Does mixing inhaler devices lead to unchecked inhaler technique errors in patients with COPD? Findings from the cross-sectional observational MISMATCH study.

BACKGROUND: Patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) may be prescribed multiple inhalers that require different techniques for optimal performance. Mixing devices has been associated with poorer COPD outcomes suggesting that it leads to inappropriate inhaler technique. However, empirical evidence is lacking. AIMS: Compare the nature and frequency of dry powder inhaler (DPI) technique errors in patients with COPD using (1) a single DPI or (2) mixed-devices (a DPI and pressurised metered dose inhaler (pMDI)). METHODS: Data from the PIFotal study-a cross-sectional study on Peak Inspiratory Flow in patients with COPD using a DPI as maintenance therapy, capturing data from 1434 patients on demographic characteristics, COPD health status and inhaler technique-were used to select 291 patients using mixed-devices. Frequency matching based on country of residence and DPI device type was used to select 291 patients using a DPI-only for comparison. Predetermined checklists were used for the evaluation of DPI video recordings and complemented with additional errors that were observed in ≥10%. Error proportions were calculated for the (1) individual and total number of errors, (2) number of critical errors and (3) number of pMDI-related errors. RESULTS: The study sample contained 582 patients (mean (SD) age 69.6 (9.4) years, 47.1% female). DPI technique errors were common, but not significantly different between the groups. The majority of patients made at least one critical error (DPI-only: 90.7% vs mixed-devices: 92.8%). Proportions of total, 'pMDI-related' and critical errors did not significantly differ between the groups. CONCLUSION: The nature and frequency of inhaler technique errors did not substantially differ between patients prescribed with a single DPI and mixed-devices. Currently, 'pMDI-related errors' in DPI use are not accounted for in existing checklists. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: ENCEPP/EUPAS48776.

Is Inhaler Technique Adequately Assessed and Reported in Clinical Trials of Asthma and Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease Therapy? A Systematic Review and Suggested Best Practice Checklist.

BACKGROUND: Inhaled medications are central to treating asthma and chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD), yet critical inhaler technique errors are made by up to 90% of patients. In the clinical research setting, recruitment of subjects with poor inhaler technique may give a false impression of both the benefits and the necessity of add-on treatments such as biologic therapies. OBJECTIVE: To assess the frequency with which inhaler technique is assessed and reliably optimized before and during patient enrollment into randomized controlled trials (RCTs) addressing the efficacy of topical therapy, and the escalation of therapy for asthma and COPD. METHODS: Systematic searches were conducted of PubMed and Embase for RCTs published in the past 10 years involving patients with a diagnosis of asthma or COPD undergoing escalation of baseline inhaled therapy (stepping up, changing, adding, switching, increasing, etc) or the introduction of biologic agents. RESULTS: Searches highlighted 1,014 studies, 118 of which were eligible after the removal of duplicates as well as screening and full text review. Of these, only 14 (11.9%) included accessible information in the methods section or referred to such information in online supplements or protocols concerning assessment of participants' inhaler technique. We therefore developed the proposed Best Practice Inhaler Technique Assessment and Reporting Checklist. CONCLUSIONS: Our study identifies a concerning lack of checking and correcting inhaler technique, or at least reporting that this was undertaken, before enrollment in asthma and COPD RCTs, which may affect the conclusions drawn. Mandating the use of a standardized checklist in RCT protocols and ensuring all published RCTs report checking and correcting inhaler technique before enrollment are important next steps.

Inspiratory flow profile and usability of the NEXThaler, a multidose dry powder inhaler, in asthma and COPD.

BACKGROUND: Inhaler selection is important when managing respiratory conditions; a patient's inhalation technique should be appropriate for the selected device, and patients should ideally be able to use a device successfully regardless of disease severity. The NEXThaler is a multidose dry-powder inhaler with a breath-actuated mechanism (BAM) and dose counter that activates only following inhalation, so effectively an 'inhalation counter'. We assessed inspiratory flow through the NEXThaler in two studies and examined whether inhalation triggered the BAM. METHODS: The two studies were open-label, single-arm, and single visit. One study recruited patients with asthma aged ≥ 18 years; the other recruited patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) aged ≥ 40 years. All patients inhaled twice through a placebo NEXThaler. The inspiratory profile through the device was assessed for each inhalation using acoustic monitoring, with flow at and time to BAM firing, peak inspiratory flow (PIF), and total inhalation time assessed. RESULTS: A total of 40 patients were enrolled in the asthma study: 20 with controlled asthma and 20 with partly controlled/uncontrolled asthma. All patients were able to trigger the BAM, as evidenced by the inhalation counter activating on closing the device. Mean flow at BAM firing following first inhalation was 35.0 (range 16.3-52.3) L/min; mean PIF was 64.6 (35.0-123.9) L/min. A total of 72 patients were enrolled in the COPD study, with data analysed for 69 (mean forced expiratory volume in 1 s 48.7% predicted [17-92%]). As with the asthma study, all patients, regardless of airflow limitation, were able to trigger the BAM. Mean flow at BAM firing following first inhalation was 41.9 (26.6-57.1) L/min; mean PIF was 68.0 (31.5-125.4) L/min. Device usability was rated highly in both studies, with 5 min sufficient to train the patients, and a click heard shortly after inhalation in all cases (providing feedback on BAM firing). CONCLUSIONS: Inhalation flows triggering the BAM in the NEXThaler were similar between patients with controlled and partly controlled/uncontrolled asthma, and were similar across COPD airflow limitation. All enrolled patients were able to activate the device.

Daily Impact of COPD in Younger and Older Adults: Global Online Survey Results from over 1,300 Patients.

The daily impact of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) on younger patients is often underappreciated. To assess this, we investigated the disease burden experienced by younger and older patients. A panel of questions was developed in conjunction with the European Federation of Allergy and Airways Diseases Patients' Associations and Boehringer Ingelheim. The online survey was conducted by Instar Research. Data were collected from eight countries in Europe, plus China, Japan and the United States. All patients were receiving COPD maintenance therapy. Patients were stratified by age (45-54, 55-64, ≥65 years). Data were analyzed from 1,375 patients from Europe (925), China (150), Japan (100) and the US (200); 365 were aged 45-54, 440 aged 55-64, and 570 aged ≥65 years. Mean age was 61.8 years; 771 (56%) were male. A significantly higher proportion of patients aged 45-54 years reported "poor" or "very poor" wellbeing (35% vs. 28%; p < 0.05) and "high impact" on 8 of the 11 daily activities and requirements for adjusting activities assessed (all p < 0.05), compared with patients aged ≥65 years. Significantly more patients aged 45-54 versus ≥65 years associated their COPD with feeling "anxious", "stressed", "sad", or "overwhelmed" (all p < 0.05). Younger patients with COPD reported a higher impact on their daily activities, wellbeing and requirement for adjusting their activities due to their symptoms than older patients. Our findings highlight the importance of optimizing treatment for younger patients with COPD and suggest that clinicians should not overlook the burden of disease in these patients.

Spacer devices for inhaled therapy: why use them, and how?

We present an extensive review of the literature to date pertaining to the rationale for using a spacer/valved holding chamber (VHC) to deliver inhaled therapy from a pressurised, metered-dose inhaler, a discussion of how the properties of individual devices may vary according to their physical characteristics and materials of manufacture, the potential risks and benefits of ancillaries such as valves, and the evidence that they contribute tangibly to the delivery of therapy. We also reiterate practical recommendations for the correct usage and maintenance of spacers/VHCs, which we trust offer practical help and advice to patients and healthcare professionals alike.

Inhaler technique mastery and maintenance in healthcare professionals trained on different devices.

OBJECTIVE: Healthcare professionals (HCPs) are required to assess and train patients in the correct use of inhalers but are often unable to demonstrate correct technique themselves. We sought to assess the level of training required for HCPs to master and maintain device mastery when using two different dry powder inhalers (DPIs). METHODS: We conducted a randomized, un-blinded, crossover study in undergraduate HCPs who undertook a six-step training procedure (intuitive use, patient information leaflet, instructional video, individual tuition from expert, then two repeats of individual tuition) for the use of Turbuhaler® (an established device) and Spiromax® (a newer device, reportedly easier to use). Device mastery (absence of errors) was evaluated by expert assessors at each training step. Maintenance of mastery was assessed 4 ± 1 week (visit 2) and 8 ± 2 weeks (visit 3) after initial training (visit 1). RESULTS: Of 516 eligible participants, 113 (22%) demonstrated device mastery prior to training on Spiromax® compared with 20 (4%) on Turbuhaler® (p < 0.001). The median number of training steps required to achieve mastery was 2 (interquartile range [IQR] 2-4) for Spiromax® and 3 (IQR 2-4) for Turbuhaler® (p < 0.001). A higher number of participants maintained mastery with Spiromax® compared with Turbuhaler®, at visits 2 and 3 (64% vs 41% and 79% vs 65%, respectively; p < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: There are significant differences in the nature and extent of training required to achieve and maintain mastery for Spiromax® and Turbuhaler® devices. The implications on clinical practice, device education delivery, and patient outcomes require further evaluation.

Adaptation of a difficult-to-manage asthma programme for implementation in the Dutch context: a modified e-Delphi.

Patients with difficult-to-manage asthma represent a heterogeneous subgroup of asthma patients who require extensive assessment and tailored management. The International Primary Care Respiratory Group approach emphasises the importance of differentiating patients with asthma that is difficult to manage from those with severe disease. Local adaptation of this approach, however, is required to ensure an appropriate strategy for implementation in the Dutch context. We used a modified three-round e-Delphi approach to assess the opinion of all relevant stakeholders (general practitioners, pulmonologists, practice nurses, pulmonary nurses and people with asthma). In the first round, the participants were asked to provide potentially relevant items for a difficult-to-manage asthma programme, which resulted in 67 items. In the second round, we asked participants to rate the relevance of specific items on a seven-point Likert scale, and 46 items were selected as relevant. In the third round, the selected items were categorised and items were ranked within the categories according to relevance. Finally, we created the alphabet acronym for the categories 'the A-I of difficult-to-manage asthma' to resonate with an established Dutch 'A-E acronym for determining asthma control'. This should facilitate implementation of this programme within the existing structure of educational material on asthma and chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) in primary care, with potential for improving management of difficult-to-manage asthma. Other countries could use a similar approach to create a locally adapted version of such a programme.

'To use or not to use': a qualitative study to evaluate experiences of healthcare providers and patients with the assessment of burden of COPD (ABC) tool.

In the management of chronic conditions, such as chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD), there is a shift from doctor-driven care to patient-centred integrated care with active involvement of and self-management by the patient. A recently developed tool, the assessment of burden of COPD (ABC) tool, can be used in this transition to facilitate self-management support and shared decision-making. We performed a qualitative study, in which we collected and analysed the data using the methods of conventional content analyses. We performed in-depth interviews consisting of mainly open questions. Fifteen healthcare providers and 21 patients were interviewed who had worked with the ABC tool in daily care. In general, participants responded positively to the tool. Healthcare providers felt the visual representation provided was effective and comprehensible for patients and provided them with insight into their disease, a finding that patients confirmed. If patients were allowed to choose between a consultation with or without the ABC tool, the majority would prefer using the tool: it provides them with an overview and insight, which makes it easier to discuss all relevant topics related to COPD. The tool can provide structure in consultations, and is compatible with the concepts of 'motivational interviewing' and 'individualised care-planning'. Suggestions for improvement related to content and layout. So far, the tool has only been available as a stand-alone online program, that is not connected to the electronic medical record systems. It was therefore suggested that the tool be integrated into the systems to enhance its usability and its uptake by healthcare providers.

Incidence of oral thrush in patients with COPD prescribed inhaled corticosteroids: Effect of drug, dose, and device.

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: Little information is available on real-life occurrence of oral thrush in COPD patients treated with ICS. We investigated oral thrush incidence in COPD patients prescribed FDC ICS/LABA therapies and assessed whether it is modulated by the ICS type, dose, and delivery device. METHODS: We conducted a historical, observational, matched cohort study (one baseline year before and one outcome year after initiation of therapy) using data from the UK Optimum Patient Care Research Database. We assessed oral thrush incidence in patients initiating long-acting bronchodilators or FDC ICS/LABA therapy. We then compared different combination therapies (budesonide/formoterol fumarate dihydrate [BUD/FOR] and fluticasone propionate/salmeterol xinafoate [FP/SAL]) and devices (DPI and pMDI). RESULTS: Patients prescribed FDC ICS/LABA had significantly greater odds of experiencing oral thrush than those prescribed long-acting bronchodilators alone (adjusted OR 2.18 [95% CI 1.84-2.59]). Significantly fewer patients prescribed BUD/FOR DPI developed oral thrush compared with FP/SAL DPI (OR 0.77 [0.63-0.94]) when allowing for differences in prescribed doses between the drugs. A significantly smaller proportion of patients developed oral thrush in the FP/SAL pMDI arm than in the FP/SAL DPI arm (OR 0.67 [0.55-0.82]). Additionally, in the FP/SAL cohort (both DPI and pMDI), increased risk of oral thrush was significantly associated with high ICS daily dose (OR 1.97 [1.22-3.17] vs low daily dose). CONCLUSIONS: ICS use increases oral thrush incidence in COPD and this effect is dose-dependent for FP/SAL therapies. Of the therapies assessed, FP/SAL pMDI and BUD/FOR DPI may be more protective against oral thrush.

Development of a diagnostic decision tree for obstructive pulmonary diseases based on real-life data.

The aim of this study was to develop and explore the diagnostic accuracy of a decision tree derived from a large real-life primary care population. Data from 9297 primary care patients (45% male, mean age 53±17 years) with suspicion of an obstructive pulmonary disease was derived from an asthma/chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) service where patients were assessed using spirometry, the Asthma Control Questionnaire, the Clinical COPD Questionnaire, history data and medication use. All patients were diagnosed through the Internet by a pulmonologist. The Chi-squared Automatic Interaction Detection method was used to build the decision tree. The tree was externally validated in another real-life primary care population (n=3215). Our tree correctly diagnosed 79% of the asthma patients, 85% of the COPD patients and 32% of the asthma-COPD overlap syndrome (ACOS) patients. External validation showed a comparable pattern (correct: asthma 78%, COPD 83%, ACOS 24%). Our decision tree is considered to be promising because it was based on real-life primary care patients with a specialist's diagnosis. In most patients the diagnosis could be correctly predicted. Predicting ACOS, however, remained a challenge. The total decision tree can be implemented in computer-assisted diagnostic systems for individual patients. A simplified version of this tree can be used in daily clinical practice as a desk tool.

Effectiveness of the Assessment of Burden of COPD (ABC) tool on health-related quality of life in patients with COPD: a cluster randomised controlled trial in primary and hospital care.

OBJECTIVE: Assessing the effectiveness of the Assessment of Burden of COPD (ABC) tool on disease-specific quality of life in patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) measured with the St. George's Respiratory Questionnaire (SGRQ), compared with usual care. METHODS: A pragmatic cluster randomised controlled trial, in 39 Dutch primary care practices and 17 hospitals, with 357 patients with COPD (postbronchodilator FEV1/FVC ratio <0.7) aged ≥40 years, who could understand and read the Dutch language. Healthcare providers were randomly assigned to the intervention or control group. The intervention group applied the ABC tool, which consists of a short validated questionnaire assessing the experienced burden of COPD, objective COPD parameter (eg, lung function) and a treatment algorithm including a visual display and treatment advice. The control group provided usual care. Researchers were blinded to group allocation during analyses. Primary outcome was the number of patients with a clinically relevant improvement in SGRQ score between baseline and 18-month follow-up. Secondary outcomes were the COPD Assessment Test (CAT) and the Patient Assessment of Chronic Illness Care (PACIC; a measurement of perceived quality of care). RESULTS: At 18-month follow-up, 34% of the 146 patients from 27 healthcare providers in the intervention group showed a clinically relevant improvement in the SGRQ, compared with 22% of the 148 patients from 29 healthcare providers in the control group (OR 1.85, 95% CI 1.08 to 3.16). No difference was found on the CAT (-0.26 points (scores ranging from 0 to 40); 95% CI -1.52 to 0.99). The PACIC showed a higher improvement in the intervention group (0.32 points (scores ranging from 1 to 5); 95% CI 0.14 to 0.50). CONCLUSIONS: This study showed that use of the ABC tool may increase quality of life and perceived quality of care. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: NTR3788; Results.

The Evolution of Pressurized Metered-Dose Inhalers from Early to Modern Devices.

Pressurized metered-dose inhalers (pMDIs) are sometimes viewed as old-fashioned and as having been superseded by dry powder inhalers (DPIs). Here, we review the technological advances that characterize modern pMDIs, and consider how they can influence the effectiveness of drug delivery for patients with asthma and chronic obstructive pulmonary disease. Compared with old chlorofluorocarbon (CFC)-based inhalers, many hydrofluoroalkane (HFA)-driven pMDIs have more favorable plume characteristics such as a reduced velocity and a higher fine particle fraction; together, these advances have resulted in the development of pMDIs with reduced oropharyngeal deposition and increased lung deposition. In addition, the plume from many HFA-pMDIs is warmer, which may facilitate their use by patients; moreover, devices are equipped with dose counters, which improves their reliability. As well as reviewing the technological advances of pMDIs, we also discuss the importance of individualizing inhaler therapies to each patient by accounting for their personal preferences and natural breathing patterns. Because pMDIs and DPIs differ considerably in their handling characteristics, matching the right inhaler to the right patient is key to ensuring effective therapy and good compliance. Finally, the majority of patients can be trained successfully in the correct use of their pMDI; training and regular monitoring of inhalation technique are essential prerequisites for effective therapy. While the 'ideal inhaler' may not exist, pMDIs are an effective device option suitable for many patients. pMDIs, together with other types of devices, offer opportunities for the effective individualization of treatments.

Using the Lower Limit of Normal Instead of the Conventional Cutoff Values to Define Predictors of Pulmonary Function Impairment in Subjects With Chronic Heart Failure.

BACKGROUND: Using the newer lower limit of normal criterion instead of the conventional cutoff values to define pulmonary function abnormalities may result in different predictors of pulmonary function impairment in patients with heart failure. Therefore, we assessed predictors of pulmonary function impairment in subjects with chronic heart failure according to the lower limit of normal in comparison with conventional cutoff values. METHODS: In this prospective cross-sectional study, 164 chronic heart failure subjects (age 68 ± 10 y, 78% men, 88% New York Heart Association class I-II) with left ventricular ejection fraction <40% underwent pulmonary function tests. Predictors of pulmonary function impairment were assessed using the lower limit of normal and conventional cutoff values (ie, 80% predicted value and the fixed ratio of FEV1/FVC <0.7). RESULTS: The lower limit of normal criterion identified an extra independent predictor of diffusion impairment compared with the 80% predicted value; in addition to body mass index, pack-years, and alveolar volume, female sex also turned out to be an independent predictor. A smoking history of ≥10 pack-years was a significant predictor of diffusion impairment and airway obstruction using the lower limit of normal criterion but not using the conventional cutoff values. However, lowering the cutoff points of conventional criteria to match the more stringent lower limit of normal and thus avoid overdiagnosis of diffusion impairment and airway obstruction in the elderly produced similar results as the lower limit of normal. CONCLUSIONS: The lower limit of normal identifies more predictors of diffusion impairment and airway obstruction compared with conventional cutoff values in subjects with chronic heart failure with left ventricular systolic dysfunction. However, lowering the conventional cutoff points yielded similar results as the lower limit of normal. (ClinicalTrials.gov registration NCT01429376.).

Levosimendan affects oxidative and inflammatory pathways in the diaphragm of ventilated endotoxemic mice.

INTRODUCTION: Controlled mechanical ventilation and endotoxemia are associated with diaphragm muscle atrophy and dysfunction. Oxidative stress and activation of inflammatory pathways are involved in the pathogenesis of diaphragmatic dysfunction. Levosimendan, a cardiac inotrope, has been reported to possess anti-oxidative and anti-inflammatory properties. The aim of the present study was to investigate the effects of levosimendan on markers for diaphragm nitrosative and oxidative stress, inflammation and proteolysis in a mouse model of endotoxemia and mechanical ventilation. METHODS: Three groups were studied: (1) unventilated mice (CON, n =8), (2) mechanically ventilated endotoxemic mice (MV LPS, n =17) and (3) mechanically ventilated endotoxemic mice treated with levosimendan (MV LPS + L, n =17). Immediately after anesthesia (CON) or after 8 hours of mechanical ventilation, blood and diaphragm muscle were harvested for biochemical analysis. RESULTS: Mechanical ventilation and endotoxemia increased expression of inducible nitric oxide synthase (iNOS) mRNA and cytokine levels of interleukin (IL)-1ß, IL-6 and keratinocyte-derived chemokine, and decreased IL-10, in the diaphragm; however, they had no effect on protein nitrosylation and 4-hydroxy-2-nonenal protein concentrations. Levosimendan decreased nitrosylated proteins by 10% (P <0.05) and 4-hydroxy-2-nonenal protein concentrations by 13% (P <0.05), but it augmented the rise of iNOS mRNA by 47% (P <0.05). Levosimendan did not affect the inflammatory response in the diaphragm induced by mechanical ventilation and endotoxemia. CONCLUSIONS: Mechanical ventilation in combination with endotoxemia results in systemic and diaphragmatic inflammation. Levosimendan partly decreased markers of nitrosative and oxidative stress, but did not affect the inflammatory response.

The minimal clinically important difference of the Control of Allergic Rhinitis and Asthma Test (CARAT): cross-cultural validation and relation with pollen counts.

BACKGROUND: The Control of Allergic Rhinitis and Asthma Test (CARAT) monitors control of asthma and allergic rhinitis. AIMS: To determine the CARAT's minimal clinically important difference (MCID) and to evaluate the psychometric properties of the Dutch CARAT. METHODS: CARAT was applied in three measurements at 1-month intervals. Patients diagnosed with asthma and/or rhinitis were approached. MCID was evaluated using Global Rating of Change (GRC) and standard error of measurement (s.e.m.). Cronbach's alpha was used to evaluate internal consistency. Spearman's correlation coefficients were calculated between CARAT, the Asthma Control Questionnaire (ACQ5) and the Visual Analog Scale (VAS) on airway symptoms to determine construct and longitudinal validity. Test-retest reliability was evaluated with intra-class correlation coefficient (ICC). Changes in pollen counts were compared with delta CARAT and ACQ5 scores. RESULTS: A total of 92 patients were included. The MCID of the CARAT was 3.50 based on GRC scores; the s.e.m. was 2.83. Cronbach's alpha was 0.82. Correlation coefficients between CARAT and ACQ5 and VAS questions ranged from 0.64 to 0.76 (P < 0.01). Longitudinally, correlation coefficients between delta CARAT scores and delta ACQ5 and VAS scores ranged from 0.41 to 0.67 (P < 0.01). Test-retest reliability showed an ICC of 0.81 (P < 0.01) and 0.80 (P < 0.01). Correlations with pollen counts were higher for CARAT than for ACQ5. CONCLUSIONS: This is the first investigation of the MCID of the CARAT. The CARAT uses a whole-point scale, which suggests that the MCID is 4 points. The CARAT is a valid and reliable tool that is also applicable in the Dutch population.

Distress in suspected lung cancer patients following rapid and standard diagnostic programs: a prospective observational study.

OBJECTIVE: Timeliness may influence emotional distress during the diagnostic phase of suspected lung cancer patients. We performed a prospective observational study to compare distress and quality of life (QoL) in two medical centres with a Rapid Outpatient Diagnostic Program (RODP) and two using conventional Stepwise Diagnostic Approach (SDA) on the basis of trained nurse-led care. METHODS: Outpatients with radiological suspicion of lung cancer completed the Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale (HADS), European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer 30-item Quality of Life Questionnaire (QLQ-C30) and its 13-item Lung Cancer specific module (QLQ-LC13) upon first visit, 2 days later, thereafter weekly for 5 weeks and after 3 months. RESULTS: The 72 SDA patients and 121 RODP patients had a mean pre-diagnostic HADS-total score of 13.5 (SD 7.6); 63.4% had a score ≥10. Baseline QLQ-C30 global QoL was 61.6 (SD 22.7) exceeding reference values for lung cancer patients. Generalized least square models showed a significant centre by time interaction effect: during the first 6 weeks, HADS-total scores decreased in RODP patients (13.8-11.9) but sustained in SDA patients (13.1-13.6), whereas QoL showed no relevant changes. Times to diagnosis and discussion of therapy plan for RODP patients were 7 and 11 days shorter, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: Suspected lung cancer patients had high baseline distress levels. A decrease over time was found in RODP compared with SDA patients. QoL did not change relevantly. Albeit observational, these data indicate that patients experience less distress in rapid diagnostic programs than in stepwise diagnostic evaluation.

Burden of Exacerbations in Patients with Moderate to Very Severe COPD in the Netherlands: A Real-life Study.

OBJECTIVE: The objective of this study was to compare rates of different types of acute exacerbations of COPD (AECOPDs) and healthcare utilization among patients with different severities of COPD. METHODS: Data for this study was obtained from the PHARMO Database Network, which includes drug dispensing records from pharmacies, hospitalization records and information from general practitioners. Patients with moderate to very severe COPD (GOLD II-III-IV) and a moderate or severe AECOPD between 2000 and 2010 were included in the study. Moderate and severe AECOPDs were defined by drug use and hospitalizations respectively. Study patients were followed from the first AECOPD to end of registration in PHARMO, death or end of study period, whichever occurred first. During follow-up, all recurrent AECOPDs were characterized and healthcare utilization was assessed. RESULTS: Of 886 patients in the study, 52% had GOLD-II, 34% GOLD-III and 14% had GOLD-IV. The overall AECOPD recurrence rate per person year (PY) increased from 0.63 for patients with GOLD-II to 1.09 for patients with GOLD-III and 1.33 for patients with GOLD-IV. The rate of severe AECOPD was 0.06, 0.14 and 0.17 per PY, respectively. CONCLUSION: AECOPD recurrence rates and healthcare utilization are significantly higher among patients with more severe COPD.