Skip to main content
Log in

Respimat® Soft Mist™ Inhaler versus Hydrofluoroalkane Metered Dose Inhaler

Patient Preference and Satisfaction

  • Original Research Article
  • Published:
Treatments in Respiratory Medicine

Abstract

Introduction

In addition to offering favorable pharmaceutical performance, an ideal inhaler should be well accepted by patients, as this may facilitate compliance. We report a study that specifically assessed inhaler preference in patients with obstructive lung disease after treatment with ipratropium bromide/fenoterol hydrobromide (Berodual®) delivered via either Respimat® Soft Mist™ Inhaler (SMI) or hydrofluoroalkane metered dose inhaler (HFA-MDI).

Methods

Patients with COPD, asthma or mixed disease were randomized to receive ipratropium bromide/fenoterol hydrobromide 20/50µg via Respimat® SMI or 40/100µg via HFA-MDI for 7 weeks each, in a crossover design. Patients were trained in inhaler use and given ≤5 attempts to demonstrate satisfactory technique. At the end of each treatment period, patients completed a 15-item satisfaction questionnaire, and inhaler technique was re-tested. On study completion, patients were asked which inhaler they preferred and they rated their willingness to continue using each inhaler. Clinical efficacy outcomes were measured by diary card to check whether switching inhaler affected efficacy.

Results

In total, 245 patients were randomized and 224 used both inhalers within their respective treatment periods. Of 201 patients expressing a preference, 162 (81%) preferred Respimat® SMI and 39 (19%) preferred HFA-MDI (p < 0.001). Patients would rather continue using Respimat® SMI than HFA-MDI (p < 0.001). Mean scores for 13 of the 15 satisfaction questions were significantly higher for Respimat® SMI than HFA-MDI (p < 0.05); in addition, the total score was also significantly higher for Respimat® SMI (p < 0.001). Most patients (217/224; 97%) were judged to have good technique with Respimat® SMI after 7 weeks’ use. Differences in efficacy measures between the devices were not significant.

Conclusion

These data indicated that a large majority of patients preferred Respimat® SMI to HFA-MDI.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Table I
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Table II
Table III
Fig. 4
Fig. 5

Similar content being viewed by others

Notes

  1. 1 The use of trade names is for product identification purposes only and does not imply endorsement.

References

  1. Hochrainer D, Hölz H. Comparison of the velocities of clouds delivered from Respimat® soft mist inhaler and metered dose inhalers [abstract]. J Aerosol Med 2001; 14(386): P1–5

    Google Scholar 

  2. Vincken W, Bantje T, Middle MV, et al. Long-term efficacy and safety of ipratropium bromide plus fenoterol via Respimat® Soft Mist™ inhaler (SMI) versus a pressurised metered dose inhaler in asthma. Clin Drug Invest 2004; 24: 17–28

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  3. Kilfeather SA, Ponitz HH, Beck E, et al. Improved delivery of ipratropium bromide/fenoterol from Respimat® Soft Mist™ inhaler in patients with COPD. Respir Med 2004; 98: 387–97

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  4. von Berg A, Jeena PM, Soemantri PA, et al. Efficacy and safety of ipratropium bromide plus fenoterol inhaled via Respimat® Soft Mist™ inhaler vs a conventional metered dose inhaler plus spacer in children with asthma. Pediatr Pulmonol 2004; 37: 264–72

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. Hufford MR, Shiffman S. Assessment methods for patient-reported outcomes. Dis Manage Health Outcomes 2003; 11: 77–86

    Article  Google Scholar 

  6. Barry PW, O’Callaghan C. The influence of inhaler selection on efficacy of asthma therapies. Adv Drug Deliv Rev 2003; 55: 879–923

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  7. Kozma CM, Slaton TL, Monz BU, et al. Development and validation of a patient satisfaction and preference questionnaire for inhalation devices. Treat Respir Med 2005; 4(1): 41–52

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Barczok M, Perleberg C, Kardos P, et al. Excellent satisfaction with Respimat® Soft Mist™ Inhaler in COPD patients [abstract]. Presented at VIII Deutsches Aerosol Therapie Seminar; 2003 Nov 14–15; Marburg

  9. Sheth K, Bernstein JA, Lincourt WR, et al. Patient perceptions of an inhaled asthma medication administered as an inhalation powder via the Diskus or as an inhalation aerosol via a metered-dose inhaler. Ann Allergy Asthma Immunol 2003; 91: 55–60

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Schlaeppi M, Edwards K, Fuller RW, et al. Patient perception of the Diskus inhaler: a comparison with the Turbuhaler inhaler. Br J Clin Pract 1996; 50: 14–9

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  11. Giraud V, Roche N. Misuse of corticosteroid metered-dose inhaler is associated with decreased asthma stability. Eur Respir J 2002; 19: 246–51

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  12. Erickson SR, Horton A, Kirking DM. Assessing metered-dose inhaler technique: comparison of observation vs patient self-report. J Asthma 1998; 35: 575–83

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  13. van Beerendonk I, Mesters I, Mudde AN, et al. Assessment of the inhalation technique in outpatients with asthma or chronic obstructive pulmonary disease using a metered-dose inhaler or dry powder device. J Asthma 1998; 35: 273–9

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgment

This study was funded by Boehringer Ingelheim. Petra Moroni is an employee of Boehringer Ingelheim. Dan Massey has worked as a consultant for Boehringer Ingelheim. Wolfgang Schurmann, Soren Schmidtmann and Mahmud Qidan are clinical investigators of this study.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Petra Moroni.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Schürmann, W., Schmidtmann, S., Moroni, P. et al. Respimat® Soft Mist™ Inhaler versus Hydrofluoroalkane Metered Dose Inhaler. Treat Respir Med 4, 53–61 (2005). https://doi.org/10.2165/00151829-200504010-00006

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.2165/00151829-200504010-00006

Keywords

Navigation