notes
                Correspondence: Richard Hodder, Professor of Medicine, Divisions of Pulmonary and Critical Care, University of Ottawa, The Ottawa Hospital, 1053 Carling Ave, Ottawa, ON, Canada K1Y 4E9, Email rhodder@ 123456ottawahospital.on.ca
                Article
                copd-4-381
                10.2147/COPD.S3391
                2829861
                19888356
                b0ba903d-5ad0-48fa-85a1-a592161947b6
                © 2009 Hodder and Price, publisher and licensee Dove Medical Press Ltd.

                This is an Open Access article which permits unrestricted noncommercial use, provided the original work is properly cited.

                History
                : 29 October 2009
                Categories
                Review

                Respiratory medicine
                respimat® soft mist™ inhaler,pressurized metered-dose inhalers,inhaler devices

                Comments

                Comment on this article