首页> 外文期刊>Npj - Primary Care Respiratory Medicine >Device errors in asthma and COPD: systematic literature review and meta-analysis
【24h】

Device errors in asthma and COPD: systematic literature review and meta-analysis

机译:哮喘和COPD的设备错误:系统的文献综述和荟萃分析

获取原文
           

摘要

Inhaler device errors are common and may impact the effectiveness of the delivered drug. There is a paucity of up-to-date systematic reviews (SRs) or meta-analyses (MAs) of device errors in asthma and chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) patients. This SR and MA provides an estimate of overall error rates (both critical and non-critical) by device type and evaluates factors associated with inhaler misuse. The following databases from inception to July 23, 2014 (Embase庐, MEDLINE庐, MEDLINE庐 In-Process and CENTRAL) were searched, using predefined search terms. Studies in adult males and females with asthma or COPD, reporting at least one overall or critical error, using metered dose inhalers and dry powder inhalers were included. Random-effect MAs were performed to estimate device error rates and to compare pairs of devices. Overall and critical error rates were high across all devices, ranging from 50鈥?00% and 14鈥?2%, respectively. However, between-study heterogeneity was also generally >90% (I-squared statistic), indicating large variability between studies. A trend towards higher error rates with assessments comprising a larger number of steps was observed; however no consistent pattern was identified. This SR and MA highlights the relatively limited body of evidence assessing device errors and the lack of standardised checklists. There is currently insufficient evidence to determine differences in error rates between different inhaler devices and their impact on clinical outcomes. A key step in improving our knowledge on this topic would be the development of standardised checklists for each device.
机译:吸入器设备错误很常见,可能会影响所输送药物的有效性。对于哮喘和慢性阻塞性肺疾病(COPD)患者,缺乏针对设备错误的最新系统评价(SR)或荟萃分析(MAs)。此SR和MA提供了按设备类型估算的总体错误率(严重和非严重),并评估了与吸入器滥用相关的因素。使用预定义的搜索词搜索了从开始到2014年7月23日的以下数据库(Embase®,MEDLINE®,MEDLINE®In-Process和CENTRAL)。纳入了使用计量吸入器和干粉吸入器对患有哮喘或COPD的成年男性和女性进行的研究,报告了至少一项总体或严重误差。执行随机效应MA以估计设备错误率并比较设备对。在所有设备中,总体错误率和严重错误率均很高,分别为50-00%和14-2%。但是,研究之间的异质性通常也> 90%(I平方统计),表明研究之间的差异很大。观察到错误率较高的趋势,评估包括更多步骤;但是,没有发现一致的模式。此SR和MA强调了评估设备错误的证据相对有限,并且缺乏标准化的检查清单。目前尚无足够的证据来确定不同吸入器设备之间的错误率差异及其对临床结果的影响。改善我们对此主题知识的关键一步是为每个设备开发标准化清单。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号