Diggory P, Fernandez C, Humphrey A, Jones V, Murphy M
Department of Elderly Care Medicine, Mayday Hospital, Croydon CR7 7YE.
BMJ. 2001 Mar 10;322(7286):577-9. doi: 10.1136/bmj.322.7286.577.
To determine whether elderly people can learn to use the inhaler used to deliver zanamivir (Relenza Diskhaler) as effectively as the Turbohaler and to identify which aspects of inhaler technique are most problematic.
Randomised, controlled, intervention study.
Wards for acute elderly care in a large district general hospital.
73 patients who were unfamiliar with the use of an inhaler, aged 71 to 99 (mean 83) years.
Initial scores and changes in scores 24 hours later using a 10 point scoring system of five aspects of inhaler technique.
38 patients were allocated the Relenza Diskhaler and 35 the Turbohaler. The mean total score was significantly greater in the Turbohaler than Diskhaler groups both initially (8.74 v 7.05) and after 24 hours (8.28 v 5.43). The major difference between inhalers was in loading and priming. After tuition 50% (19 of 38) of patients allocated the Diskhaler were unable to load and prime the device and 65% (24 of 37) were unable to do so 24 hours later. Of those allocated the Turbohaler, two patients were unable to load and prime the device after initial review and one after 24 hours.
Most elderly people cannot use the inhaler device used to deliver the anti-influenza drug zanamivir. Treatment with this drug is unlikely to be effective in elderly people unless the delivery system is improved.
确定老年人学习使用用于递送扎那米韦(乐感清吸入碟剂)的吸入器是否能像使用都保吸入器一样有效,并确定吸入器技术的哪些方面问题最大。
随机对照干预研究。
一家大型区综合医院的急性老年护理病房。
73名不熟悉吸入器使用的患者,年龄71至99岁(平均83岁)。
使用吸入器技术五个方面的10分评分系统,记录初始分数及24小时后的分数变化。
38名患者被分配使用乐感清吸入碟剂,35名使用都保吸入器。都保吸入器组的平均总分在初始时(8.74对7.05)和24小时后(8.28对5.43)均显著高于乐感清吸入碟剂组。两种吸入器的主要差异在于装药和启动。培训后,分配使用乐感清吸入碟剂的患者中有50%(38名中的19名)无法装药和启动该装置,24小时后有65%(37名中的24名)仍无法做到。在分配使用都保吸入器的患者中,两名患者在初次检查后无法装药和启动该装置,24小时后有一名患者仍无法做到。
大多数老年人无法使用用于递送抗流感药物扎那米韦的吸入器装置。除非改进给药系统,否则该药物对老年人的治疗不太可能有效。