Teaching inhaler use in chronic obstructive pulmonary disease patients.

PURPOSE: To review barriers to the successful use of inhalers in patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD), and the role of the nurse practitioner (NP) in facilitating optimum inhaler use. DATA SOURCES: Review of the national and international scientific literature. CONCLUSIONS: Pharmacologic treatment of COPD patients comprises mainly inhaled medications. Incorrect use of inhalers is very common in these individuals. Some of the consequences of poor inhaler technique include reduced therapeutic dosing, medication adherence, and disease stability, which can lead to increased morbidity, decreased quality of life, and a high burden on the healthcare system. Knowledgeable evaluation and frequent reassessment of inhaler use coupled with education of patients, caregivers, and healthcare professionals can significantly improve the benefits COPD patients derive from inhaled therapy. IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE: Patient education is vital for correct use of inhalers and to ensure the effectiveness of inhaled medications. The NP has a critical role in assessing potential barriers to successful learning by the patient and improving inhaler technique and medication management. The NP can also facilitate success with inhaled medications by providing up-to-date inhaler education for other healthcare team members, who may then act as patient educators.

Identifying adults at risk of COPD who need confirmatory spirometry in primary care: Do symptom-based questions help?

Objective To examine the usefulness of a symptom-based case-finding questionnaire (CFQ) and the Medical Research Council (MRC) dyspnea scale in identifying which individuals with known risk factors for chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) require targeted spirometry in primary care. Design Cross-sectional study. Setting Three community primary care practices in Ontario. Participants Men and women 40 years of age and older with a smoking history of 20 pack-years or more. Main outcome measures We administered a CFQ for the presence of cough, sputum, wheeze, dyspnea, and recurrent respiratory infections (possible range of scores from 0 to 5) and applied the MRC dyspnea scale to assess the severity of COPD (possible range of scores from 1 to 5). Spirometric measures of forced expiratory volume in 1 second (FEV1) and forced vital capacity (FVC) were collected, with COPD defined as a postbronchodilator FEV1/FVC of less than 0.7 and FEV1 of less than 80% of the predicted value. Using spirometric data to confirm the diagnosis of COPD, likelihood ratios, pretest and posttest probabilities, and area under a receiver operating characteristic curve were calculated for the total CFQ and MRC scores. Results Scores for the CFQ and MRC dyspnea scale were available for 996 and 829 participants, respectively. The likelihood ratios for a total CFQ score of 3 or higher and an MRC dyspnea score of 4 or 5 were 1.82 (95% confidence interval [CI] 1.48 to 2.22) and 4.22 (95% CI 2.08 to 8.56), respectively. The likelihood ratios for a total CFQ score of 2 or less and an MRC dyspnea score of 1 were 0.75 (95% CI 0.66 to 0.85) and 0.50 (95% CI 0.39 to 0.65), respectively. Area under the receiver operating characteristic curve was 0.62 (95% CI 0.58 to 0.67; P < .001) for the total CFQ scores and 0.64 (95% CI 0.60 to 068; P < .001) for the MRC dyspnea scores. Conclusion In adults with known risk factors, the likelihood of having moderate to severe COPD is increased in those who report 3 or more common respiratory symptoms and marked functional limitation resulting from dyspnea. However, selecting individuals for spirometry based on symptoms alone will identify less than half of those with moderate to severe COPD.

Prevalence and underdiagnosis of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease among patients at risk in primary care.

BACKGROUND: People with known risk factors for chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) are important targets for screening and early intervention. We sought to measure the prevalence of COPD among such individuals visiting a primary care practitioner for any reason. We also evaluated the accuracy of prior diagnosis or nondiagnosis of COPD and identified associated clinical characteristics. METHODS: We recruited patients from three primary care sites who were 40 years or older and had a smoking history of at least 20 pack-years. Participants were asked about respiratory symptoms and underwent postbronchodilator spirometry. COPD was defined as a ratio of forced expiratory volume in the first second of expiration to forced vital capacity (FEV(1)/FVC) of less than 0.7 and an FEV(1) of less than 80% predicted. RESULTS: Of the 1459 patients who met the study criteria, 1003 (68.7%) completed spirometry testing. Of these, 208 were found to have COPD, for a prevalence of 20.7% (95% confidence interval 18.3%-23.4%). Of the 205 participants with COPD who completed the interview about respiratory symptoms before spirometry, only 67 (32.7%) were aware of their diagnosis before the study. Compared with patients in whom COPD had been correctly diagnosed before the study, those in whom COPD had been over-diagnosed or undiagnosed were similar in terms of age, sex, current smoking status and number of visits to a primary care practitioner because of a respiratory problem. INTERPRETATION: Among adult patients visiting a primary care practitioner, as many as one in five with known risk factors met spirometric criteria for COPD. Underdiagnosis of COPD was frequent, which suggests a need for greater screening of at-risk individuals. Knowledge of the prevalence of COPD will help plan strategies for disease management.

Patient preferences for inhaler devices in chronic obstructive pulmonary disease: experience with Respimat Soft Mist inhaler.

Current guidelines for the management of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) recommend the regular use of inhaled bronchodilator therapy in order to relieve symptoms and prevent exacerbations. A variety of inhaler devices are currently available to COPD patients, and the choice of device is an important consideration because it can influence patients' adherence to treatment, and thus potentially affect the long-term outcome. The Respimat((R)) Soft Mist Inhaler (SMI) generates a slow-moving aerosol with a high fine particle fraction, resulting in deposition of a higher proportion of the dose in the lungs than pressurized metered-dose inhalers (pMDIs) or some dry powder inhalers (DPIs). We review clinical studies of inhaler satisfaction and preference comparing Respimat((R)) SMI against other inhalers in COPD patients. Using objective and validated patient satisfaction instruments, Respimat((R)) SMI was consistently shown to be well accepted by COPD patients, largely due to its inhalation and handling characteristics. In comparative studies with pMDIs, the patient total satisfaction score with Respimat((R)) SMI was statistically and clinically significantly higher than with the pMDI. In comparative studies with DPIs, the total satisfaction score was statistically significantly higher than for the Turbuhaler((R)) DPI, but only the performance domain of satisfaction was clinically significantly higher for Respimat((R)) SMI. Whether the observed higher levels of patient satisfaction reported with Respimat((R)) SMI might be expected to result in improved adherence to therapy and thus provide benefits consistent with those recently shown to be associated with sustained bronchodilator treatment in patients with COPD remains to be proven.

Early drotrecogin alpha (activated) administration in severe sepsis is associated with lower mortality: a retrospective analysis of the Canadian ENHANCE cohort.

INTRODUCTION: Early multimodal treatment of severe sepsis, including the use of drotrecogin alfa (activated) (DrotAA) when indicated, is considered essential for optimum outcome. However, predicting which infected patients will progress to severe sepsis and the need for aggressive intervention continues to be problematic. We therefore wished to explore whether there were any potential early markers that might predict improved survival in response to early use of DrotAA in patients with severe sepsis. In particular, in the dynamic setting of severe sepsis, we postulated that changes in markers reflecting evolving rather than baseline clinical status might guide therapy. METHODS: Data on a cohort of 305 Canadian patients from the open label ENHANCE trial of DrotAA in severe sepsis was retrospectively analyzed to search for potential clinical predictors of outcome in severe sepsis. Patients received a 96-hour infusion of DrotAA and were followed for 28 days. The association between time to treatment and mortality within subgroups defined by dynamic changes in various potential markers was explored. RESULTS: Mortality at 28 days was 22.6% and the variables of age, time to treatment, and early changes in serum creatinine and platelet count were identified by logistic regression as independent predictors of mortality. Across all age ranges, 28-day mortality was lower when DrotAA was administered within 24 hours of first sepsis-induced organ dysfunction compared to administration after 24 hours for both subgroups of patients defined by changes in platelet count and creatinine within the first day. CONCLUSIONS: These findings suggest that when indicated, treatment with DrotAA should be initiated as soon as possible, regardless of age. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Previous trial registration number: NCT00568893.

The short-form chronic respiratory disease questionnaire was a valid, reliable, and responsive quality-of-life instrument in acute exacerbations of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease.

OBJECTIVE: To assess the psychometric properties of the short-form chronic respiratory disease questionnaire (SF-CRQ) as a quality-of-life (QOL) instrument in chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) exacerbations. STUDY DESIGN AND SETTING: In a prospective multicenter cohort study, consecutive emergency department (ED) patients with COPD exacerbation were interviewed using the SF-CRQ and other instruments. Baseline information was collected in the ED and from follow-up data 2 weeks later. The results of the SF-CRQ were compared with the results of the other instruments and clinical variables by correlation and factor analyses. RESULTS: Of the 301 enrolled patients, 80% reported improvements across each of the domains of the SF-CRQ over the 2-week post-ED period. Overall median changes for the dyspnea, fatigue, emotional function, and mastery domains were 2, 1, 1, and 1.5, respectively (P<0.001 for each domain). Correlation and factor analyses support their convergent/divergent validity and construct validity. The reliability for the change score of the SF-CRQ was high (Cronbach's alpha coefficient, 0.82). Overall minimal clinically important difference for improvement in the SF-CRQ was 1.01 (95% confidence interval, 0.72-1.31). CONCLUSION: SF-CRQ is a valid, reliable, and responsive instrument for the assessment of short-term QOL change in patients with COPD exacerbations.

Outcomes in COPD patients receiving tiotropium or salmeterol plus treatment with inhaled corticosteroids.

Patients with COPD are frequently prescribed inhaled corticosteroids (ICS); however, it is unclear whether the treatment with ICS might modify responses to inhaled bronchodilators. Two 6-month, randomized, placebo-controlled, double-blind, double-dummy, parallel-group studies of tiotropium 18 microg once daily, compared with salmeterol, 50 microg bid, had been conducted in patients with moderate-to-severe COPD. Efficacy was assessed by spirometry, transition dyspnea index (TDI), St. George's Respiratory Questionnaire (SGRQ), and exacerbations. Data from both studies were combined to form subgroups with regard to concurrent use of ICS. 796 patients receiving ICS were separately analyzed from 390 patients not receiving ICS. Mean age was 64 years, and pre-bronchodilator FEV1 was 1.06 L (ICS group) and 1.13 L (non-ICS group). Both bronchodilators increased morning mean +/- SE pre-dose FEV1 compared with placebo (ICS groups: tiotropium 110 +/- 20 mL, salmeterol 80 +/- 20 mL; non-ICS groups: tiotropium 150 +/- 30 mL, salmeterol 110 +/- 30 mL; p > 0.05 for tiotropium vs salmeterol). Improvements in TDI and SGRQ and frequency of exacerbations also tended to be more profound for tiotropium. Treatment with tiotropium in patients with moderate-to-severe COPD was superior to salmeterol in lung function, irrespective of concurrent use of ICS.

Tiotropium in combination with placebo, salmeterol, or fluticasone-salmeterol for treatment of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease: a randomized trial.

BACKGROUND: Treatment of moderate or severe chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) with combinations of inhaled corticosteroids, long-acting beta-agonists, and long-acting anticholinergic bronchodilators is common but unstudied. OBJECTIVE: To determine whether combining tiotropium with salmeterol or fluticasone-salmeterol improves clinical outcomes in adults with moderate to severe COPD compared with tiotropium alone. DESIGN: Randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial conducted from October 2003 to January 2006. SETTING: 27 academic and community medical centers in Canada. PATIENTS: 449 patients with moderate or severe COPD. INTERVENTION: 1 year of treatment with tiotropium plus placebo, tiotropium plus salmeterol, or tiotropium plus fluticasone-salmeterol. MEASUREMENTS: The primary end point was the proportion of patients who experienced an exacerbation of COPD that required treatment with systemic steroids or antibiotics. RESULTS: The proportion of patients in the tiotropium plus placebo group who experienced an exacerbation (62.8%) did not differ from that in the tiotropium plus salmeterol group (64.8%; difference, -2.0 percentage points [95% CI, -12.8 to 8.8 percentage points]) or in the tiotropium plus fluticasone-salmeterol group (60.0%; difference, 2.8 percentage points [CI, -8.2 to 13.8 percentage points]). In sensitivity analyses, the point estimates and 95% confidence bounds shifted in the direction favoring tiotropium plus salmeterol and tiotropium plus fluticasone-salmeterol. Tiotropium plus fluticasone-salmeterol improved lung function (P = 0.049) and disease-specific quality of life (P = 0.01) and reduced the number of hospitalizations for COPD exacerbation (incidence rate ratio, 0.53 [CI, 0.33 to 0.86]) and all-cause hospitalizations (incidence rate ratio, 0.67 [CI, 0.45 to 0.99]) compared with tiotropium plus placebo. In contrast, tiotropium plus salmeterol did not statistically improve lung function or hospitalization rates compared with tiotropium plus placebo. LIMITATIONS: More than 40% of patients who received tiotropium plus placebo and tiotropium plus salmeterol discontinued therapy prematurely, and many crossed over to treatment with open-label inhaled steroids or long-acting beta-agonists. CONCLUSIONS: Addition of fluticasone-salmeterol to tiotropium therapy did not statistically influence rates of COPD exacerbation but did improve lung function, quality of life, and hospitalization rates in patients with moderate to severe COPD. International Standard Randomised Controlled Trial registration number: ISRCTN29870041.

Swine influenza a outbreak, Fort Dix, New Jersey, 1976.

In early 1976, the novel A/New Jersey/76 (Hsw1N1) influenza virus caused severe respiratory illness in 13 soldiers with 1 death at Fort Dix, New Jersey. Since A/New Jersey was similar to the 1918-1919 pandemic virus, rapid outbreak assessment and enhanced surveillance were initiated. A/New Jersey virus was detected only from January 19 to February 9 and did not spread beyond Fort Dix. A/Victoria/75 (H3N2) spread simultaneously, also caused illness, and persisted until March. Up to 230 soldiers were infected with the A/New Jersey virus. Rapid recognition of A/New Jersey, swift outbreak assessment, and enhanced surveillance resulted from excellent collaboration between Fort Dix, New Jersey Department of Health, Walter Reed Army Institute of Research, and Center for Disease Control personnel. Despite efforts to define the events at Fort Dix, many questions remain unanswered, including the following: Where did A/New Jersey come from? Why did transmission stop?

Development and validation of a patient satisfaction and preference questionnaire for inhalation devices.

INTRODUCTION: The Patient Satisfaction and Preference Questionnaire (PASAPQ) is a multi-item measure of respiratory inhalation device satisfaction and preference designed to be easily understood and administered to patients with asthma and COPD. This study assessed its validity, reliability and responsiveness and explored the between-group difference in PASAPQ scores that is meaningful. METHODS: The field test version was developed using literature, focus groups and expert opinion. Item reduction followed. The assessment of the validity, reliability and responsiveness of the PASAPQ utilized data from two clinical studies comparing devices delivering the same medication, and was performed with pre-specified criteria. A minimally important difference (MID) was estimated using both anchor- and distribution-based approaches. RESULTS: Two factors of the PASAPQ, 'performance' and 'convenience', were consistent across studies. Missing and out-of-range data were minimal (<1%) and respondents used a full range of response options. All items correlated most highly with their hypothesized scale and all exceeded the minimum correlation criteria of 0.40. Cronbach's alfa was high (0.87-0.94), providing support for internal reliability for the PASAPQ. Correlations of the overall satisfaction item with the performance domain ranged from 0.78 to 0.91, the convenience domain ranged from 0.54 to 0.71, and the total score ranged from 0.78 to 0.90. These moderate-to-strong correlations provide substantial support for the validity of the PASAPQ domains and total score. Discriminate validity was assessed by calculating PASAPQ scores for patients' ratings of the device that they preferred compared with the other, non-preferred device. The preferred device was rated higher on all satisfaction measures, supporting the ability of the PASAPQ to discriminate between preferred and non-preferred devices. Although a difference of 3 or 4 points may be sufficient to observe a small effect difference between groups, most of the MID estimates were in the 8-10 point range. DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSION: Our analyses across asthma, COPD and patients with mixed respiratory disease (with features of both COPD and asthma), study designs and data sets lead us to conclude that the PASAPQ is a practical, valid, reliable and responsive instrument for measuring respiratory device satisfaction. Furthermore, a difference in satisfaction scores between treatment groups of 10 points is, conservatively, a difference that is meaningful to patients.