Usability of inhaler devices: a parameter currently misused

IF 2.3
Roberto W. Dal Negro
{"title":"Usability of inhaler devices: a parameter currently misused","authors":"Roberto W. Dal Negro","doi":"10.5826/mrm.2024.960","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Inhalation represents the most convenient route for delivering respiratory drugs. Delivery systems showed a huge technological progress and several pocket inhalers had been engineered over the last decades for clinical use. Despite the growing technological efforts aimed to simplify the inhalation procedures and optimize the therapeutic outcomes, the effectiveness of drug inhalation through inhalers still represents a major challenge in respiratory medicine. Patients may actually incur in different types of critical errors when using all inhalers and are not capable to inhale throughout all devices equally well. Therefore, the choice of the most suitable and convenient device to prescribe still is a critical issue in real life. Usability is the only comprehensive parameter consenting the effective and objective assessment of pocket inhalers’ performance, and allowing their objective comparison and ranking. Unpredictable discrepancies are in fact easily detectable between inhalers (even belonging to the same class) in terms of Usability, independently of the patient’s awareness. The reasons were described and discussed for each class of inhalers presently available. Usability is a multidimensional parameter that is much more multifaceted and complex than usually presumed. Usability takes origin from the integrated, balanced and objective assessment of the role played by several factors from different domains, such as: factors related to patient’s beliefs, to patients’ behavioural components, to device engineering and to the overall cost. Usability is the key parameter for assessing and optimizing the appropriateness of any inhalation treatment through whatever device. Usability would also represent a key investigational instrument for supporting the future development of ­innovative and more performing inhaler devices objectively.","PeriodicalId":49031,"journal":{"name":"Multidisciplinary Respiratory Medicine","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":2.3000,"publicationDate":"2024-03-04","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Multidisciplinary Respiratory Medicine","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.5826/mrm.2024.960","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Inhalation represents the most convenient route for delivering respiratory drugs. Delivery systems showed a huge technological progress and several pocket inhalers had been engineered over the last decades for clinical use. Despite the growing technological efforts aimed to simplify the inhalation procedures and optimize the therapeutic outcomes, the effectiveness of drug inhalation through inhalers still represents a major challenge in respiratory medicine. Patients may actually incur in different types of critical errors when using all inhalers and are not capable to inhale throughout all devices equally well. Therefore, the choice of the most suitable and convenient device to prescribe still is a critical issue in real life. Usability is the only comprehensive parameter consenting the effective and objective assessment of pocket inhalers’ performance, and allowing their objective comparison and ranking. Unpredictable discrepancies are in fact easily detectable between inhalers (even belonging to the same class) in terms of Usability, independently of the patient’s awareness. The reasons were described and discussed for each class of inhalers presently available. Usability is a multidimensional parameter that is much more multifaceted and complex than usually presumed. Usability takes origin from the integrated, balanced and objective assessment of the role played by several factors from different domains, such as: factors related to patient’s beliefs, to patients’ behavioural components, to device engineering and to the overall cost. Usability is the key parameter for assessing and optimizing the appropriateness of any inhalation treatment through whatever device. Usability would also represent a key investigational instrument for supporting the future development of ­innovative and more performing inhaler devices objectively.
吸入器的可用性:目前被滥用的参数
吸入是输送呼吸道药物的最便捷途径。过去几十年来,给药系统在技术上取得了巨大进步,并设计出多种袖珍吸入器用于临床。尽管在简化吸入程序和优化治疗效果方面做出了越来越多的技术努力,但通过吸入器吸入药物的有效性仍然是呼吸医学领域的一大挑战。实际上,患者在使用所有吸入器时都可能会出现不同类型的严重错误,而且并不能在所有设备上都同样有效地吸入药物。因此,在现实生活中,选择最合适、最方便的设备进行处方仍然是一个关键问题。易用性是唯一能对袖珍吸入器的性能进行有效、客观评估,并对其进行客观比较和排序的综合参数。事实上,吸入器之间(即使属于同一类别)在可用性方面很容易发现不可预测的差异,而与患者的认知无关。我们对目前市面上每一类吸入器的原因进行了描述和讨论。可用性是一个多维参数,其多面性和复杂性远远超出人们的想象。可用性源于对来自不同领域的多个因素所起作用的综合、平衡和客观评估,这些因素包括:与患者信仰有关的因素、与患者行为因素有关的因素、与设备工程有关的因素以及与总体成本有关的因素。可用性是评估和优化通过任何设备进行吸入治疗的适当性的关键参数。可用性也是一个重要的研究工具,可客观地支持未来开发创新和性能更佳的吸入器设备。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Multidisciplinary Respiratory Medicine
Multidisciplinary Respiratory Medicine Medicine-Pulmonary and Respiratory Medicine
自引率
0.00%
发文量
23
期刊介绍: Multidisciplinary Respiratory Medicine is the official journal of the Italian Respiratory Society - Società Italiana di Pneumologia (IRS/SIP). The journal publishes on all aspects of respiratory medicine and related fields, with a particular focus on interdisciplinary and translational research. The interdisciplinary nature of the journal provides a unique opportunity for researchers, clinicians and healthcare professionals across specialties to collaborate and exchange information. The journal provides a high visibility platform for the publication and dissemination of top quality original scientific articles, reviews and important position papers documenting clinical and experimental advances.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信