Effectiveness of multimedia-assisted training on inhaler usage technique, which is the optimum technique?

OBJECTIVE: In this study, we aimed to investigate the most appropriate education method for patients to use their inhaler devices with the proper technique. PATIENTS AND METHODS: The study had a cross-sectional, multicenter design. 525 consecutive patients who had never used an inhaler therapy before were included in the study. Seven different types of inhalers were evaluated. 75 patients were included for each device type. For each device type, 25 patients were trained by their own physicians who personally demonstrated the use of the device [verbal education with physical demonstration (VEWPD)], 25 were given multimedia-assisted training (MAT), and 25 received both types of training together (first VEWPD followed by MAT). After the patients were trained, inhaler medications were used under the supervision of a physician. Correct use of the inhaler devices and perceptions of convenience were scored. RESULTS: For Ellipta inhaler device and Levered Diskus inhaler device, the proportion of patients using their devices properly was significantly higher in patients who were instructed with both of the methods together compared to other education groups (p = 0.011, p = 0.015). The effects of different types of training on learning in Sanohaler, Diskus inhaler, and Pressurized metered dose inhaler devices were the same. CONCLUSIONS: We could not come to a conclusion that multimedia training was more beneficial than other training. As an unexpected result, in almost all of the devices, patients who received multimedia training in combination with verbal training did not develop better learning despite being shown the use of the device twice (except Ellipta inhaler, and Levered Diskus inhaler device).

Comprehensive biomarker analysis of patients with idiopathic pulmonary fibrosis and interstitial lung disease with healthy individuals.

OBJECTIVE: Interstitial lung diseases (ILDs) are a group of diffuse parenchymal lung disorders that can be idiopathic [idiopathic pulmonary fibrosis (IPF)] or associated with other diseases and are characterized by varying degrees of inflammation and fibrosis with poor prognosis. Several indicators are essential in diagnosing these individuals and differentiating between IPF and ILD. PATIENTS AND METHODS: The study involved 44 IPF patients, 22 ILD (non-IPF) patients, and 24 healthy people. We aimed to compare ILD (non-IPF) and IPF patient groups with each other and with healthy people in terms of interleukin (IL)-1, tumor necrosis factor-alpha (TNF-α), matrix metalloproteinase (MMP)-1, MMP-7, galectin (Gal)-3, IL-6, Krebs von den Lungen-6 (KL-6), total antioxidant status (TAS), total oxidant status (TOS), pyruvate kinase (PK), complete blood count (CBC), ferritin, erythrocyte sedimentation rate (ESR), and C-reactive protein (CRP) features. Furthermore, it was intended to assess the patient groups in terms of visual semi-quantitative score (VSQS) (IPF alone), respiratory function tests (RFT), and 6-minute walk test (6MWT), also potential correlations between these tests and the previously indicated parameters. RESULTS: MMP-1, MMP-7, Gal-3, IL-6, KL-6, forced vital capacity (FVC), % FVC, forced expiratory volume in 1 second (FEV1), % FEV1, TAS, TOS, and PK values significantly elevated in IPF and ILD. Weight, IL-1, MMP-1, MMP-7, Gal-3, IL-6, KL-6, % FVC, FEV1, % FEV1, eosinophil count, and % red blood cell distribution width (RDW) values differed between IPF and ILD. VSQS, 6MWT, and PK were substantially linked with MMP-1, MMP-7, Gal-3, IL-6, and KL-6 in IPF. CONCLUSIONS: The factors investigated can be helpful in the diagnosis and distinction of IPF and ILD. In addition to focusing on the inflammatory environment in IPF and ILD patients, oxidant and antioxidant interactions must be studied.