Cost-utility of as-needed ICS-formoterol versus to maintenance ICS in mild to moderate persistent asthma.

BACKGROUND: Recent asthma guidelines, such as the Global Initiative for Asthma (GINA), recommend in adult patients as-needed inhaled corticosteroids (ICS)-formoterol as an alternative to maintenance ICS in mild to moderate persistent asthma. The introduction of these recommendations concerns whether using as-needed budesonide-formoterol would be more cost-effective than to maintenance ICS. This study aimed to evaluate the cost-effectiveness of as-needed combination low-dose budesonide-formoterol compared to short-acting ß2-agonist (SABA) reliever therapy in patients with mild asthma. METHODS: A probabilistic Markov model was created to estimate the cost and quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs) of patients with mild asthma in Colombia. Total costs and QALYs of low-dose budesonide-formoterol compared to short-acting ß2-agonist (SABA) were calculated over a lifetime horizon. Multiple sensitivity analyses were conducted. Cost-effectiveness was evaluated at a willingness-to-pay value of $19,000. RESULTS: The model suggests a potential gain of 0.37 QALYs and per patient per year on as-needed ICS-formoterol and a reduction in the discounted cost per person-year, of as-needed ICS-formoterol to maintenance ICS, of US$40. This position of dominance of as-needed ICS-formoterol negates the need to calculate an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio. In the deterministic and probabilistic sensitivity analysis, our base-case results were robust to variations in all assumptions and parameters. CONCLUSION: Low-dose budesonide-formoterol as a reliever was cost-effective when added to usual care in patients with mild asthma. Our study provides evidence that should be used by decision-makers to improve clinical practice guidelines and should be replicated to validate their results in other middle-income countries.

An Efficient and Cost-Effective Nose-Only Inhalational Chamber for Rodents: Design, Optimization and Validation.

The mainstay treatment of pulmonary disorders lies around the direct drug targeting to the lungs using a nebulizer, metered-dose inhaler, or dry powder inhaler. Only few inhalers are available in the market that could be used for inhalational drug delivery in rodents. However, the available rodent inhalers invariably require high cost and maintenance, which limits their use at laboratory scale. The present work, therefore, was undertaken to develop a simple, reliable, and cost-effective nose-only inhalation chamber with holding capacity of three mice at a time. The nebulized air passes directly and continuously from the central chamber to mouthpiece and maintains an aerosol cloud for rodents to inhale. Laser diffraction analysis indicated volume mean diameter of 4.02 ± 0.30 µm, and the next-generation impactor studies, however, revealed mean mass aerodynamic diameter of 3.40 ± 0.27 µm, respectively. An amount of 2.05 ± 0.20 mg of voriconazole (VRC) was available for inhalation at each delivery port of the inhaler. In vivo studies indicated the deposition of 76.12 ± 19.50 µg of VRC in the mice lungs when nebulized for a period of 20 min. Overall, the developed nose-only inhalation chamber offers a reliable means of generating aerosols and successfully exposing mice to nebulization.

Cost saving of switching to equivalent inhalers and its effect on health outcomes.

BACKGROUND: Switching inhalers to cheaper equivalent products is often advocated as a necessary cost saving measure, yet the impact on patient's health and healthcare utilisation has not been measured. METHODS: We identified asthma and chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) patients from UK primary care electronic healthcare records between 2000 and 2016. A self-controlled case series was used to estimate incidence rate ratios (IRR); comparing outcome rates during the risk period, 3 months after the exposure (financially motivated switch), and control periods (preswitch and postrisk period). Four outcomes were assessed: disease exacerbation, general practitioner consultation, non-specific respiratory events and adverse-medication events. Medication possession ratio (MPR) was calculated to assess adherence. 2017 National Health Service indicative prices were used to estimate cost differences per equivalent dose. RESULTS: We identified a cohort of 569 901 asthma and 171 231 COPD regular inhaler users, 2% and 6% had been switched, respectively. Inhaler switches between a brand-to-generic inhaler, and all other switches (brand-to-brand, generic-to-generic, generic-to-brand), were associated with reduced exacerbations (brand-to-generic: IRR=0.75, 95% CI 0.64 to 0.88; all other: IRR=0.79, 95% CI 0.71 to 0.88). Gender, age, therapeutic class, inhaler device and inhaler-technique checks did not significantly modify this association (p<0.05). The rate of consultations, respiratory-events and adverse-medication events did not change significantly (consultations: IRR=1.00, 95% CI 0.99 to 1.01; respiratory-events: IRR=0.96, 95% CI 0.95 to 0.97; adverse-medication-events: IRR=1.05, 95% CI 0.96 to 1.15). Adherence significantly increased post-switch (median MPR: pre-switch=54%, post-switch=62%; p<0.001). Switching patients, in the cohort of regular inhaler users, to the cheapest equivalent inhaler, could have saved around £6 million annually. CONCLUSION: Switching to an equivalent inhaler in patients with asthma or COPD appeared safe and did not negatively affect patient's health or healthcare utilisation.

Manufacturer Revenue on Inhalers After Expiration of Primary Patents, 2000-2021.

This study quantifies the revenue earned on all brand-name inhalers approved by the US Food and Drug Administration from 2000 to 2021 and compared earnings before and after expiration of primary patents on these products.

Improving inhaler adherence in patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease: a cost-effectiveness analysis.

BACKGROUND: The PHARMACOP-intervention significantly improved medication adherence and inhalation technique for patients with COPD compared with usual care. This study aimed to evaluate its cost-effectiveness. METHODS: An economic analysis was performed from the Belgian healthcare payer's perspective. A Markov model was constructed in which a representative group of patients with COPD (mean age of 70 years, 66% male, 43% current smokers and mean Forced Expiratory Volume in 1 second of % predicted of 50), was followed for either receiving the 3-month PHARMACOP-intervention or usual care. Three types of costs were calculated: intervention costs, medication costs and exacerbation costs. Outcome measures included the number of hospital-treated exacerbations, cost per prevented hospital-treated exacerbation and cost per Quality Adjusted Life-Year. Follow-up was 1 year in the basecase analysis. Sensitivity and scenario analyses (including long-term follow-up) were performed to assess uncertainty. RESULTS: In the basecase analysis, the average overall costs per patient for the PHARMACOP-intervention and usual care were €2,221 and €2,448, respectively within the 1-year time horizon. This reflects cost savings of €227 for the PHARMACOP-intervention. The PHARMACOP-intervention resulted in the prevention of 0.07 hospital-treated exacerbations per patient (0.177 for PHARMACOP versus 0.244 for usual care). Results showed robust cost-savings in various sensitivity analyses. CONCLUSIONS: Optimization of current pharmacotherapy (e.g. close monitoring of inhalation technique and medication adherence) has been shown to be cost-saving and should be considered before adding new therapies.

The importance of continuity in inhaler device choice for asthma and chronic obstructive pulmonary disease.

Inhaled therapies are central to the treatment of asthma and chronic obstructive pulmonary disease. Physicians consider many factors when selecting the most appropriate inhaler device, including device efficacy and the cost to the health care system. This review aims to discuss the factors that are important when considering inhaler devices and the importance of continuity in the choice of inhaler device. A large number of factors can contribute to therapeutic outcomes with inhalation devices. The inhalation technique is critical to treatment success and differs substantially between inhaler devices. Misuse of an inhaler is common, and thorough training of patients and physicians is important to ensure correct utilization. Patient satisfaction is an important consideration because it is significantly correlated with compliance and better outcomes. Financial pressures contribute to decision making: although selecting the less expensive inhaler device might reduce direct treatment costs, it can have a large impact on disease control and the patient's well-being. Switching may be associated with a poor inhalation technique, reduced disease control and quality of life, increased use of other treatments and health care resources, and a greater chance of unsuccessful treatment. Nonconsensual switches can result in patient discontent, reduced confidence in the medication, and uncertainty regarding the degree of disease control. It is recommended that patients with stable disease remain on their current device. If a switch is considered, the patient should be consulted and the physician should take into account the patient's preference, their ability to correctly use the device, and the availability of the preferred drug in the preferred device.

Assessing the determinants of the potential for cost-effectiveness over time: the empirical case of COPD.

OBJECTIVES: The objective of this study was to assess the potential for cost-effectiveness of new technologies for chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) over the period from 2001 to 2010. METHODS: Lung function outcomes and drug prices were observed for a UK COPD population over the period from 2001 to 2010. Cost-effectiveness was assessed at regular intervals on the basis of an established cost-effectiveness model, and the maximum price a technology providing cure could achieve under the current cost-effectiveness rules was estimated. RESULTS: The results of this study show that although the scope for clinical improvement in COPD was still considerable, during the 10 years studied, the potential for cost-effectiveness at each point in time was dependent on momentary market characteristics, such as the changing price of comparators and improvements in clinical effectiveness. As a result, the analysis demonstrates that the future cost-effectiveness of a technology in development depends on the manner pricing and clinical effectiveness evolve throughout time. CONCLUSIONS: Because any predictions will be short-lived and dependent on a number of uncertain factors, we conclude that producing accurate forecasts on the potential for cost-effectiveness of new therapies earlier during the development process is especially difficult under the current static cost-effectiveness framework.

Potential negative consequences of non-consented switch of inhaled medications and devices in asthma patients.

BACKGROUND: Asthma requires individually tailored and careful management to control and prevent symptoms and exacerbations. Selection of the most appropriate treatment is dependent on both the choice of drugs and inhaler device; however, financial pressures may result in patients being switched to alternative medications and devices in an attempt to reduce costs. AIM: This review aimed to examine the published literature in order to ascertain whether switching a patient's asthma medications or device negatively impacts clinical and economic outcomes. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A literature search of MEDLINE (2001-13 September 2011) was conducted to identify English-language articles focused on the direct impact of switching medications and inhaler devices and switching from fixed-dose combination to monocomponent therapy via separate inhalers in patients with asthma; the indirect impacts of switching were also assessed. RESULTS: Evidence showed that non-consented switching of medications and inhalers in patients with asthma can be associated with a range of negative outcomes, at both individual and organisational levels. Factors that reduce adherence may lead to compromised symptom control resulting in increased healthcare resource utilisation and poorer patient quality of life. DISCUSSION: The consequences of a non-consented switch should be weighed carefully against arguments supporting an inhaler switch without the patient's consent for non-medical/budgetary reasons, such as potential reductions in initial acquisition costs, which may be associated with subsequent additional healthcare needs. CONCLUSION: Given the increasing pressure for reduced costs and efficient allocation of limited healthcare resources, an additional investment in ensuring high medication adherence may lead to greater savings due to a potentially decreased demand for healthcare services. In contrast, savings achieved in acquisition costs may result in a greater net loss due to increased healthcare consumption caused by decreased asthma control.

[On general practitioners' care of patients with asthma]. / HausärztlicheVersorgung von Patienten mit Asthma.

UNLABELLED: This review offers readers new aspects for the guideline-compliant care of asthma patients. Here, attention is focused on illustrating the bottlenecks in the administration of good and practicable therapeutic care and listing these as "major challenges for GPs". The interdisciplinary team of authors - consisting of three hospital-based pulmonologists, one pulmonologist in private practice, one internist in general practice, one pharmacist and one health economist discussed aspects of asthma therapy relevant in clinical practice. RESULTS AND CONCLUSIONS: Practicable results for the reader included an asthma pentagram, a graphic depicting the links and interactions between diagnosis, symptom management, communication, application and costs. From this emerged a consensus on four recommendations that can help GPs improve their care of their patients: (1) Whenever possible, have a specialist verifythe diagnosis. (2) Practice inhalation techniques with the patient and check up on their technique at regular intervals. (3) Monitor and fine-tune the therapeutic goals set down together with the patient. (4) Clearly define the (patient's) responsibilities and who is organizing care (communication between GP-specialist-patient-pharmacist-family members).

Efficacy and cost comparisons of bronchodilatator administration between metered dose inhalers with disposable spacers and nebulizers for acute asthma treatment.

BACKGROUND: Despite demonstration of equivalent efficacy of beta agonist delivery using a metered dose inhaler (MDI) with spacer vs. nebulizer in asthma patients, use of a nebulizer remains standard practice. OBJECTIVES: We hypothesize that beta agonist delivery with a MDI/disposable spacer combination is an effective and low-cost alternative to nebulizer delivery for acute asthma in an inner-city population. METHODS: This study was a prospective, randomized, double-blinded, placebo-controlled trial with 60 acute asthma adult patients in two inner-city emergency departments. Subjects (n = 60) received albuterol with either a MDI/spacer combination or nebulizer. The spacer group (n = 29) received albuterol by MDI/spacer followed by placebo nebulization. The nebulizer group (n = 29) received placebo by MDI/spacer followed by albuterol nebulization. Peak flows, symptom scores, and need for rescue bronchodilatator were monitored. Median values were compared with the Kolmogorov-Smirnov test. RESULTS: Patients in the two randomized groups had similar baseline characteristics. The severity of asthma exacerbation, median peak flows, and symptom scores were not significantly different between the two groups. The median (interquartile range) improvement in peak flow was 120 (75-180) L/min vs. 120 (80-155) L/min in the spacer and nebulizer groups, respectively (p = 0.56). The median improvement in the symptom score was 7 (5-9) vs. 7 (4-9) in the spacer and nebulizer groups, respectively (p = 0.78). The median cost of treatment per patient was $10.11 ($10.03-$10.28) vs. $18.26 ($9.88-$22.45) in the spacer and nebulizer groups, respectively (p < 0.001). CONCLUSION: There is no evidence of superiority of nebulizer to MDI/spacer beta agonist delivery for emergency management of acute asthma in the inner-city adult population. MDI/spacer may be a more economical alternative to nebulizer delivery.

Trends in Medicaid spending on inhalers in the United States, 2012-2018.

BACKGROUND: Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) and asthma are common respiratory diseases that impose a significant economic burden on Medicaid. Inhalers are the mainstay treatment for relieving symptoms and improving outcomes for COPD and asthma patients. OBJECTIVE: To describe the total spending and trends of Medicaid expenditures on inhalers between 2012 and 2018 in the United States. METHODS: We analyzed the deidentified data from the Medicaid Drug Spending Dashboard and utilization datasets from 2012 to 2018. We identified 9 classes of inhalers and described the Medicaid total spending on and relative annual changes for those inhalers. We also described the spending on available generic inhalers and compared the Medicaid spending by manufacturers during this time frame. RESULTS: Medicaid spent $26.2 billion on inhalers from 2012 to 2018. This spending increased by $2.5 billion (120%) over this time frame. During this specified period, the highest Medicaid spending was on the group of inhaled corticosteroid (ICS)-containing inhalers ($14.9 billion). Within this group, the inhaler class of ICS/long-acting beta-2 adrenoceptor agonists contributed to the highest Medicaid spending (53%), with a growth of 607% between 2012 and 2018. Of the $26.2 billion that Medicaid spent on inhalers, $35.5 million (less than 0.01%) was spent on 2 generic inhalers: fluticasone propionate with salmeterol and levalbuterol tartrate hydrofluoroalkane. CONCLUSIONS: Between 2012 and 2018, on average, $3.5 billion per year was spent by Medicaid on inhalers. Decreasing the price of inhalers by introducing more generic inhalers in the market can potentially reduce the cost burden on Medicaid. DISCLOSURES: This study was funded by the American Foundation for Pharmaceutical Education (AFPE). The funders had no role in study design, data collection, and analysis, decision to publish, or preparation of the manuscript. The authors declare no conflicts of interest.

Controller Medication Use and Exacerbations for Children and Adults With Asthma in High-Deductible Health Plans.

Importance: High-deductible health plans (HDHPs) are increasingly common and associated with decreased medication use in some adult populations. How children are affected is less certain. Objective: To examine the association between HDHP enrollment and asthma controller medication use and exacerbations. Design, Setting, and Participants: For this longitudinal cohort study with a difference-in-differences design, data were obtained from a large, national, commercial (and Medicare Advantage) administrative claims database between January 1, 2002, and December 31, 2014. Children aged 4 to 17 years and adults aged 18 to 64 years with persistent asthma who switched from traditional plans to HDHPs or remained in traditional plans (control group) by employer choice during a 24-month period were identified. A coarsened exact matching technique was used to balance the groups on characteristics including employer and enrollee propensity to have HDHPs. In most HDHPs, asthma medications were exempt from the deductible and subject to copayments. Statistical analyses were conducted from August 13, 2019, to January 19, 2021. Exposure: Employer-mandated HDHP transition. Main Outcomes and Measures: Thirty-day fill rates and adherence (based on proportion of days covered [PDC]) were measured for asthma controller medications (inhaled corticosteroid [ICS], leukotriene inhibitors, and ICS long-acting ß-agonists [ICS-LABAs]). Asthma exacerbations were measured by rates of oral corticosteroid bursts and asthma-related emergency department visits among controller medication users. Results: The HDHP group included 7275 children (mean [SD] age, 10.8 [3.3] years; 4402 boys [60.5%]; and 5172 non-Hispanic White children [71.1%]) and 17 614 adults (mean [SD] age, 41.1 [13.4] years; 10 464 women [59.4%]; and 12 548 non-Hispanic White adults [71.2%]). The matched control group included 45 549 children and 114 141 adults. Compared with controls, children switching to HDHPs experienced significant absolute decreases in annual 30-day fills only for ICS-LABA medications (absolute change, -0.04; 95% CI, -0.07 to -0.01). Adults switching to HDHPs did not have significant reductions in 30-day fills for any controllers. There were no statistically significant differences in PDC, oral steroid bursts, or asthma-related emergency department visits for children or adults. For the 9.9% of HDHP enrollees with health savings account-eligible HDHPs that subjected medications to the deductible, there was a significant absolute decrease in PDC for ICS-LABA compared with controls (-4.8%; 95% CI, -7.7% to -1.9%). Conclusions and Relevance: This cohort study found that in a population where medications were exempt from the deductible for most enrollees, HDHP enrollment was associated with minimal or no reductions in controller medication use for children and adults and no change in asthma exacerbations. These findings suggest a potential benefit from exempting asthma medications from the deductible in HDHPs.

Economic evaluation of BDP/formoterol fixed vs two single inhalers in asthma treatment.

BACKGROUND: Asthma treatment costs are substantial, the largest proportion being incurred by medications. Combination therapy with inhaled corticosteroids (ICS) and long-acting beta(2)-agonists (LABA) is recommended in patients not adequately controlled by ICS alone. Aim of this study was to compare costs and health outcomes of a fixed ICS-LABA combination of beclomethasone dipropionate (BDP) and formoterol fumarate (FF) vs the same drugs delivered via separate inhalers in Germany. METHODS: A cost-minimization analysis, a cost-effectiveness analysis, as well as a threshold analysis were undertaken. Efficacy results were obtained from a recent clinical trial. Cost inputs include medical costs, physician costs, and hospital admission costs. Medical costs, health outcomes, and treatment costs were also varied to assess their impact on results. RESULTS: Beclomethasone dipropionate/FF fixed combination was less costly compared to BDP + FF delivered as separate inhalers, costs totaling euro 525 and euro 637, respectively, over a 24-week treatment period. The incremental cost-effectiveness ratio was euro-9.77 per additional day free of asthma symptoms. Equal cost-effectiveness ratios would still be obtained at a price of the fixed combination increased by 3.4-fold. CONCLUSION: A cost-minimization analysis as well as a cost-effectiveness analysis for Germany based on different product price calculations show that BDP/FF fixed combination is superior to BDP + FF delivered via separate inhalers.

Incorporating the Environmental Impact into a Budget Impact Analysis: The Example of Adopting RESPIMAT® Re-usable Inhaler.

BACKGROUND: RESPIMAT® re-usable enables patients to re-use the inhaler and its availability therefore reduces the number of inhalers and associated wastage. OBJECTIVE: The objective of this study was to perform an economic evaluation that incorporates the ecological impact of adopting RESPIMAT re-usable into the healthcare system in Germany. METHODS: Inhaler costs and environmental impact over 5 years in Germany in a scenario with RESPIMAT re-usable compared to a scenario without RESPIMAT re-usable were estimated using a budget impact model. The carbon emissions were derived for each treatment pattern considering the whole life cycle (cradle-to-grave) of the inhaler product. The cost of carbon emissions was estimated using a societal cost per ton of carbon emission. RESULTS: By introducing RESPIMAT re-usable in Germany, it was estimated that by 2023, the number of inhalers used would have decreased by 5,748,750 compared to a scenario without RESPIMAT re-usable. In addition, this measure would reduce the environmental burden of inhaler use while at the same time reducing medical cost of inhalers. CONCLUSIONS: Adopting RESPIMAT® re-usable to the national healthcare services may be a cost-saving option, which has the additional benefit of reducing the societal cost of carbon emissions.

Availability of substances for use in personal vaporisers on three online cryptomarkets.

BACKGROUND: Personal vaporisers are gaining popularity as an alternative route of administration for a range of substances. Online cryptomarkets are becoming increasingly popular among people who use substances due to their perceived anonymity, ease of use, and reduced risk of violence compared to traditional face-to-face dealers. We examined the diversity of substances marketed for use in a personal vaporiser on these marketplaces. METHODS: Vaping related listings were extracted from three online cryptomarkets ('Agartha', 'Cryptonia', and 'Tochka') using The Onion Router browser. Data collection occurred between October and November 2019. RESULTS: We identified 1929 listings from 201 unique sellers. The top product on Agartha, Cryptonia, and Tochka were vape cartridges prefilled with the e-liquid (70.4 %, 39.4 %, 52.3 % respectively). The most common substance in these products was cannabis oil (96.1 %, 82.1 %, 87.8 %), followed by synthetic cannabinoids (3.7 %, 9.7 %, 9.8 %) and psychedelic substances (0.2 %, 6.4 %, 1.2 %). Vendors were primarily from the USA. Many products offered worldwide shipping (96.3 %, 42.4 %, 51.2 %). CONCLUSION: Vaping products listed on online cryptomarkets in 2019 primarily contained cannabis oils. Future studies should continue to examine cryptomarkets to identify emerging trends of substances that can be used in personal vaporisers.

Effects of prescription coinsurance and income-based deductibles on net health plan spending for older users of inhaled medications.

BACKGROUND: Health plans that increase prescription cost-sharing for their patients may increase overall plan costs. We analyzed the impact on health plan spending of a switch in public drug insurance from full coverage to a prescription copayment (copay), and then to income-based deductibles plus coinsurance (IBD). METHODS: We studied British Columbia residents 65 years of age or older who were dispensed inhaled steroids, beta2 agonists or anticholinergics on or after January 1996. Multivariable linear regression was used to estimate health plan costs for the population using inhalers by the Ministry of Health (MOH) during the copay and IBD policies. We estimated costs for excess physician visits and emergency hospitalizations based on data from a previously published cohort study and cost data from the MOH. We estimated the net change in MOH spending as the sum of changes in spending for inhalers, physician visits, hospitalizations, and policy administration costs. RESULTS: Net health plan spending increased by C$1.98 million per year during the copay policy [95% confidence interval (CI): 0.10-4.34], and C$5.76 million per year during the first 10 months of the IBD policy (95% CI: 1.75-10.58). Out-of-pocket spending by older patients increased 30% during the copay policy (95% CI: 24-36) and 59% during the IBD policy (95% CI: 56-63). CONCLUSIONS: British Columbia's experience indicates that cost containment focused on cost-shifting to patients may increase net expenditures for the treatment of some diseases. Health plans should consult experts to anticipate the potential cross-program impacts of policy changes.

The impact of prescription charges on asthma patients is uneven and unpredictable: evidence from qualitative interviews.

AIM: To explore whether, and how, prescription charges affect asthma patients' disease management behaviour. METHOD: Thirty qualitative interviews. RESULTS: Interviewees were aged between 21 and 59, 21 were women, 24 were paying individual prescription charges, and six had prepayment certificates (PPCs). Most had a beta2-agonist 'reliever' and a steroid 'preventer' inhaler. Prescription charges posed affordability issues for some, and for two patients cost-related reduction in 'preventer' use affected asthma control negatively. Many described various ways of keeping medication cost down. Affordability issues, negative views on paying charges, and whether interviewees viewed their asthma medication as essential, were influential factors. Steroid inhalers were viewed more commonly as being less essential and affected by cost. The episodic nature of asthma meant that predicting benefit from PPCs was difficult. CONCLUSION: This study strengthens existing evidence that medication cost is a factor in asthma patients' management decisions, with a potential cost-related impact on asthma control.

Assessment of key influences on asthma inhaler device selection.

AIM: To identify factors that influenced trained asthma practice nurses' inhaler device selection and the relative importance they placed on these factors in clinical practice. METHOD: Questionnaires were sent to 1,500 randomly selected, trained asthma nurses working in primary care. A second, open-ended questionnaire was sent to 300 of these nurses. RESULTS: The response rate was 38% (573) for the first questionnaire and 21% (64) for the second questionnaire. Patient-related factors had the greatest influence on device selection. Other important factors were ease of inhaler use, the patient's lifestyle and inspiratory flow. Less important considerations were device availability, the size, shape and colour of the inhaler and recommendations from others. CONCLUSION: Many factors influence device selection. Nurses considered some of the factors identified as important when selecting a device, but not others. Nurses should be aware of potential influences on device selection and should consider their professional accountability in all patient interactions.