Back to Journals » International Journal of Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease » Volume 4

Asthma patients prefer Respimat® Soft Mist Inhaler to Turbuhaler®

Authors

Rick Hodder, Pat Ray Reese, Terra Slaton

Published 26 May 2009 Volume 2009:4 Pages 225—232

DOI https://doi.org/10.2147/COPD.S3452

Review by Single-blind

Peer reviewer comments 4

Rick Hodder1, Pat Ray Reese2, Terra Slaton3

1Divisions of Pulmonary and Critical Care, University of Ottawa, Ottawa, Ontario, Canada; 2Reese Associates Consulting LLC, Cary, North Carolina, USA; 3Consultant, West Columbia, South Carolina, USA

Abstract: Device satisfaction and preference are important patient-reported outcomes to consider when choosing inhaled therapy. A subset of adults (n = 153) with moderate or severe asthma participating in a randomized parallel-group, double-dummy trial that compared the efficacy and safety of 12 weeks’ treatment with budesonide delivered via Respimat® Soft Mist Inhaler (SMI) (200 or 400 µg bd) or Turbuhaler® dry powder inhaler (400 µg bd), completed a questionnaire on patient device preference and satisfaction (PASAPQ) as part of a psychometric validation. As the study used a double-dummy design to maintain blinding, patients used and assessed both devices, rating their satisfaction with, preference for, and willingness to continue using each device. The mean age of patients was 41 years, 69% were female and the mean duration of disease was 16 years. Total PASAPQ satisfaction scores were 85.5 and 76.9 for Respimat® SMI and Turbuhaler® respectively (p < 0.0001); 112 patients (74%) preferred Respimat® SMI and 26 (17%) preferred Turbuhaler®. Fourteen subjects (9%) indicated no preference for either inhaler. Willingness to continue using Respimat® SMI was higher than that for Turbuhaler® (mean scores: 80/100 and 62/100, respectively). Respimat® SMI was preferred to Turbuhaler® by adult asthma patients who used both devices in a clinical trial setting.

Keywords: asthma, Respimat® Soft Mist Inhaler, Turbuhaler®

Creative Commons License This work is published and licensed by Dove Medical Press Limited. The full terms of this license are available at https://www.dovepress.com/terms.php and incorporate the Creative Commons Attribution - Non Commercial (unported, v3.0) License. By accessing the work you hereby accept the Terms. Non-commercial uses of the work are permitted without any further permission from Dove Medical Press Limited, provided the work is properly attributed. For permission for commercial use of this work, please see paragraphs 4.2 and 5 of our Terms.

Download Article [PDF] 

 

Readers of this article also read:

Opportunities for inhaler device selection in elderly patients with asthma or COPD

Barrons R, Wheeler J, Woods JA

Patient Intelligence 2015, 7:53-65

Published Date: 4 December 2015

Bronchial hyperresponsiveness, airway inflammation, and reversibility in patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease

Zanini A, Cherubino F, Zampogna E, Croce S, Pignatti P, Spanevello A

International Journal of Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease 2015, 10:1155-1161

Published Date: 17 June 2015

Improving adherence with inhaler therapy in COPD

Suzanne C Lareau, Barbara P Yawn

International Journal of Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease 2010, 5:401-406

Published Date: 24 November 2010

Clinical utility of varenicline for smokers with medical and psychiatric comorbidity

Jon O Ebbert, Kirk D Wyatt, Ali Zirakzadeh, et al

International Journal of Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease 2009, 4:421-430

Published Date: 17 November 2009