Inhalation Technique Errors with Metered-Dose Inhalers Among Patients with Obstructive Lung Diseases: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of U.S. Studies.

Soojin Cho-Reyes, B. Celli, C. Dembek, Karen Yeh, M. Navaie
{"title":"Inhalation Technique Errors with Metered-Dose Inhalers Among Patients with Obstructive Lung Diseases: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of U.S. Studies.","authors":"Soojin Cho-Reyes, B. Celli, C. Dembek, Karen Yeh, M. Navaie","doi":"10.15326/jcopdf.6.3.2018.0168","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Background\nMetered dose inhalers (MDIs) are commonly prescribed for inhalation therapy, but correct use is critical to promoting effective medication delivery. This systematic literature review and meta-analysis evaluates the overall and step-by-step prevalence of errors among adults with obstructive lung diseases in the United States who used MDIs.\n\n\nMethods\nElectronic and manual searches conducted between 1979-2018 using PubMed, EMBASE, PsycINFO, Cochrane, and Google identified 10 articles that met the following inclusion criteria: (a) English language, (b) U.S. adults diagnosed with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, and (c) MDI use error rates. Meta-analytic techniques using random-effects models were applied to calculate effect sizes, weighted proportions, and 95% confidence intervals (CIs). Heterogeneity was assessed by the I2 statistic.\n\n\nResults\nAggregate findings revealed that 86.7% of patients (n=390, 95% CI 77.5-96.0) made at least 1 inhalation technique error, and 76.9% (n=885, 95% CI 65.8-87.9) incorrectly performed ≥ 20% of device use steps. The most prevalent step-by-step errors across the studies (n=1105) were failure to: (a) exhale fully and away from the inhaler before inhalation (65.5% [95% CI 52.0, 78.9]); (b) hold breath for 5-10 seconds (41.9% [95% CI 29.8, 53.9]); (c) inhale slowly and deeply (39.4% [95% CI 26.2, 52.5]); (d) exhale after inhalation (35.9% [95% CI 17.0, 54.8]); and (e) shake the inhaler before use (34.2% [95% CI 30.6, 37.7]).\n\n\nConclusions\nAcross the studies used in this meta-analysis more than three-fourths of U.S. adults with obstructive lung diseases used MDIs incorrectly. Our findings suggest the need for ongoing patient education and consideration of alternative devices to mitigate errors.","PeriodicalId":10249,"journal":{"name":"Chronic obstructive pulmonary diseases","volume":"20 1","pages":"267-280"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2019-07-24","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"42","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Chronic obstructive pulmonary diseases","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.15326/jcopdf.6.3.2018.0168","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 42

Abstract

Background Metered dose inhalers (MDIs) are commonly prescribed for inhalation therapy, but correct use is critical to promoting effective medication delivery. This systematic literature review and meta-analysis evaluates the overall and step-by-step prevalence of errors among adults with obstructive lung diseases in the United States who used MDIs. Methods Electronic and manual searches conducted between 1979-2018 using PubMed, EMBASE, PsycINFO, Cochrane, and Google identified 10 articles that met the following inclusion criteria: (a) English language, (b) U.S. adults diagnosed with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, and (c) MDI use error rates. Meta-analytic techniques using random-effects models were applied to calculate effect sizes, weighted proportions, and 95% confidence intervals (CIs). Heterogeneity was assessed by the I2 statistic. Results Aggregate findings revealed that 86.7% of patients (n=390, 95% CI 77.5-96.0) made at least 1 inhalation technique error, and 76.9% (n=885, 95% CI 65.8-87.9) incorrectly performed ≥ 20% of device use steps. The most prevalent step-by-step errors across the studies (n=1105) were failure to: (a) exhale fully and away from the inhaler before inhalation (65.5% [95% CI 52.0, 78.9]); (b) hold breath for 5-10 seconds (41.9% [95% CI 29.8, 53.9]); (c) inhale slowly and deeply (39.4% [95% CI 26.2, 52.5]); (d) exhale after inhalation (35.9% [95% CI 17.0, 54.8]); and (e) shake the inhaler before use (34.2% [95% CI 30.6, 37.7]). Conclusions Across the studies used in this meta-analysis more than three-fourths of U.S. adults with obstructive lung diseases used MDIs incorrectly. Our findings suggest the need for ongoing patient education and consideration of alternative devices to mitigate errors.
阻塞性肺疾病患者使用计量吸入器吸入技术错误:美国研究的系统回顾和荟萃分析
背景:计量吸入器(MDIs)通常用于吸入治疗,但正确使用对于促进有效的药物传递至关重要。本系统的文献综述和荟萃分析评估了美国使用MDIs的成人阻塞性肺疾病患者的总体和逐步患病率。方法在1979-2018年期间使用PubMed、EMBASE、PsycINFO、Cochrane和Google进行电子和手动检索,确定了10篇符合以下纳入标准的文章:(a)英语,(b)诊断为慢性阻塞性肺病的美国成年人,(c) MDI使用错误率。采用随机效应模型的元分析技术计算效应大小、加权比例和95%置信区间(ci)。采用I2统计量评估异质性。结果86.7%的患者(n=390, 95% CI 77.5-96.0)至少出现1次吸入技术错误,76.9%的患者(n=885, 95% CI 65.8-87.9)错误执行≥20%的器械使用步骤。研究中最常见的逐步错误(n=1105)是未能:(a)在吸入前充分呼气并远离吸入器(65.5% [95% CI 52.0, 78.9]);(b)屏气5-10秒(41.9% [95% CI 29.8, 53.9]);(c)缓慢深吸气(39.4% [95% CI 26.2, 52.5]);(d)吸气后呼气(35.9% [95% CI 17.0, 54.8]);(e)使用前摇晃吸入器(34.2% [95% CI 30.6, 37.7])。在本荟萃分析中使用的研究中,超过四分之三患有阻塞性肺病的美国成年人错误地使用了MDIs。我们的研究结果表明,需要对患者进行持续的教育,并考虑使用替代设备来减少错误。
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:481959085
Book学术官方微信