Breathing Out Completely Before Inhalation: The Most Problematic Step in Application Technique in Patients With Non-Mild Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease

Background: Patient adherence to an inhaled medication application technique (A-ApplT) represents a major health-care issue in patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD). However, there is a lack of studies evaluating this issue thoroughly. The aim of our study was to introduce a universal easy-to-use method of assessing the A-ApplT to chronic medication in moderate to very severe COPD individuals.Methods: The Czech Multicenter Research Database of COPD (COPD CMRD), a large observational prospective study, was used as a source of clinical data. A-ApplT was evaluated using our Five Steps Assessment. This measure is based on dichotomous evaluation of each of five predefined consecutive application technique steps and can be used in all settings for all currently available inhalation systems in COPD subjects.Results: A total of 546 participants (75.0% men; mean age 66.7 years; mean forced expiratory volume in 1s 44.7%) were available for analysis. This represents 69.6% of all patients recruited in the COPD CMRD. Less than one third of patients presented their application technique without any erroneous steps. The most problematic steps were breathing out completely in one breath immediately before inhalation (step No. 3), and the actual inhalation maneuver (step No. 4). The total number of errors was similar for dry powder inhalers and pressurized metered-dose inhalers.Conclusion: Our novel instrument, Five Steps Assessment, is comfortable for use in routine clinical practice to explore A-ApplT. The A-ApplT in real-life patients with non-mild COPD was inadequate and patients should be repeatedly trained by properly (re-)educated medical staff

Patterns of non-adherence to supplementation with calcium and vitamin D in persistent postmenopausal women are similar at start and one year later: a qualitative longitudinal study

Background: Osteoporosis is a chronic disease and adherence can fluctuate over time. Therefore, longer observation is necessary to investigate the stability of patients’ adherence. The study aim was to compare the overall adherence (OA) with supplementation with the fixed combination of calcium and vitamin D (Ca/D) in postmenopausal women at baseline and after 1 year, and to evaluate the fluctuation of the OA in individual months. Furthermore, we studied whether adherence is influenced by signing of informed consent and routine medical check-up.Methods: This was a longitudinal, observational study. The data were obtained from the Osteocenter of University Hospital in Hradec Kralove, Czech Republic. Adherence was measured using electronic bottles type Medication Events Monitoring System (MEMS). The study was carried out in two 3-month periods; the baseline in 2013 (signing of informed consent while medical check-up) and the follow-up (medical check-up) in 2014. The adherence and adherence-related outcomes were studied in patients who had initiated osteoporosis treatment and were persistent.Results: 21 (49%) out of 43 patients who avoided drug dispenser and were persistent both at baseline and at follow-up, completed the study and were included. Median age was 76. Evaluating the whole 3-month periods, the OA did not differ significantly at baseline and at follow-up, the OA was 71% and 68% respectively. However, the adherence in month 1 at baseline was significantly higher than the adherence in month 2 at baseline (p < 0.001) and also than the adherence in month 1 at follow-up (p = 0.010). Analysing the study period without month 1, a stable adherence was observed in 48% of patients. About 33% of doses were omitted at baseline and 34% at follow-up. As many as 71% of the patients took drug holidays at baseline, and 76% at follow-up. Conclusion: The OA was insufficient, around 70% both at baseline and at follow-up. One half of the patients showed a stable adherence. The patterns of non-adherence were very similar at follow-up. Signing of the informed consent seems to act as bias more than regular medical check-up