Most frequent errors in inhalation technique of patients with asthma treated at a tertiary care hospital

7Citations
Citations of this article
48Readers
Mendeley users who have this article in their library.

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: To demonstrate the most frequent errors in inhalation technique in patients with asthma undergoing treatment at a tertiary care hospital. METHODS: A cross-sectional study with a convenience sample of asthma patients aged 18 years or over, treated at a pulmonology outpatient clinic of a tertiary care hospital. The assessment of inhalation technique of users of the dry powder inhalers Aerolizer®, Aerocaps and Diskus®, or metered-dose inhalers was based on the manufacturer's instructions for use of each inhaler device. Patients demonstrated the inhalation technique with empty inhaler devices, and it was considered correct when all stages were performed properly, or when errors probably did not interfere with the treatment outcome. RESULTS: Among 71 participants, 43 (60.5%) performed inhalation technique incorrectly. Among metered-dose inhalers and dry powder inhalers users, inhalation technique errors were found in 84.2% and 51.9%, respectively (p=0.013). Errors were more frequent at the exhalation stage (67.4%), followed by breathing in (58.1%) and apnea (51.2%). In the group using dry powder inhalers, the most common errors occurred during exhalation and, for those using metered-dose inhalers, the most compromised stage was aspiration. CONCLUSION: Errors were more frequent among those using metered-dose inhalers compared with dry powder inhalers. Misconceptions are more common at the expiration stage among users of dry powder inhalers and in aspiration among those on metered-dose inhalers.

Cite

CITATION STYLE

APA

Pessôa, C. L. C., Mattos, M. J. da S., Alho, A. R. M., Fischmann, M. M., Haerdy, B. M., Côrtes, A. C. C., … Brignol, S. M. S. (2019). Most frequent errors in inhalation technique of patients with asthma treated at a tertiary care hospital. Einstein (Sao Paulo, Brazil), 17(2), eAO4397. https://doi.org/10.31744/einstein_journal/2019AO4397

Register to see more suggestions

Mendeley helps you to discover research relevant for your work.

Already have an account?

Save time finding and organizing research with Mendeley

Sign up for free