Journal Information
Vol. 44. Issue 7.
Pages 346-352 (January 2008)
Share
Share
Download PDF
More article options
Vol. 44. Issue 7.
Pages 346-352 (January 2008)
Original Articles
Full text access
Assessment of Patient Satisfaction and Preferences With Inhalers in Asthma With the FSI-10 Questionnaire
Visits
6203
Miguel Perpiñá Torderaa,
Corresponding author
perpinya_mig@gva.es

Correspondence: Dr M. Perpiñá Tordera, Servicio de Neumología, Hospital Universitario La Fe, Avda de Campanar, 21, 46009 Valencia, Spain
, José Luis Viejob, Joaquín Sanchosc, Xavier Badiad, Nicolás Cobose, César Picadof, Víctor Sobradillog, Jaime Martínez González del Ríoh, Fernando Ducei, Luis Muñoz Cabreraj
a Servicio de Neumología, Hospital Universitario La Fe, Valencia, Spain
b Servicio de Neumología, Hospital General Yagüe, Burgos, Spain
c Servicio de Neumología, Hospital de Sant Pau, Barcelona, Spain
d Health Outcomes Research, Barcelona, Spain
e Unidad de Neumología Pediátrica, Hospital Vail d'Hebron, Barcelona, Spain
f Servicio de Neumología, Hospital Clínic, Barcelona, Spain
g Servicio de Neumología, Hospital de Cruces, Baracaldo, Vizcaya, Spain
h Servicio de Neumología, Hospital Universitario Central de Asturias, Oviedo, Asturias, Spain
i Servicio de Alergia, Hospital Clínico Lozano Blesa, Zaragoza, Spain
j Servicio de Neumología, Hospital Reina Sofía, Córdoba, Spain
Ver más
This item has received
Article information
Background and objective

Lack of adherence to inhaled corticosteroid therapy is common in patients with asthma, and it has been suggested that allowing patients to choose their own inhalers would resolve this problem. The FSI-10 (Feeling of Satisfaction with Inhaler) is a self-completed questionnaire to assess patient opinions regarding ease or difficulty of use, portability, and usability of devices for delivery of inhaled corticosteroids. The aim of this study was to define the measurement properties of the FSI-10 questionnaire and to use this inventory to compare satisfaction and preferences of patients with asthma regarding 3 different devices for delivery of inhaled corticosteroids: Turbuhaler, Accuhaler, and Novolizer.

Patients and methods

We performed a multicenter, prospective, observational study in 112 stable asthmatic patients (64 women; mean [SD] age, 37 [22] years) treated on a regular basis with inhaled corticosteroids. The use of the devices was explained to the patients and the order in which they should be used in each case was randomly assigned. The devices were used for 7-day periods and at the end of each the FSI-10 questionnaire was completed for the device used. Once the protocol was completed, patients stated their preference for the different devices used.

Results

The FSI-10 was easily understood and rapidly completed, and it exhibited acceptable measurement properties. Factor analysis showed that the measure was unidimensional. Although acceptance of all 3 devices assessed was reasonable, the FSI-10 questionnaire detected significant differences between them: Turbuhaler and Novolizer scored higher than Accuhaler on a number of questions. This preference is partly explained by Turbuhaler having been the device that was commonly used by the patients prior to the study. However, the highest scoring and most often preferred inhaler in patients under 16 years of age was the Novolizer, even though the Turbuhaler had also usually been used by those patients prior to the study.

Conclusions

The FSI-10 is a useful instrument for assessing the degree of satisfaction of asthmatic patients regarding available inhalation devices. It is easy to understand and complete, and able to identify differences in patient satisfaction with the different inhalers.

Key words:
Preference
Inhalation devices
Corticosteroids
Asthma
Antecedentes y objetivo

El incumplimiento terapéutico con los corticoides inhalados (CI) es frecuente en los pacientes con asma. Se ha señalado que la elección del dispensador por el paciente facilitaría la solución del problema. El FSI-10 (Evaluación de la Satisfacción con el Inhalador) es un cuestionario autorrellenable que valora las opiniones sobre comodidad, dificultad, transportabilidad y manejabilidad de los dispositivos para CI. El objetivo de este trabajo ha sido definir las propiedades métricas del FSI-10 y comparar, mediante este inventario, la satisfacción y las preferencias de los pacientes con asma respecto a 3 dispositivos para CI: Turbuhaler® (T), Accuhaler® (A) y Novolizer® (N).

Pacientes y métodos

Hemos realizado un estudio observacional, prospectivo y multicéntrico en 112 asmáticos (64 mujeres; edad media ± desviación estándar: 37 ± 22 años) estables y tratados regularmente con CI. Se les explicó la técnica de utilizatión de los dispositivos a evaluar y, aleatoriamente, se asignó el orden en que debían emplearlos. Usaron los dispositivos durante períodos de 7 días, tras los cuales cumplimentaron el FSI-10. Completado el protocolo, todos ellos expresaron el grado de preferencia por los dispositivos empleados.

Resultados

El FSI-10 resultó fácil de comprender y rápido de cumplimentar, y mostró propiedades métricas aceptables. El analisis factorial exploratorio muestra la unidimensionalidad de la medida. La aceptacion de los 3 dispositivos evaluados fue razonable, pero el FSI-10 detect» diferencias signiflcativas entre ellos: los sistemas T y N se valoraron mejor que A en bastantes preguntas del cuestionario. Esta pre-ferencia responde en parte al hecho de que T era el dispositi-vo comunmente utilizado con anterioridad por los pacientes. Sin embargo, para los menores de 16 afios el inhalador prefe-rido y mejor puntuado fue N, a pesar de que en este subgrupo tambien era el T el habitualmente manejado.

Conclusiones

El FSI-10 es un instrumento util para evaluar el grado de satisfaction del paciente asmatico con los dispositivos de inhalacion disponibles. Es comprensible, de facil manejo y capaz de identificar diferencias de satisfaccion entre distintos inhaladores.

Palabras clave:
Preferencias
Dispositivos de inhalacion
Corticoides
Asma
Full text is only aviable in PDF
References
[1]
J Sanchis.
New trends in aerosol therapy: the clinicians view.
Eur Respir Rev, 18 (1994), pp. 106-107
[2]
MB Dolovich, RC Ahrens, DR Hess, P Anderson, R Dhand, JL Rau, et al.
Device selection and outcomes of aerosol therapy: evidence-based guidelines: American College of Chest Physicians/American College of Asthma, Allergy, and Immunology.
Chest, 127 (2005), pp. 335-371
[3]
British Thoracic Society, Scottish Intercollegiate Guideline Network.
British guideline on the management of asthma.
Thorax, 58 (2003), pp. 1-94
[4]
P Anderson.
Patient preference for and satisfaction with inhaler devices.
Eur Respir Rev, 96 (2005), pp. 109-116
[5]
X Badia.
La satisfacción con el tratamiento.
Med Clin (Barc), 125 (2005), pp. 98-99
[6]
JL Campbell, GM Kiebert, MR Partridge.
Development of the Satisfaction with Inhaled Asthma Treatment Questionnaire.
Eur Respir J, 22 (2003), pp. 127-134
[7]
MJ Welch, HS Nelson, G Shapiro, JW Bensch, WN Sokol, JA Smith, et al.
Comparison of patient preference and ease of teaching inhaler technique for Pulmicort Turbuhaler versus pressurized metereddose inhalers.
J Aerosol Med, 17 (2004), pp. 129-139
[8]
W Schurmann, S Schmidtmann, P Moroni, D Massey, M Qidan.
Respimat Soft Mist inhaler versus hydrofluoroalkane metered dose inhaler: patient preference and satisfaction.
Treat Respir Med, 4 (2005), pp. 53-61
[9]
J Serra Batlles, V Plaza, C Vadiola, E Morejón.
Patient perception and acceptability of multidose dry powder inhalers: a randomized crossover comparison of Diskus/Accuhaler with Turbuhaler.
J Aerosol Med, 15 (2002), pp. 59-64
[10]
J Giner, M Torrejón, A Ramos, P Casán, C Granel, V Plaza, et al.
Preferencias de los pacientes en la elección de dispositivos de inhalación en polvo.
Arch Bronconeumol, 40 (2004), pp. 106-109
[11]
RB Cattell.
The scree test for the number of factors.
Multivar Behav Res, 1 (1966), pp. 140-161
[12]
LJ Crombach.
Coefficient alpha and the internal structure test.
Psychometrika, 16 (1951), pp. 297-334
[13]
CM Clancy, JM Eisenberg.
Outcomes research: measuring the end results of health care.
Science, 282 (1988), pp. 245-246
[14]
R Fitzpatrick.
Surveys of patient satisfaction: I. Important general considerations.
BMJ, 302 (1991), pp. 887-889
[15]
A Donabedian.
Evaluating the quality of medical care.
Milbank Mem Fund Q, 44 (1996), pp. 166-203
[16]
DL Patrick, YP Chiang.
Measurement of health outcomes in treatment effectiveness evaluations: conceptual and methodological challenges.
Med Care, 38 (2000), pp. 14-25
[17]
LE Markson, WM Vollmer, L Fitterman, E Ó'Connor, S Narayanan, M Berger, et al.
Insight into patient dissatisfaction with asthma treatment.
Arch Intern Med, 161 (2001), pp. 379-384
[18]
J Martín Fernández, C Barcina Sánchez, FJ Jiménez Jiménez, R Marazuela Bermejo.
Estudio de validación de la versión adaptada al castellano del cuestionario de satisfacción con la medicación inhalada en pacientes asmáticos.
Arch Bronconeumol, 42 (2006), pp. 575-582
[19]
CM Kozma, TL Slaton, BU Monz, R Hoddr, PR Reese.
Development and validation of a patient satisfaction and preference questionnaire for inhalation devices.
Treat Respir Med, 4 (2005), pp. 41-52
[20]
GH Guyatt, DH Feeny, DL Patrick.
Measuring health-related quality of life.
Ann Intern Med, 118 (1993), pp. 622-629

This study was funded by Meda Pharma and grant FIS PI05/0583 from the Health Research Fund of the Spanish Ministry of Health.

Copyright © 2008. Sociedad Española de Neumología y Cirugía Torácica (SEPAR)
Archivos de Bronconeumología
Article options
Tools

Are you a health professional able to prescribe or dispense drugs?