Background: Medical therapy in chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) usually includes inhaled dual bronchodilation leading not only to an improvement in symptoms but also to an increase in physical performance. However, it remains unknown whether responder rates to dual bronchodilation differ between the Swiss subgroup in comparison to participants of other European countries. Methods:The non-interventional OTIVACTO trial investigated changes in self-reported physical functioning in COPD patients treated with tiotropium/olodaterol 5/5 µg fixed dose combination for 6 weeks. The cut-off between responder and non-responder was defined as a minimum increase of 10 points using the 10-question physical functioning questionnaire (PF-10) score. We searched for patterns of the responder patient group and compared the results of the whole dataset with the subgroup of Swiss participants.Results: Compared to the total cohort (n = 7,608), the Swiss participants (n = 94) were predominantly > 65 years of age and had significantly more comorbidities. There were no significant differences according to COPD stage, smoking status, exacerbation rate in the last 12 months and modified Medical Research Council questionnaire (mMRC) score between the total cohort and the Swiss collective. There were no significant differences between the Swiss subgroup and the total cohort with regard to response to the medication in the PF-10 score. In the intragroup comparison, patients with high mMRC score showed significantly higher values in the PF-10 in both groups.The number of exacerbations had no influence on the PF-10 score in the Swiss subgroup but in the total cohort. Conclusion:In terms of age and number of comorbidities, significant differences were found between the overall patient population and the Swiss participants, having no influence on the success of the medication. The patients suffering from increased dyspnea benefited most from tiotropium/olodaterol treatment (Clinical Trials Registry NCT02720757).

Objective: The aims of the survey were to assess first experiences of Swiss COPD patients switching from the disposable to the new reusable Respimat inhaler, and to evaluate physicians and patients views of the new training material. Methods: Patients with a confirmed diagnosis of COPD using a disposable Respimat inhaler for at least three months were included. Patients demographics, COPD stage, current treatment, and comorbidities relevant for the handling of the device were assessed. Further, patients were trained on the reusable Respimat by placebo inhaler, patient brochure, video cards/demo films and SMS reminder service. After at least one cartridge change, patients gave comprehensive feedback on their satisfaction with the reusable Respimat and physicians evaluated the need for re-training. Results: 235 patients participated in the survey. Of these, 37% suffered from comorbidities restricting the handling of the Respimat. 216 (92%) patients had a better overall satisfaction with the reusable than with the disposable Respimat. Dose counter (86%), monthly preparation (81%) and daily handling (77%) were also assessed as better by most of the patients. In 80% of cases, the user ability was stated as better than for the disposable Respimat. Less than 15% of the patients required further training. Placebo inhaler was the mostly preferred training material by both, physicians (in 86% of the patients) and patients (75%). In patients with comorbidities affecting inhaler handling, overall satisfaction was also better in 86% of the patients. Conclusion:The majority of patients were satisfied with the new reusable Respimat device and proper handling could be attained using the provided training material, even in patients with restricting comorbidities.

Health-related quality of life (HRQoL) in patients with moderate to severe chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) is often reduced by high symptom burden and frequent exacerbations. So far, data on therapeutic success in Swiss COPD patients receiving dual bronchodilation therapy as COPD maintenance treatment are limited. Data from a recently published, non-interventional study on clinical benefit after the start of combined tiotropium–olodaterol treatment were analyzed focusing on Swiss patients compared to the overall cohort including patients from various European countries. Demographic data on the changes in Clinical COPD Questionnaire (CCQ) for the assessment of HRQoL in correlation to symptoms and the number of exacerbations, as well as physician’s global assessment (PGE), were evaluated 6 weeks after treatment start. In Switzerland (n = 61), significantly more patients had comorbidities and exacerbations but showed less symptoms compared to the overall cohort (n = 4639). HRQoL improved in both cohorts, with a negative correlation to symptom burden and number of exacerbations in the overall cohort. PGE scores improved after 6 weeks with a better general condition at baseline in Swiss patients (PGE score 4/5: 68.9% [Swiss cohort] vs. 49.0% [overall cohort]. Despite significant differences regarding the presence of symptoms and exacerbations, therapeutic success was similar in both patient groups. Highly symptomatic patients benefited mostly from tiotropium–olodaterol treatment.