Comparison of clinical efficacy and satisfaction of Tiotropium via Respimat® administration with and without a spacer in patient with Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease: A single centre experience.

OBJECTIVE: This study assessed the delivery of tiotropium via Respimat® in addition to standard care of treatment among chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) patients. We study the efficacy, clinical outcome of handling inhaler device, rate of exacerbation and frequency of hospital admission of tiotropium via Respimat® with and without the use of a spacer (AeroChamber®). METHODS: Randomised, open-label study of COPD patients which was randomised into two groups: spacer or nonspacer groups using tiotropium via Respimat®. Treatment with their pre-existing inhalers continued. Subjects were assessed at weeks 0, and 8 for forced expiratory volume in 1 second (FEV1), COPD assessment tool (CAT), St. George's Respiratory Questionnaire (SGRQ), and satisfaction questionnaire. RESULTS: We enrolled 96 subjects: 49 in the spacer group and 47 in the non-spacer group. The mean predicted FEV1 in spacer group was 54.48% at baseline and 57.5l% at week 8: p=0.011. In the non-spacer groups, FEV1 was 54.48% at baseline and 59.20% with a mean increment of 4.72 in both groups: p=0.002. There were no difference of exacerbation rates and hospital admission between both groups. At baseline, mean CAT score in the spacer group was 14.01 which improved to 9.80 (p<0.001) and 14.01 to 8.80 (p<0.001) in the non-spacer group. SGRQ total score reduced in both groups with mean difference of 3.1 (p<0.001) and 3.7: (p<0.001) at weeks 0 to 8. CONCLUSION: There was no difference between exacerbation and hospital admissions between both groups. There was no difference in FEV1, CAT and SQRQ score using Tiotropium via Respimat® with or without a spacer.

Understanding of Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) and the practice of preventive measures among doctors and nurses in a university teaching hospital- A cross-sectional study.

INTRODUCTION: Knowledge and adequate practice of preventive measures among health care workers (HCWs) are important to reduce the risk of COVID-19 transmission. METHODS: A cross-sectional study was conducted among doctors and nurses in the medical department in Pusat Perubatan Universiti Kebangsaan Malaysia between November 18, 2020 and December 18, 2020 during the third wave of COVID-19 epidemic in Malaysia. We studied the knowledge and practice of preventive measures of COVID-19 among doctors and nurses in the COVID-19 or sudden acute respiratory infection (SARI) wards and general medical wards. Data was collected using a validated self-designed google form online-questionnaire. RESULTS: A total of 407 subjects completed the study and 80.8% were females; 55.8% were aged between 30-39 years; 46.4% were medical doctors. The main source of COVID-19 knowledge was the Ministry of Health Malaysia (MOH) website (35.1%). Majority (97%) had sufficient knowledge and 82% practiced proper preventive measures. Doctors had a higher mean knowledge score compared to nurses (p < 0.001). HCWs working in COVID-19 or SARI wards scored higher in knowledge questions compared to those in the general medical wards (p = 0.020). Nurses practiced better preventive measures (p < 0.001). Good knowledge could not be predicted based on professions (OR: 0.222, 95% CI: 0.048 - 1.028, p = 0.054). Majority were unable to recall the proper steps of donning (85.8%) and doffing (98.5%). CONCLUSIONS: Although majority had good knowledge and practiced proper preventive measures, there was a poor recall in donning and doffing steps regardless of place of practice. The MOH website is a useful platform for tailored continuous medical education and regular updates on COVID-19. Regular training and retraining on donning and doffing of PPE is needed to bridge this gap.