Misuse of respiratory inhalers in hospitalized patients with asthma or COPD.

Department of Medicine, University of Chicago, Instructor, Section of Hospital Medicine, Chicago, IL 60637, USA.
Journal of General Internal Medicine (Impact Factor: 3.42). 06/2011; 26(6):635-42. DOI: 10.1007/s11606-010-1624-2
Source: PubMed

ABSTRACT Patients are asked to assume greater responsibility for care, including use of medications, during transitions from hospital to home. Unfortunately, medications dispensed via respiratory inhalers to patients with asthma or chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) can be difficult to use.
To examine rates of inhaler misuse and to determine if patients with asthma or COPD differed in their ability to learn how to use inhalers correctly.
A cross-sectional and pre/post intervention study at two urban academic hospitals.
Hospitalized patients with asthma or COPD.
A subset of participants received instruction about the correct use of respiratory inhalers.
Use of metered dose inhaler (MDI) and Diskus devices was assessed using checklists. Misuse and mastery of each device were defined as <75% and 100% of steps correct, respectively. Insufficient vision was defined as worse than 20/50 in both eyes. Less-than adequate health literacy was defined as a score of <23/36 on The Short Test of Functional Health Literacy in Adults (S-TOFHLA).
One-hundred participants were enrolled (COPD n = 40; asthma n = 60). Overall, misuse was common (86% MDI, 71% Diskus), and rates of inhaler misuse for participants with COPD versus asthma were similar. Participants with COPD versus asthma were twice as likely to have insufficient vision (43% vs. 20%, p = 0.02) and three-times as likely to have less-than- adequate health literacy (61% vs. 19%, p = 0.001). Participants with insufficient vision were more likely to misuse Diskus devices (95% vs. 61%, p = 0.004). All participants (100%) were able to achieve mastery for both MDI and Diskus devices.
Inhaler misuse is common, but correctable in hospitalized patients with COPD or asthma. Hospitals should implement a program to assess and teach appropriate inhaler technique that can overcome barriers to patient self-management, including insufficient vision, during transitions from hospital to home.

Download full-text


Available from: Vineet M Arora, Jun 27, 2015
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: The purpose of this study was to evaluate the timing and practices of blood glucose testing and rapid-acting insulin administration around mealtimes. This study used an observational, descriptive design to assess the time between blood glucose testing and insulin administration and the time between first bite of the meal and insulin administration. The setting was 4 cardiology units in 2 hospitals within a large community healthcare system. Sixty-four mealtime practice events at breakfast, lunch, and supper were observed. Investigators directly observed the timing of rapid-acting insulin administration at 3 mealtime periods an assessed timing of blood glucose testing, food intake, and method of glucose reporting. Overall, 14% (n = 64) of the patients received blood glucose testing within 1 hour prior to insulin administration and insulin administration within 15 minutes of the meal. As separate elements, blood glucose testing was done within the defined ideal range 35% (n = 63) of the time, and insulin was administered within range 40% (n = 58) of the time. Timing for meals, blood glucose testing, and rapid-acting insulin administration varied significantly and was not well synchronized among the various patient caregivers with low achievement of ideal practices. Results to this study revealed opportunities for better coordination of mealtime insulin practices. Lack of coordination can lead to medication errors and adverse drug events. Further study should include effect of mealtime coordination on glycemic control outcomes and testing the effect of interventions on timing of mealtime insulin practices.
    Clinical nurse specialist CNS 28(3):161-7. DOI:10.1097/NUR.0000000000000045 · 0.90 Impact Factor
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: What prevents people with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) from attending and completing pulmonary rehabilitation programs? Qualitative design using semi-structured interviews. 19 adults with COPD who had declined to participate and 18 adults with COPD who had not completed a pulmonary rehabilitation program at a metropolitan teaching hospital. A lack of perceived benefit from pulmonary rehabilitation was a significant theme for those who chose not to participate in pulmonary rehabilitation. Participants expressed perceptions that exercise was not a worthwhile treatment, or that they were already doing enough exercise at home. Difficulty getting to the program related to poor mobility, lack of transport, and cost of travel was a significant theme, expressed both by those who chose not to participate and those who did not complete. Another major theme associated with both uptake and completion involved being unwell, with participants indicating that the burden of COPD and other comorbidities impacted on attendance. Minor themes involved competing demands on time, older age, fatigue, program timing, and lack of social support. Many people with COPD who elect not to take up a referral to pulmonary rehabilitation perceive that they would not experience any health benefits from attendance. Difficulties with travel to the program and being unwell are barriers to both uptake and completion. Improving attendance at pulmonary rehabilitation requires consideration of how information regarding the proven benefits of pulmonary rehabilitation can be conveyed to eligible patients, along with flexible program models that facilitate access and accommodate co-morbid disease.
    Journal of physiotherapy 01/2011; 57(3):183-90. DOI:10.1016/S1836-9553(11)70040-6 · 2.89 Impact Factor
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Patient-centered care may be pivotal in improving health outcomes for patients with asthma. In addition to increased attention in both research and clinical forums, recent legislation also highlights the importance of patient-centered outcomes research in the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act. However, whether patient-centered care has been shown to improve outcomes for this population is unclear. To answer this question, we performed a systematic review of the literature that aimed to define current patient-focused management issues, characterize important patient-defined outcomes in asthma control, and identify current and emerging treatments related to patient outcomes and perspectives. We used a parallel search strategy via Medline®, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, CINAHL® (Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature), and PsycINFO®, complemented with a reference review of key articles that resulted in a total of 133 articles; 58 were interventions that evaluated the effect on patient-centered outcomes, and 75 were descriptive studies. The majority of intervention studies demonstrated improved patient outcomes (44; “positive” results); none showed true harm (0; “negative”); and the remainder were equivocal (14; “neutral”). Key themes emerged relating to patients’ desires for asthma knowledge, preferences for tailored management plans, and simplification of treatment regimens. We also found discordance between physicians and patients regarding patients’ needs, beliefs, and expectations about asthma. Although some studies show promise regarding the benefits of patient-focused care, these methods require additional study on feasibility and strategies for implementation in real world settings. Further, it is imperative that future studies must be, themselves, patientcentered (eg, pragmatic comparative effectiveness studies) and applicable to a variety of patient populations and settings. Despite the need for further research, enough evidence exists that supports incorporating a patient-centered approach to asthma management, in order to achieve improved outcomes and patient health.