Evaluation of Metered Dose Inhaler Use Technique and Response to Educational Training.

G. Jolly, A. Mohan, R. Guleria, R. Poulose, J. George
{"title":"Evaluation of Metered Dose Inhaler Use Technique and Response to Educational Training.","authors":"G. Jolly, A. Mohan, R. Guleria, R. Poulose, J. George","doi":"10.5005/ijcdas-57-1-17","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"BACKGROUND\nPrescribing inhalers without imparting adequate education regarding proper technique of their usage may result in suboptimal clinical improvement and wastage of medication. Training interventions using a standard check-list may help improve faulty techniques and enhance drug efficacy.\n\n\nMETHODS\nPatients using metered dose inhaler (MDI) were included in the study. Inhaler technique was first evaluated at baseline using a standard check-list of recommended steps (National Institute of Health guidelines; see Table) and scores were given for each step correctly performed. Those who could not perform all steps correctly were given training intervention. The patients were assigned to two methods of educational intervention; one group was trained by providing written material giving step-wise instructions while the other group was given an actual physical demonstration using a placebo device. The technique was re-evaluated and scored following each educational session, and continued till the patient achieved a full score, or for a maximum of 3 sessions, whichever occurred earlier. Median score was calculated after each session and was compared between the two groups. Each patient was followed up after two months and the re-evaluated the same way.\n\n\nRESULTS\nOne hundred and seventeen subjects were enrolled in the study (59 in the written group and 57 in the practical demonstration group). At baseline, only 1 of the 117 subjects could perform all the steps of inhaler usage correctly. This patient was, therefore, not provided the inhaler technique education. The overall median (range) score of the whole group was 3 (range 1-8). This score rose to 6, 7 and 8 after each of the three subsequent educational intervention sessions. At one-month follow-up, the median score dropped to 7 and improved with a repeat educational session as previously done. A significant difference was observed in the median score improvement achieved in the practical demonstration group compared with the written instruction group (3.0 versus 2.0 respectively, p < 0.001).\n\n\nCONCLUSIONS\nInhalation technique of patients improves after imparting systematic educational intervention. A practical demonstration of all the steps proved more effective than simple verbal/written advice. In view of increasing errors being committed over a period of time, repeated demonstration of the proper technique using a standard check-list significantly improves the errors committed during inhaler use.","PeriodicalId":76635,"journal":{"name":"The Indian journal of chest diseases & allied sciences","volume":"1 1","pages":"17-20"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2022-11-17","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"23","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"The Indian journal of chest diseases & allied sciences","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.5005/ijcdas-57-1-17","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 23

Abstract

BACKGROUND Prescribing inhalers without imparting adequate education regarding proper technique of their usage may result in suboptimal clinical improvement and wastage of medication. Training interventions using a standard check-list may help improve faulty techniques and enhance drug efficacy. METHODS Patients using metered dose inhaler (MDI) were included in the study. Inhaler technique was first evaluated at baseline using a standard check-list of recommended steps (National Institute of Health guidelines; see Table) and scores were given for each step correctly performed. Those who could not perform all steps correctly were given training intervention. The patients were assigned to two methods of educational intervention; one group was trained by providing written material giving step-wise instructions while the other group was given an actual physical demonstration using a placebo device. The technique was re-evaluated and scored following each educational session, and continued till the patient achieved a full score, or for a maximum of 3 sessions, whichever occurred earlier. Median score was calculated after each session and was compared between the two groups. Each patient was followed up after two months and the re-evaluated the same way. RESULTS One hundred and seventeen subjects were enrolled in the study (59 in the written group and 57 in the practical demonstration group). At baseline, only 1 of the 117 subjects could perform all the steps of inhaler usage correctly. This patient was, therefore, not provided the inhaler technique education. The overall median (range) score of the whole group was 3 (range 1-8). This score rose to 6, 7 and 8 after each of the three subsequent educational intervention sessions. At one-month follow-up, the median score dropped to 7 and improved with a repeat educational session as previously done. A significant difference was observed in the median score improvement achieved in the practical demonstration group compared with the written instruction group (3.0 versus 2.0 respectively, p < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS Inhalation technique of patients improves after imparting systematic educational intervention. A practical demonstration of all the steps proved more effective than simple verbal/written advice. In view of increasing errors being committed over a period of time, repeated demonstration of the proper technique using a standard check-list significantly improves the errors committed during inhaler use.
计量吸入器使用技术评价及对教育培训的反应。
背景:在处方吸入器时,如果没有对吸入器的正确使用技术进行充分的教育,可能会导致临床改善不理想和药物浪费。使用标准检查表的培训干预可能有助于改进有缺陷的技术并提高药物疗效。方法采用计量吸入器(MDI)患者为研究对象。首先在基线使用推荐步骤的标准检查清单对吸入器技术进行评估(国家卫生研究所指南;(见表),并对正确执行的每一步给出分数。不能正确完成所有步骤的患者接受训练干预。患者被分配到两种教育干预方法;一组通过提供书面材料进行逐步指导,而另一组则使用安慰剂装置进行实际的物理演示。每次教育课程结束后,对该技术进行重新评估和评分,并持续到患者获得满分,或最多3次,以较早者为准。每次治疗后计算中位数得分,并比较两组之间的差异。每个患者在两个月后随访,并以同样的方式重新评估。结果共纳入研究对象117人,其中书面组59人,实践示范组57人。在基线时,117名受试者中只有1人能够正确执行吸入器使用的所有步骤。因此,该患者未接受吸入器技术教育。全组总体得分中位数(范围)为3分(范围1-8分)。在随后的三个教育干预课程中,这个分数分别上升到6,7和8。在一个月的随访中,中位数得分下降到7分,并在重复教育课程后得到改善。与书面指导组相比,实践示范组的中位数得分提高有显著差异(分别为3.0分和2.0分,p < 0.001)。结论通过系统的教育干预,患者的雾化技术水平有所提高。所有步骤的实际演示证明比简单的口头/书面建议更有效。鉴于在一段时间内发生的错误越来越多,使用标准检查表反复演示正确的技术可显著改善吸入器使用期间发生的错误。
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
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
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:604180095
Book学术官方微信