Effectiveness of inhaler types for real-world asthma management

retrospective observational study using the GPRD

David Price, John Haughney, Erika Sims, Muzammil Ali, Julie von Ziegenweidt, Elizabeth V Hillyer, Amanda J Lee, Alison Chisholm, Neil Barnes

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

30 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

Purpose:
Results of randomized controlled trials may not predict effectiveness of inhaled corticosteroids (ICS) in real-world clinical practice, where inhaler technique and device characteristics can influence effectiveness. We compared asthma outcomes for ICS delivered via three different inhaler devices: pressurized metered-dose inhaler (pMDI), breath-actuated MDI (BAI), and dry powder inhaler (DPI).Patients and methods:
This retrospective database study evaluated 1-year outcomes for primary care patients with asthma aged 5–60 years prescribed their first ICS (initiation population) by pMDI (n = 39,746), BAI (n = 9809), or DPI (n = 6792), or their first ICS dose increase (step-up population) by pMDI (n = 6245), BAI (n = 1388), or DPI (n = 1536). Co-primary outcome measures were composite proxy measures of asthma control (no hospital attendance for asthma, oral corticosteroids, or antibiotics for lower respiratory infection) and severe exacerbations (unscheduled hospital admission, emergency room attendance, or oral corticosteroids). Outcomes were adjusted for potential confounding factors identified during a baseline year.Results:
In the initiation population, adjusted odds ratios (95% confidence intervals [CI]) for asthma control, as compared with pMDIs, were significantly better for BAIs (1.08 [1.02–1.14]) and DPIs (1.13 [1.06–1.21]), while adjusted exacerbation rate ratios (95% CI) were 1.00 (0.93–1.08) and 0.88 (0.81–0.95), respectively. In the step-up population, adjusted odds of asthma control were 1.21 (1.05–1.39) for BAIs and 1.13 (0.99–1.29) for DPIs; adjusted exacerbation rate ratios were 0.83 (0.71–0.98) for BAIs and 0.85 (0.74–0.98) for DPIs, compared with pMDIs.Conclusion:
Inhaler device selection may have a bearing on clinical outcomes. Differences in real-world effectiveness among these devices require closer evaluation in well-designed prospective trials.
Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)37-47
Number of pages11
JournalJournal of Asthma and Allergy
Volume4
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - 2011

Fingerprint

Nebulizers and Vaporizers
Observational Studies
Adrenal Cortex Hormones
Asthma
Retrospective Studies
Dry Powder Inhalers
Metered Dose Inhalers
Equipment and Supplies
Population
Confidence Intervals
Proxy
Respiratory Tract Infections
Hospital Emergency Service
Primary Health Care
Randomized Controlled Trials
Odds Ratio
Outcome Assessment (Health Care)
Databases
Anti-Bacterial Agents

Keywords

  • asthma control
  • dry powder inhaler
  • breath-actuated inhaler
  • metered-dose inhaler
  • primary care

Cite this

Effectiveness of inhaler types for real-world asthma management : retrospective observational study using the GPRD. / Price, David; Haughney, John; Sims, Erika; Ali, Muzammil; von Ziegenweidt, Julie; Hillyer, Elizabeth V; Lee, Amanda J; Chisholm, Alison; Barnes, Neil.

In: Journal of Asthma and Allergy, Vol. 4, 2011, p. 37-47.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Price, David ; Haughney, John ; Sims, Erika ; Ali, Muzammil ; von Ziegenweidt, Julie ; Hillyer, Elizabeth V ; Lee, Amanda J ; Chisholm, Alison ; Barnes, Neil. / Effectiveness of inhaler types for real-world asthma management : retrospective observational study using the GPRD. In: Journal of Asthma and Allergy. 2011 ; Vol. 4. pp. 37-47.
@article{ba5b273b445741d3bd968906890f6677,
title = "Effectiveness of inhaler types for real-world asthma management: retrospective observational study using the GPRD",
abstract = "Purpose: Results of randomized controlled trials may not predict effectiveness of inhaled corticosteroids (ICS) in real-world clinical practice, where inhaler technique and device characteristics can influence effectiveness. We compared asthma outcomes for ICS delivered via three different inhaler devices: pressurized metered-dose inhaler (pMDI), breath-actuated MDI (BAI), and dry powder inhaler (DPI).Patients and methods: This retrospective database study evaluated 1-year outcomes for primary care patients with asthma aged 5–60 years prescribed their first ICS (initiation population) by pMDI (n = 39,746), BAI (n = 9809), or DPI (n = 6792), or their first ICS dose increase (step-up population) by pMDI (n = 6245), BAI (n = 1388), or DPI (n = 1536). Co-primary outcome measures were composite proxy measures of asthma control (no hospital attendance for asthma, oral corticosteroids, or antibiotics for lower respiratory infection) and severe exacerbations (unscheduled hospital admission, emergency room attendance, or oral corticosteroids). Outcomes were adjusted for potential confounding factors identified during a baseline year.Results: In the initiation population, adjusted odds ratios (95{\%} confidence intervals [CI]) for asthma control, as compared with pMDIs, were significantly better for BAIs (1.08 [1.02–1.14]) and DPIs (1.13 [1.06–1.21]), while adjusted exacerbation rate ratios (95{\%} CI) were 1.00 (0.93–1.08) and 0.88 (0.81–0.95), respectively. In the step-up population, adjusted odds of asthma control were 1.21 (1.05–1.39) for BAIs and 1.13 (0.99–1.29) for DPIs; adjusted exacerbation rate ratios were 0.83 (0.71–0.98) for BAIs and 0.85 (0.74–0.98) for DPIs, compared with pMDIs.Conclusion: Inhaler device selection may have a bearing on clinical outcomes. Differences in real-world effectiveness among these devices require closer evaluation in well-designed prospective trials.",
keywords = "asthma control, dry powder inhaler, breath-actuated inhaler, metered-dose inhaler, primary care",
author = "David Price and John Haughney and Erika Sims and Muzammil Ali and {von Ziegenweidt}, Julie and Hillyer, {Elizabeth V} and Lee, {Amanda J} and Alison Chisholm and Neil Barnes",
year = "2011",
doi = "10.2147/JAA.S17709",
language = "English",
volume = "4",
pages = "37--47",
journal = "Journal of Asthma and Allergy",
issn = "1178-6965",
publisher = "Dove Medical Press Ltd.",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Effectiveness of inhaler types for real-world asthma management

T2 - retrospective observational study using the GPRD

AU - Price, David

AU - Haughney, John

AU - Sims, Erika

AU - Ali, Muzammil

AU - von Ziegenweidt, Julie

AU - Hillyer, Elizabeth V

AU - Lee, Amanda J

AU - Chisholm, Alison

AU - Barnes, Neil

PY - 2011

Y1 - 2011

N2 - Purpose: Results of randomized controlled trials may not predict effectiveness of inhaled corticosteroids (ICS) in real-world clinical practice, where inhaler technique and device characteristics can influence effectiveness. We compared asthma outcomes for ICS delivered via three different inhaler devices: pressurized metered-dose inhaler (pMDI), breath-actuated MDI (BAI), and dry powder inhaler (DPI).Patients and methods: This retrospective database study evaluated 1-year outcomes for primary care patients with asthma aged 5–60 years prescribed their first ICS (initiation population) by pMDI (n = 39,746), BAI (n = 9809), or DPI (n = 6792), or their first ICS dose increase (step-up population) by pMDI (n = 6245), BAI (n = 1388), or DPI (n = 1536). Co-primary outcome measures were composite proxy measures of asthma control (no hospital attendance for asthma, oral corticosteroids, or antibiotics for lower respiratory infection) and severe exacerbations (unscheduled hospital admission, emergency room attendance, or oral corticosteroids). Outcomes were adjusted for potential confounding factors identified during a baseline year.Results: In the initiation population, adjusted odds ratios (95% confidence intervals [CI]) for asthma control, as compared with pMDIs, were significantly better for BAIs (1.08 [1.02–1.14]) and DPIs (1.13 [1.06–1.21]), while adjusted exacerbation rate ratios (95% CI) were 1.00 (0.93–1.08) and 0.88 (0.81–0.95), respectively. In the step-up population, adjusted odds of asthma control were 1.21 (1.05–1.39) for BAIs and 1.13 (0.99–1.29) for DPIs; adjusted exacerbation rate ratios were 0.83 (0.71–0.98) for BAIs and 0.85 (0.74–0.98) for DPIs, compared with pMDIs.Conclusion: Inhaler device selection may have a bearing on clinical outcomes. Differences in real-world effectiveness among these devices require closer evaluation in well-designed prospective trials.

AB - Purpose: Results of randomized controlled trials may not predict effectiveness of inhaled corticosteroids (ICS) in real-world clinical practice, where inhaler technique and device characteristics can influence effectiveness. We compared asthma outcomes for ICS delivered via three different inhaler devices: pressurized metered-dose inhaler (pMDI), breath-actuated MDI (BAI), and dry powder inhaler (DPI).Patients and methods: This retrospective database study evaluated 1-year outcomes for primary care patients with asthma aged 5–60 years prescribed their first ICS (initiation population) by pMDI (n = 39,746), BAI (n = 9809), or DPI (n = 6792), or their first ICS dose increase (step-up population) by pMDI (n = 6245), BAI (n = 1388), or DPI (n = 1536). Co-primary outcome measures were composite proxy measures of asthma control (no hospital attendance for asthma, oral corticosteroids, or antibiotics for lower respiratory infection) and severe exacerbations (unscheduled hospital admission, emergency room attendance, or oral corticosteroids). Outcomes were adjusted for potential confounding factors identified during a baseline year.Results: In the initiation population, adjusted odds ratios (95% confidence intervals [CI]) for asthma control, as compared with pMDIs, were significantly better for BAIs (1.08 [1.02–1.14]) and DPIs (1.13 [1.06–1.21]), while adjusted exacerbation rate ratios (95% CI) were 1.00 (0.93–1.08) and 0.88 (0.81–0.95), respectively. In the step-up population, adjusted odds of asthma control were 1.21 (1.05–1.39) for BAIs and 1.13 (0.99–1.29) for DPIs; adjusted exacerbation rate ratios were 0.83 (0.71–0.98) for BAIs and 0.85 (0.74–0.98) for DPIs, compared with pMDIs.Conclusion: Inhaler device selection may have a bearing on clinical outcomes. Differences in real-world effectiveness among these devices require closer evaluation in well-designed prospective trials.

KW - asthma control

KW - dry powder inhaler

KW - breath-actuated inhaler

KW - metered-dose inhaler

KW - primary care

U2 - 10.2147/JAA.S17709

DO - 10.2147/JAA.S17709

M3 - Article

VL - 4

SP - 37

EP - 47

JO - Journal of Asthma and Allergy

JF - Journal of Asthma and Allergy

SN - 1178-6965

ER -