Disparities in self-reported healthcare access for airways disease in British Columbia, Canada, during the COVID-19 pandemic. Insights from a survey co-developed with people living with asthma and chronic obstructive pulmonary disease.

Patients' perspectives on the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on their access to asthma and COPD healthcare could inform better, more equitable care delivery. We demonstrate this topic using British Columbia (BC), Canada, where the impact of the pandemic has not been described. We co-designed a cross-sectional survey with patient partners and administered it to a convenience sample of people living with asthma and COPD in BC between September 2020 and March 2021. We aimed to understand how access to healthcare for these conditions was affected during the pandemic. The survey asked respondents to report their characteristics, access to healthcare for asthma and COPD, types of services they found disrupted and telehealth (telephone or video appointment) use during the pandemic. We analysed 433 responses and found that access to healthcare for asthma and COPD was lower during the pandemic than pre-pandemic (p < 0.001). Specialty care services were most frequently reported as disrupted, while primary care, home care and diagnostics were least disrupted. Multivariable logistic regression revealed that access during the pandemic was positively associated with self-assessed financial ability (OR = 22.0, 95% CI: 7.0 - 84.0, p < 0.001, reference is disagreeing with having financial ability) and living in medium-sized urban areas (OR = 2.3, 95% CI: 1.0 - 5.2, p = 0.04, reference is rural areas). These disparities in access should be validated post-pandemic to confirm whether they still persist. They also indicate the continued relevance of exploring approaches for more equitable healthcare.

Impact of a COPD comprehensive case management program on hospital length of stay and readmission rates.

BACKGROUND: COPD accounts for the highest rate of hospital admissions among major chronic diseases. COPD hospitalizations are associated with impaired quality of life, high health care utilization, and poor prognosis and result in an economic and a social burden that is both substantial and increasing. AIM: The aim of this study is to determine the efficacy of a comprehensive case management program (CCMP) in reducing length of stay (LOS) and risk of hospital admissions and readmissions in patients with COPD. MATERIALS AND METHODOLOGY: We retrospectively compared outcomes across five large hospitals in Vancouver, BC, Canada, following the implementation of a systems approach to the management of COPD patients who were identified in the hospital and followed up in the community for 90 days. We compared numbers, rates, and intervals of readmission and LOS during 2 years of active program delivery compared to 1 year prior to program implementation. RESULTS: A total of 1,564 patients with a clinical diagnosis of COPD were identified from 2,719 hospital admissions during the 3 years of study. The disease management program reduced COPD-related hospitalizations by 30% and hospitalizations for all causes by 13.6%. Similarly, the rate of readmission for all causes showed a significant decline, with hazard ratios (HRs) of 0.55 (year 1) and 0.51 (year 2) of intervention (P<0.001). In addition, patients' mean LOS (days) for COPD-related admissions declined significantly from 10.8 to 6.8 (P<0.05). CONCLUSION: A comprehensive disease management program for COPD patients, including education, case management, and follow-up, was associated with significant reduction in hospital admissions and LOS.

Evaluation of the use of inhaled medications by hospital inpatients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease.

BACKGROUND: The prevalence of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) is increasing. Patients with COPD are treated with a variety of inhaled medications. Previous studies evaluating inhaler technique have had varied results but have generally found high rates of misuse of these devices. There is a paucity of studies of inhaler technique focusing on North American patients with COPD who have been admitted to hospital. OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the inhaler technique of patients with COPD who have been admitted to hospital and to identify baseline patient characteristics and/or inhaler devices associated with poor inhaler technique. METHODS: Patients with a diagnosis of COPD who were admitted to the hospitalist or internal medicine service at a tertiary care hospital in British Columbia between October 2010 and April 2011 were identified. After giving informed consent, recruited patients demonstrated their inhaler technique, which was evaluated with standardized checklists. Errors in technique were categorized as either noncritical or critical. Critical errors were defined as those resulting in little or no medication reaching the lungs. RESULTS: Thirty-seven patients (mean age 78 years) participated in the study. Twenty-two (59%) of the patients made critical errors while demonstrating their inhaler technique. Patients using metered-dose inhalers were more likely to make a critical error than patients using other inhalers (13/14 [93%] versus 9/23 [39%]; relative risk 2.38, p = 0.002). On average, 26% of the steps for using an inhaler were performed incorrectly. Twenty-three (62%) of the patients reported having received previous counselling on inhaler technique, but only 13 (57%) of these 23 patients had received such counselling in the previous 6 months. CONCLUSIONS: More than half of the patients in this study misused their inhaler devices, and many made critical errors that would result in inadequate amounts of drug reaching the lung. Many of the patients were not receiving regular counselling on appropriate inhaler technique. Health care professionals should be aware of poor inhaler technique, should routinely evaluate their patients' inhaler technique, and should provide counselling.