Alsuwaigh Rayan, Cao Yan, Puan Youxin, Yii Anthony, Mohamed Noor Soyah Binti, Ye Hui, Chen Haijuan, Li Xiao Ling, Binte Mohd Noor Norlidah, Liew Jason, Tay Tunn Ren
Department of Respiratory and Critical Care Medicine, Changi General Hospital, Singapore.
Department of Case Management, Changi General Hospital, Singapore.
J Asthma. 2023 Mar;60(3):600-608. doi: 10.1080/02770903.2022.2082307. Epub 2022 Jun 7.
Short-acting bronchodilators for asthma and chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) exacerbations are commonly delivered by nebulizers although administration using metered dose inhaler with space chamber (MDI spacer) has been shown to be equally efficacious. There are few studies examining patients' and healthcare providers' attitudes on the two administration methods in adults. This study explores patients' and healthcare providers' attitudes on the use of nebulizer versus MDI spacer for acute asthma and COPD exacerbations in adults.
Patients admitted for asthma or COPD exacerbations, doctors, and nurses in a university-affiliated hospital were surveyed from 1 April 2021 to 30 September 2021 regarding their views on the effectiveness, ease of use, preparation and administration, side effects, and infection risk of the two administration methods.
Ninety-nine patients, 103 doctors, and 650 nurses completed the survey. 60.6% of patients perceived nebulizer to be more effective. Patients who found nebulizer more comfortable were more likely to prefer nebulizer (OR 43.97, = 0.01), while those who associated it with a greater infection risk were less likely to prefer nebulizer (OR 0.15, = 0.03). 49.5% of doctors and 49.1% of nurses perceived nebulizer to be more effective, compared to 10.7% and 34.5%, respectively, for MDI spacer. Effectiveness and patient comfort influenced doctors' and nurses' preference for nebulizer while ease of preparation and administration influenced nurses' preference only.
Patients and healthcare providers perceived nebulizer to be more effective. Factors unique to each group influenced their preference for nebulizer.
治疗哮喘和慢性阻塞性肺疾病(COPD)急性加重期的短效支气管扩张剂通常通过雾化器给药,尽管使用带储雾罐的定量吸入器(MDI储雾罐)给药已被证明同样有效。很少有研究探讨成人患者和医护人员对这两种给药方法的态度。本研究探讨了成人患者和医护人员对在急性哮喘和COPD加重期使用雾化器与MDI储雾罐的态度。
2021年4月1日至2021年9月30日,对一家大学附属医院中因哮喘或COPD急性加重期入院的患者、医生和护士进行了调查,询问他们对两种给药方法的有效性、易用性、准备和给药过程、副作用以及感染风险的看法。
99名患者、103名医生和650名护士完成了调查。60.6%的患者认为雾化器更有效。觉得使用雾化器更舒适的患者更倾向于选择雾化器(比值比43.97,P = 0.01),而那些认为其感染风险更高的患者则不太可能选择雾化器(比值比0.15,P = 0.03)。49.5%的医生和49.1%的护士认为雾化器更有效,相比之下,MDI储雾罐的这一比例分别为10.7%和34.5%。有效性和患者舒适度影响医生和护士对雾化器的偏好,而准备和给药的简易程度仅影响护士的偏好。
患者和医护人员认为雾化器更有效。每组特有的因素影响了他们对雾化器的偏好。