Our analyses across asthma, COPD and patients with mixed respiratory disease (with features of both COPD and asthma), study designs and data sets lead us to conclude that the PASAPQ is a practical, valid, reliable and responsive instrument for measuring respiratory device satisfaction. Furthermore, a difference in satisfaction scores between treatment groups of 10 points is, conservatively, a difference that is meaningful to patients.

No 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.

No abstract

No abstract