COPD:定期培训老年病人使用应用程序

H. Frohnhofen
{"title":"COPD:定期培训老年病人使用应用程序","authors":"H. Frohnhofen","doi":"10.1159/000531539","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Background: Maintaining correct inhaler technique is crucial in the management of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD). We aimed to investigate the inhaler technique in patients with COPD, to compare it immediately after and at 1 month after training, and to identify the predictors of incorrect inhaler use at 1 month after training. Methods: This prospective study was conducted at the COPD clinic of Siriraj Hospital (Bangkok, Thailand). Patients demonstrating improper inhaler use were trained face-to-face by pharmacists. Inhaler technique was re-assessed immediately after and at 1 month after training. The Montreal Cognitive Assessment (MoCA) score, pulmonary function tests, 6-min walk distance (6 MWD), modified Medical Research Council scale score, and COPD Assessment Test (CAT) score were evaluated. Results: Sixty-six patients with COPD who demonstrated at least one critical error during the use of any controller inhaler were enrolled. The mean age was 73.0 ± 9.0 years, and 75.8% patients had moderate/severe COPD. Immediately after training, all patients used dry powder inhalers correctly and 88.1% used pressurized metered-dose inhalers correctly. At 1 month, the number of patients demonstrating the correct technique decreased across all devices. Multivariable analysis revealed that MoCA score ≤ 16 was independently associated with a critical error at 1 month after training (adjusted odds ratio: 12.7, 95% confidence interval: 1.8-88.2, p = 0.010). At 1 month, CAT score (11.4 ± 8.9 vs. 8.4 ± 5.5, p = 0.018) and 6 MWD (351 ± 93 m vs. 372 ± 92 m, p = 0.009) had significantly improved in patients demonstrating the correct technique, and CAT score met the minimal clinically important difference.","PeriodicalId":402207,"journal":{"name":"Kompass Pneumologie","volume":"22 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-06-29","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"COPD: Konsequente Schulung älterer Patienten im Umgang mit ihrem Applikator etablieren\",\"authors\":\"H. Frohnhofen\",\"doi\":\"10.1159/000531539\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Background: Maintaining correct inhaler technique is crucial in the management of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD). We aimed to investigate the inhaler technique in patients with COPD, to compare it immediately after and at 1 month after training, and to identify the predictors of incorrect inhaler use at 1 month after training. Methods: This prospective study was conducted at the COPD clinic of Siriraj Hospital (Bangkok, Thailand). Patients demonstrating improper inhaler use were trained face-to-face by pharmacists. Inhaler technique was re-assessed immediately after and at 1 month after training. The Montreal Cognitive Assessment (MoCA) score, pulmonary function tests, 6-min walk distance (6 MWD), modified Medical Research Council scale score, and COPD Assessment Test (CAT) score were evaluated. Results: Sixty-six patients with COPD who demonstrated at least one critical error during the use of any controller inhaler were enrolled. The mean age was 73.0 ± 9.0 years, and 75.8% patients had moderate/severe COPD. Immediately after training, all patients used dry powder inhalers correctly and 88.1% used pressurized metered-dose inhalers correctly. At 1 month, the number of patients demonstrating the correct technique decreased across all devices. Multivariable analysis revealed that MoCA score ≤ 16 was independently associated with a critical error at 1 month after training (adjusted odds ratio: 12.7, 95% confidence interval: 1.8-88.2, p = 0.010). At 1 month, CAT score (11.4 ± 8.9 vs. 8.4 ± 5.5, p = 0.018) and 6 MWD (351 ± 93 m vs. 372 ± 92 m, p = 0.009) had significantly improved in patients demonstrating the correct technique, and CAT score met the minimal clinically important difference.\",\"PeriodicalId\":402207,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Kompass Pneumologie\",\"volume\":\"22 1\",\"pages\":\"0\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-06-29\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Kompass Pneumologie\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1159/000531539\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Kompass Pneumologie","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1159/000531539","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

背景:维持正确的吸入器技术在慢性阻塞性肺疾病(COPD)的治疗中至关重要。我们的目的是研究COPD患者的吸入器技术,比较其在训练后1个月和训练后1个月的情况,并确定在训练后1个月不正确使用吸入器的预测因素。方法:本前瞻性研究在泰国曼谷Siriraj医院COPD门诊进行。药师对表现出吸入器使用不当的患者进行了面对面培训。在训练后立即和训练后1个月对吸入器技术进行重新评估。评估蒙特利尔认知评估(MoCA)评分、肺功能测试、6分钟步行距离(6mwd)、修订医学研究委员会量表评分和COPD评估测试(CAT)评分。结果:66例COPD患者在使用任何控制吸入器期间至少出现一次严重错误。平均年龄为73.0±9.0岁,75.8%为中/重度COPD。培训后,所有患者均正确使用干粉吸入器,88.1%的患者正确使用加压计量吸入器。在1个月时,所有器械中表现出正确技术的患者数量减少。多变量分析显示,MoCA评分≤16与训练后1个月的临界误差独立相关(校正优势比:12.7,95%可信区间:1.8-88.2,p = 0.010)。1个月时,采用正确技术的患者CAT评分(11.4±8.9对8.4±5.5,p = 0.018)和6 MWD(351±93 m对372±92 m, p = 0.009)显著改善,CAT评分达到最小临床重要差异。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
COPD: Konsequente Schulung älterer Patienten im Umgang mit ihrem Applikator etablieren
Background: Maintaining correct inhaler technique is crucial in the management of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD). We aimed to investigate the inhaler technique in patients with COPD, to compare it immediately after and at 1 month after training, and to identify the predictors of incorrect inhaler use at 1 month after training. Methods: This prospective study was conducted at the COPD clinic of Siriraj Hospital (Bangkok, Thailand). Patients demonstrating improper inhaler use were trained face-to-face by pharmacists. Inhaler technique was re-assessed immediately after and at 1 month after training. The Montreal Cognitive Assessment (MoCA) score, pulmonary function tests, 6-min walk distance (6 MWD), modified Medical Research Council scale score, and COPD Assessment Test (CAT) score were evaluated. Results: Sixty-six patients with COPD who demonstrated at least one critical error during the use of any controller inhaler were enrolled. The mean age was 73.0 ± 9.0 years, and 75.8% patients had moderate/severe COPD. Immediately after training, all patients used dry powder inhalers correctly and 88.1% used pressurized metered-dose inhalers correctly. At 1 month, the number of patients demonstrating the correct technique decreased across all devices. Multivariable analysis revealed that MoCA score ≤ 16 was independently associated with a critical error at 1 month after training (adjusted odds ratio: 12.7, 95% confidence interval: 1.8-88.2, p = 0.010). At 1 month, CAT score (11.4 ± 8.9 vs. 8.4 ± 5.5, p = 0.018) and 6 MWD (351 ± 93 m vs. 372 ± 92 m, p = 0.009) had significantly improved in patients demonstrating the correct technique, and CAT score met the minimal clinically important difference.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
COPD, Bronchiektasen und neutrophile Inflammation: Den Einfluss von Atemwegsentzündungen, Infektionen und Rauchen bedenken ILD: Monozytenverhältnis als ergänzender Biomarker für die Prognose Besondere klinische Aspekte bei der Diagnostik und Behandlung der akuten Lungenembolie MPE beim mutierten NSCLC: Intrapleurale Applikation von Bevacizumab stellt effektive Therapie dar Weaning von invasiver Beatmung: Multiresistente Bakterien beeinflussen den Erfolg
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1