BackgroundOlder adults are more vulnerable to polypharmacy and prescriptions of potentially inappropriate medications. There are several ways to address polypharmacy to prevent its occurrence. We focused on computerized decision support tools.ObjectiveThe available literature was reviewed to understand whether computerized decision support tools reduce potentially inappropriate prescriptions or potentially inappropriate medications in older adult patients and affect health outcomes.MethodsOur systematic review was conducted by searching the literature in the MEDLINE, CENTRAL, EMBASE, and Web of Science databases for interventional studies published through February 2018 to assess the impact of computerized decision support tools on potentially inappropriate medications and potentially inappropriate prescriptions in people aged 65 years and older.ResultsA total of 3756 articles were identified, and 16 were included. More than half (n=10) of the studies were randomized controlled trials, one was a crossover study, and five were pre-post intervention studies. A total of 266,562 participants were included; of those, 233,144 participants were included and assessed in randomized controlled trials. Intervention designs had several different features. Computerized decision support tools consistently reduced the number of potentially inappropriate prescriptions started and mean number of potentially inappropriate prescriptions per patient. Computerized decision support tools also increased potentially inappropriate prescriptions discontinuation and drug appropriateness. However, in several studies, statistical significance was not achieved. A meta-analysis was not possible due to the significant heterogeneity among the systems used and the definitions of outcomes.ConclusionsComputerized decision support tools may reduce potentially inappropriate prescriptions and potentially inappropriate medications. More randomized controlled trials assessing the impact of computerized decision support tools that could be used both in primary and secondary health care are needed to evaluate the use of medication targets defined by the Beers or STOPP (Screening Tool of Older People’s Prescriptions) criteria, adverse drug reactions, quality of life measurements, patient satisfaction, and professional satisfaction with a reasonable follow-up, which could clarify the clinical usefulness of these tools.Trial RegistrationInternational Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews (PROSPERO) CRD42017067021; https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero/display_record.php?ID=CRD42017067021

Objectives To evaluate the effect of inhaler education programs on clinical outcomes and exacerbation rates in older adults with asthma or chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD). Design Systematic review and meta‐analysis. Setting and Participants Older adults with asthma or COPD, either in primary or secondary health care and pharmacy setting. Measurements We searched the Medline, Embase, and Central databases according to the main eligibility criteria for inclusion: systematic reviews, meta‐analysis, clinical trials and quasi‐experimental studies; participants aged 65 and older; education on inhaler technique and reporting of disease control and exacerbation rates. We used the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluations scale for quality assessment and used a random‐effect model with Mantel–Haenszel adjustment to perform a meta‐analysis. Results We included 8 studies (4 randomized, 4 quasi‐experimental) with a total of 1,812 participants. The most frequent type of intervention was physical demonstration of inhaler technique, training with placebo devices. Five studies showed significant reduction in exacerbation rates (pooled risk ratio=0.71, 95% confidence interval=0.59–0.86; p < .001), although effect on disease control and quality of life showed high discrepancy in the reported results, and all randomized studies revealed uncertainty in their risk of bias assessment. Conclusion All interventions seemed to improve inhaler performance and clinically relevant outcomes, but a placebo device could be the most effective. There is evidence that interventions reduce exacerbation risk in older adults, although to an overall moderate degree. J Am Geriatr Soc 67:57–66, 2019.

Acta Med Port 2015 Nov-Dec;28(6):702-707 RESUMOIntrodução: A doença pulmonar obstrutiva crónica e a asma afectam quase 300 milhões de indivíduos em todo o mundo. A terapêutica inalatória associa-se frequentemente a erros na técnica realizada reduzindo a eficácia e adesão. Objectivo: Avaliar a técnica inalatória e sua relação com o controlo clínico e funcional em asma e doença pulmonar obstrutiva crónica. Material e Métodos: Estudo transversal analítico incluindo doentes com asma e doença pulmonar obstrutiva crónica medicados com dispositivos inalatórios. Recolheram-se dados demográficos e existência de ensino prévio da técnica. Avaliou-se a técnica inalatória em: Passo 1 -expiração prévia; Passo 2 -activação do dispositivo; Passo 3 -inspiração; Passo Step 1 -device activation;Step 2 -previous expiration;Step 3 -inspiration;Step 4 -end inspiratory pause. Teaching inhalation technique has a positive impact on its future performance. Most patients make mistakes, affecting clinical control in asthma, although in chronic obstructive pulmonary isease no relation was found. This is an ongoing work that aims to reevaluate inhalation technique after patients' education and its further impact.

To assess the impact that educational interventions to improve inhaler techniques have on the clinical and functional control of asthma and COPD, we evaluated 44 participants before and after such an intervention. There was a significant decrease in the number of errors, and 20 patients (46%) significantly improved their technique regarding prior exhalation and breath hold. In the asthma group, there were significant improvements in the mean FEV1, FVC, and PEF (of 6.4%, 8.6%, and 8.3% respectively). Those improvements were accompanied by improvements in Control of Allergic Rhinitis and Asthma Test scores but not in Asthma Control Test scores. In the COPD group, there were no significant variations. In asthma patients, educational interventions appear to improve inhaler technique, clinical control, and functional control.

The study aimed to determine the associations of Peak Inspiratory Flow (PIF), inhalation technique and adherence with health status and exacerbations in participants with COPD using DPI maintenance therapy. This cross-sectional multi-country observational real-world study included COPD participants aged ≥40 years using a DPI for maintenance therapy. PIF was measured three times with the In-Check DIAL G16: (1) typical PIF at resistance of participant’s inhaler, (2) maximal PIF at resistance of participant’s inhaler, (3) maximal PIF at low resistance. Suboptimal PIF (sPIF) was defined as PIF lower than required for the device. Participants completed questionnaires on health status (Clinical COPD Questionnaire (CCQ)), adherence (Test of Adherence to Inhalers (TAI)) and exacerbations. Inhalation technique was assessed by standardised evaluation of video recordings. Complete data were available from 1434 participants (50.1% female, mean age 69.2 years). GOLD stage was available for 801 participants: GOLD stage I (23.6%), II (54.9%), III (17.4%) and IV (4.1%)). Of all participants, 29% had a sPIF, and 16% were shown able to generate an optimal PIF but failed to do so. sPIF was significantly associated with worse health status (0.226 (95% CI 0.107–0.346), worse units on CCQ; p = 0.001). The errors ‘teeth and lips sealed around mouthpiece’, ‘breathe in’, and ‘breathe out calmly after inhalation’ were related to health status. Adherence was not associated with health status. After correcting for multiple testing, no significant association was found with moderate or severe exacerbations in the last 12 months. To conclude, sPIF is associated with poorer health status. This study demonstrates the importance of PIF assessment in DPI inhalation therapy. Healthcare professionals should consider selecting appropriate inhalers in cases of sPIF.