Home Treatment Compared to Initial Hospitalization in Normotensive Patients with Acute Pulmonary Embolism in the Netherlands: A Cost Analysis.

BACKGROUND: Venous thromboembolism constitutes substantial health care costs amounting to approximately 60 million euros per year in the Netherlands. Compared with initial hospitalization, home treatment of pulmonary embolism (PE) is associated with a cost reduction. An accurate estimation of cost savings per patient treated at home is currently lacking. AIM: The aim of this study was to compare health care utilization and costs during the first 3 months after a PE diagnosis in patients who are treated at home versus those who are initially hospitalized. METHODS: Patient-level data of the YEARS cohort study, including 383 normotensive patients diagnosed with PE, were used to estimate the proportion of patients treated at home, mean hospitalization duration in those who were hospitalized, and rates of PE-related readmissions and complications. To correct for baseline differences within the two groups, regression analyses was performed. The primary outcome was the average total health care costs during a 3-month follow-up period for patients initially treated at home or in hospital. RESULTS: Mean hospitalization duration for the initial treatment was 0.69 days for those treated initially at home (n = 181) and 4.3 days for those initially treated in hospital (n = 202). Total average costs per hospitalized patient were €3,209 and €1,512 per patient treated at home. The adjusted mean difference was €1,483 (95% confidence interval: €1,181-1,784). CONCLUSION: Home treatment of hemodynamically stable patients with acute PE was associated with an estimated net cost reduction of €1,483 per patient. This difference underlines the advantage of triage-based home treatment of these patients.

Effects of Community-based Exercise Prehabilitation for Patients Scheduled for Colorectal Surgery With High Risk for Postoperative Complications: Results of a Randomized Clinical Trial.

OBJECTIVE: To assess the effects of a 3-week community-based exercise program on 30-day postoperative complications in high-risk patients scheduled for elective colorectal resection for (pre)malignancy. SUMMARY BACKGROUND DATA: Patients with a low preoperative aerobic fitness undergoing colorectal surgery have an increased risk of postoperative complications. It remains, however, to be demonstrated whether prehabilitation in these patients reduces postoperative complications. METHODS: This 2-center, prospective, single-blinded randomized clinical trial was carried out in 2 large teaching hospitals in the Netherlands. Patients (≥60 years) with colorectal (pre)malignancy scheduled for elective colorectal resection and with a score ≤7 metabolic equivalents on the veterans-specific activity questionnaire were randomly assigned to the prehabilitation group or the usual care group by using block-stratified randomization. An oxygen uptake at the ventilatory anaerobic threshold <11 mL/kg/min at the baseline cardiopulmonary exercise test was the final inclusion criterion. Inclusion was based on a power analysis. Patients in the prehabilitation group participated in a personalized 3-week (3 sessions per week, nine sessions in total) supervised exercise program given in community physical therapy practices before colorectal resection. Patients in the reference group received usual care. The primary outcome was the number of patients with one or more complications within 30 days of surgery, graded according to the Clavien-Dindo classification. Data were analyzed on an intention-to-treat basis. RESULTS: Between February 2014 and December 2018, 57 patients [30 males and 27 females; mean age 73.6 years (standard deviation 6.1), range 61-88 years] were randomized to either prehabilitation (n = 28) or usual care (n = 29). The rate of postoperative complications was lower in the prehabilitation group (n = 12, 42.9%) than in the usual care group (n = 21, 72.4%, relative risk 0.59, 95% confidence interval 0.37-0.96, P = 0.024). CONCLUSIONS: Exercise prehabilitation reduced postoperative complications in high-risk patients scheduled to undergo elective colon resection for (pre)malignancy. Prehabilitation should be considered as usual care in high-risk patients scheduled for elective colon, and probably also rectal, surgery.

Adherence to an eHealth Self-Management Intervention for Patients with Both COPD and Heart Failure: Results of a Pilot Study.

Background: Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) and chronic heart failure (CHF) often coexist and share periods of symptom deterioration. Electronic health (eHealth) might play an important role in adherence to interventions for the self-management of COPD and CHF symptoms by facilitating and supporting home-based care. Methods: In this pilot study, an eHealth self-management intervention was developed based on paper versions of multi-morbid exacerbation action plans and evaluated in patients with both COPD and CHF. Self-reporting of increased symptoms in diaries was linked to an automated decision support system that generated self-management actions, which was communicated via an eHealth application on a tablet. After participating in self-management training sessions, patients used the intervention for a maximum of four months. Adherence to daily symptom diary completion and follow-up of actions were analyzed. An add-on sensorized (Respiro®) inhaler was used to analyze inhaled medication adherence and inhalation technique. Results: In total, 1148 (91%) of the daily diaries were completed on the same day by 11 participating patients (mean age 66.8 ± 2.9 years; moderate (55%) to severe (45%) COPD; 46% midrange left ventricular function (LVF) and 27% reduced LVF). Seven patients received a total of 24 advised actions because of increased symptoms of which 11 (46%) were followed-up. Of the 13 (54%) unperformed advised actions, six were "call the case manager". Adherence to inhaled medication was 98.4%, but 51.9% of inhalations were performed incorrectly, with "inhaling too shortly" (<1.25 s) being the most frequent error (79.6%). Discussion: Whereas adherence to completing daily diaries was high, advised actions were inadequately followed-up, particularly the action "call the case manager". Inhaled medication adherence was high, but inhalations were poorly performed. Future research is needed to identify adherence barriers, further tailor the intervention to the individual patient and analyse the intervention effects on health outcomes.

Current practice patterns of outpatient management of acute pulmonary embolism: A post-hoc analysis of the YEARS study.

BACKGROUND: Studies have shown the safety of home treatment of patients with pulmonary embolism (PE) at low risk of adverse events. Management studies focusing on home treatment have suggested that 30% to 55% of acute PE patients could be treated at home, based on the HESTIA criteria, but data from day-to-day clinical practice are largely unavailable. AIM: To determine current practice patterns of home treatment of acute PE in the Netherlands. METHOD: We performed a post-hoc analysis of the YEARS study. The main outcomes were the proportion of patients who were discharged <24 h and reasons for admission if treated in hospital. Further, we compared the 3-month incidence of PE-related unscheduled readmissions between patients treated at home and in hospital. RESULTS: Of the 404 outpatients with PE included in this post-hoc analysis of the YEARS study, 184 (46%) were treated at home. The median duration of admission of the hospitalized patients was 3.0 days. The rate of PE-related readmissions of patients treated at home was 9.7% versus 8.6% for hospitalized patients (crude hazard ratio 1.1 (95% CI 0.57-2.1)). The 3-month incidence of any adverse event was 3.8% in those treated at home (2 recurrent VTE, 3 major bleedings and two deaths) compared to 10% in the hospitalized patients (3 recurrent VTE, 6 major bleedings and fourteen deaths). CONCLUSIONS: In the YEARS study, 46% of patients with PE were treated at home with low incidence of adverse events. PE-related readmission rates were not different between patients treated at home or in hospital.

Reasons for Hospitalization of Patients with Acute Pulmonary Embolism Based on the Hestia Decision Rule.

BACKGROUND: The Hestia criteria can be used to select pulmonary embolism (PE) patients for outpatient treatment. The subjective Hestia criterion "medical/social reason for admission" allows the treating physician to consider any patient-specific circumstances in the final management decision. It is unknown how often and why this criterion is scored. METHODS: This is a patient-level post hoc analysis of the combined Hestia and Vesta studies. The main outcomes were the frequency of all scored Hestia items in hospitalized patients and the explicit reason for scoring the subjective criterion. Hemodynamic parameters and computed tomography-assessed right ventricular (RV)/left ventricular (LV) ratio of those only awarded with the subjective criterion were compared with patients treated at home. RESULTS: From the 1,166 patients screened, data were available for all 600 who were hospitalized. Most were hospitalized to receive oxygen therapy (45%); 227 (38%) were only awarded with the subjective criterion, of whom 51 because of "intermediate to intermediate-high risk PE." Compared with patients with intermediate risk PE (RV/LV ratio > 1.0) treated at home (179/566, 32%), hospitalized patients with only the subjective criterion had a higher mean RV/LV ratio (mean difference +0.30, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.19-0.41) and a higher heart rate (+18/min, 95% CI 10-25). No relevant differences were observed for other hemodynamic parameters. CONCLUSION: The most frequent reason for hospital admission was oxygen therapy. In the decision to award the subjective criterion as sole argument for admission, the severity of the RV overload and resulting hemodynamic response of the patient was taken into account rather than just abnormal RV/LV ratio.

The use of oximetry and a questionnaire in primary care enables exclusion of a subsequent obstructive sleep apnea diagnosis.

PURPOSE: The study aims to prospectively validate the prognostic value of oximetry alone or combined in a two-step strategy with a questionnaire for the exclusion of obstructive sleep apnea (OSA) in primary care. METHODS: A total of 140 subjects with suspected OSA were included from 54 participating primary care practices. All subjects completed the Philips questionnaire and underwent one night of oximetry prior to referral to a sleep center. The prognostic value of two strategies was evaluated against the diagnosis of the sleep center as the gold standard: (1) assume OSA and subsequently refer to a sleep center if the oxygen desaturation index (ODI) is ≥ 5 and (2) assume OSA and refer to a sleep center if the Philips questionnaire score is ≥ 55% (regardless of the ODI) or if the Philips questionnaire score is < 55% and the ODI is ≥ 5. RESULTS: OSA was diagnosed in the sleep centers in 100 (71%) of the included subjects. Using ODI ≥ 5 alone resulted in a sensitivity of 99.0%, a specificity of 50.0%, a negative predictive value of 95.2%, and a positive predictive value 83.2%. Using the two-step strategy, oximetry would be performed on 39% of the subjects. This strategy resulted in a sensitivity of 100%, a specificity of 35.0%, a negative predictive value of 100%, and a positive predictive value of 79.4%. CONCLUSIONS: In a Dutch primary care population with a clinical suspicion of OSA and low frequency of cardiovascular comorbidities, the use of oximetry alone or combined in a two-step strategy with a questionnaire enables exclusion of a sleep center diagnosis of OSA.

Validation of the oxygen desaturation index in the diagnostic workup of obstructive sleep apnea.

INTRODUCTION: Obstructive sleep apnea (OSA) is common, and diagnosis requires expensive and laborious testing to assess the apnea hypopnea index (AHI). We performed an analysis to explore the relationship between the oxygen desaturation index (ODI) as measured with pulse oximetry and the AHI in our large portable monitoring (PM) database to find an optimal cutoff value for the ODI in order to be able to exclude AHI ≥ 5 on PM. METHODS: Three thousand four hundred thirteen PM recordings were randomly divided into a training set (N = 2281) and a test set (N = 1132). The optimal cutoff for the ODI to exclude an AHI ≥ 5 on PM was determined in the training set and subsequently validated in the test set. RESULTS: Area under the curve of the ODI to exclude an AHI ≥ 5 on PM was 0.997 in the training set and 0.996 in the test set. In the training set, the optimal cutoff to predict an AHI < 5 was an ODI < 5. Using this cutoff in the test set provided a sensitivity of 97.7%, a specificity of 97.0%, a positive predictive value of 99.2%, and a negative predictive value of 91.4%. CONCLUSION: An ODI < 5 predicts an AHI < 5 with high sensitivity and specificity when measured simultaneously using the same oximeter during PM recording.

Retrospective validation of a new volumetric capnography parameter for the exclusion of pulmonary embolism at the emergency department.

Volumetric capnography might be used to exclude pulmonary embolism (PE) without the need for computed tomography pulmonary angiography. In a pilot study, a new parameter (CapNoPE) combining the amount of carbon dioxide exhaled per breath (carbon dioxide production (V CO2 )), the slope of phase 3 of the volumetric capnogram (slope 3) and respiratory rate (RR) showed promising diagnostic accuracy (where CapNoPE=(V CO2 ×slope 3)/RR). To retrospectively validate CapNoPE for the exclusion of PE, the volumetric capnograms of 205 subjects (68 with PE) were analysed, based on a large multicentre dataset of volumetric capnograms from subjects with suspected PE at the emergency department. The area under the curve (AUC) of the receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve and diagnostic accuracy of the in-pilot established threshold (1.90 Pa·min) were calculated. CapNoPE was 1.56±0.97 Pa·min in subjects with PE versus 2.51±1.67 Pa·min in those without PE (p<0.001). The AUC of the ROC curve was 0.714 (95% CI 0.64-0.79). For the cut-off of ≥1.90 Pa·min, sensitivity was 64.7%, specificity was 59.9%, the negative predictive value was 77.4% and the positive predictive value was 44.4%. The CapNoPE parameter is decreased in patients with PE but its diagnostic accuracy seems too low to use in clinical practice.

Reproducibility of hypercapnic ventilatory response measurements with steady-state and rebreathing methods.

In this study, the hypercapnic ventilatory response (HCVR) was measured, defined as the ventilation response to carbon dioxide tension (PCO2 ). We investigated which method, rebreathing or steady-state, is most suitable for measurement of the HCVR in healthy subjects, primarily based on reproducibility. Secondary outcome parameters were subject experience and duration. 20 healthy adults performed a rebreathing and steady-state HCVR measurement on two separate days. Subject experience was assessed using numeric rating scales (NRS). The intraclass correlation coefficient (ICCs) of the sensitivity to carbon dioxide above the ventilatory recruitment threshold and the projected apnoea threshold were calculated to determine the reproducibility of both methods. The ICCs of sensitivity were 0.89 (rebreathing) and 0.56 (steady-state). The ICCs of the projected apnoea threshold were 0.84 (rebreathing) and 0.25 (steady-state). The steady-state measurement was preferred by 16 out of 20 subjects; the differences in NRS scores were small. The hypercapnic ventilatory response measured using the rebreathing setup provided reproducible results, while the steady-state method did not. This may be explained by high variability in end-tidal PCO2 . Differences in subject experience between the methods are small.

The TL,NO /TL,CO ratio cannot be used to exclude pulmonary embolism.

BACKGROUND: The existing screening modalities for pulmonary embolism (PE), such as D-dimer and clinical prediction rules, have low positive predictive values. With its capability to indicate pulmonary vascular abnormalities, the ratio of the transfer factor of the lungs for nitric oxide and the transfer factor of the lungs for carbon monoxide (TL,NO /TL,CO ) might be an additional discriminating parameter. METHODS: Carbon monoxide/Nitric oxide diffusion measurements were performed on unselected patients seen on the emergency department for which due to suspected PE a computed tomography pulmonary angiogram (CTPA) was ordered. RESULTS: A total of 28 patients were included, PE was found in 12 on CTPA. Median TL,NO /TL,CO ratio was 4·09 (interquartile range (IQR) 3·83-4·40) in the no PE group versus 4·00 (IQR 3·78-4·32) in the PE group (P = 0·959). Median alveolar volume was 77·1% of predicted in the no PE group versus 71·0% of predicted in the PE group (P = 0·353). Median TL,CO was 75·8% of predicted in the no PE group versus 68·8% of predicted in the PE group (P = 0·120). Median TL,NO was 69·3% of predicted in the no PE group versus 60·5% of predicted in the PE group (P = 0·078). CONCLUSION: The presented data indicate that the TL,NO /TL,CO ratio cannot be used to exclude PE.

Volumetric capnography in the exclusion of pulmonary embolism at the emergency department: a pilot study.

The analysis of the [Formula: see text] in expired air as a function of the exhaled volume (volumetric capnography) might result in a more specific exclusion tool for pulmonary embolism (PE) in addition to the Wells-score and D-dimer. A novel combination of volumetric capnography parameters ([Formula: see text]) should be decreased in PE and could possibly be used to decrease the number of requested computed tomography pulmonary angiograms (CTPA). Volumetric capnography measurements were performed on consecutive patients seen in the emergency department for which, due to suspected PE (due to increased D-dimer level or Wells-score), a CTPA was ordered. A total of 30 subjects were included, of which in 13 PE was seen on CTPA. Median [Formula: see text] was 4.36 kPa (IQR 3.92-4.88) in the no PE group versus 4.07 kPa (IQR 3.37-4.39) in the PE group (p = 0.086). Median of the novel parameter [Formula: see text] was 1.85 min.kPa dl-1 (IQR 1.21-3.00) in the no PE group versus 1.18 min.kPa dl-1 (IQR 0.61-1.38) in the PE group (p = 0.006). Using a threshold for the new parameter of 1.90 min.kPa dl-1 or higher to exclude PE resulted in a negative predictive value of 100% (95% CI: 77%-100%) and would have potentially excluded PE in 47% (95% CI: 26%-69%) of the no PE group without the need for CTPA. This pilot study introduces a novel parameter [Formula: see text] which is significantly decreased in PE subjects. Future studies regarding validation and addressing aspects such as reproducibility and normalization after treatment are needed to confirm its usability in excluding PE in the emergency department.

Efficacy and Safety of Outpatient Treatment Based on the Hestia Clinical Decision Rule with or without N-Terminal Pro-Brain Natriuretic Peptide Testing in Patients with Acute Pulmonary Embolism. A Randomized Clinical Trial.

RATIONALE: Outpatient treatment of pulmonary embolism (PE) may lead to improved patient satisfaction and reduced healthcare costs. However, trials to assess its safety and the optimal method for patient selection are scarce. OBJECTIVES: To validate the utility and safety of selecting patients with PE for outpatient treatment by the Hestia criteria and to compare the safety of the Hestia criteria alone with the Hestia criteria combined with N-terminal pro-brain natriuretic peptide (NT-proBNP) testing. METHODS: We performed a randomized noninferiority trial in 17 Dutch hospitals. We randomized patients with PE without any of the Hestia criteria to direct discharge or additional NT-proBNP testing. We discharged the latter patients as well if NT-proBNP did not exceed 500 ng/L or admitted them if NT-proBNP was greater than 500 ng/L. The primary endpoint was 30-day adverse outcome defined as PE- or bleeding-related mortality, cardiopulmonary resuscitation, or intensive care unit admission. The noninferiority margin for the primary endpoint was 3.4%. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: We randomized 550 patients. In the NT-proBNP group, 34 of 275 (12%) had elevated NT-proBNP values and were managed as inpatients. No patient (0 of 34) with an elevated NT-proBNP level treated in hospital (0%; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0-10.2%), versus no patient (0 of 23) with a post hoc-determined elevated NT-proBNP level from the direct discharge group (0%; 95% CI, 0-14.8%), experienced the primary endpoint. In both trial cohorts, the primary endpoint occurred in none of the 275 patients (0%; 95% CI, 0-1.3%) subjected to NT-proBNP testing, versus in 3 of 275 patients (1.1%; 95% CI, 0.2-3.2%) in the direct discharge group (P = 0.25). During the 3-month follow-up, recurrent venous thromboembolism occurred in two patients (0.73%; 95% CI, 0.1-2.6%) in the NT-proBNP group versus three patients (1.1%; 95% CI, 0.2-3.2%) in the direct discharge group (P = 0.65). CONCLUSIONS: Outpatient treatment of patients with PE selected on the basis of the Hestia criteria alone was associated with a low risk of adverse events. Given the low number of patients with elevated NT-proBNP levels, this trial was unable to draw definite conclusions regarding the incremental value of NT-proBNP testing in patients who fulfill the Hestia criteria. Clinical trial registered with www.trialregister.nl/trialreg/admin/rctview.asp?TC=2603 (NTR2603).

Obstructive Sleep Apnea Syndrome in Company Workers: Development of a Two-Step Screening Strategy with a New Questionnaire.

STUDY OBJECTIVES: To develop and evaluate a screening questionnaire and a two-step screening strategy for obstructive sleep apnea syndrome (OSAS) in healthy workers. METHODS: This is a cross-sectional study of 1,861 employees comprising healthy blue- and white-collar workers in two representative plants in the Netherlands from a worldwide consumer electronic company who were approached to participate. Employees were invited to complete various sleep questionnaires, and undergo separate single nasal flow recording and home polysomnography on two separate nights. RESULTS: Of the 1,861 employees, 249 provided informed consent and all nasal flow and polysomnography data were available from 176 (70.7%). OSAS was diagnosed in 65 (36.9%). A combination of age, absence of insomnia, witnessed breathing stops, and three-way scoring of the Berlin and STOPBANG questionnaires best predicted OSAS. Factor analysis identified a six-factor structure of the resulting new questionnaire: snoring, snoring severity, tiredness, witnessed apneas, sleep quality, and daytime well-being. Subsequently, some questions were removed, and the remaining questions were used to construct a new questionnaire. A scoring algorithm, computing individual probabilities of OSAS as high, intermediate, or low risk, was developed. Subsequently, the intermediate risk group was split into low and high probability for OSAS, based on nasal flow recording. This two-step approach showed a sensitivity of 63.1%, and a specificity of 90.1%. Specificity is important for low prevalence populations. CONCLUSION: A two-step screening strategy with a new questionnaire and subsequent nasal flow recording is a promising way to screen for OSAS in a healthy worker population. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION: Development and validation of a screening instrument for obstructive sleep apnea syndrome in healthy workers. Netherlands Trial Register (www.trailregister.nl), number: NTR2675.

Sleep position trainer versus tennis ball technique in positional obstructive sleep apnea syndrome.

STUDY OBJECTIVE: Positional therapy (PT) is an effective therapy in positional obstructive sleep apnea syndrome (POSAS) when used, but the compliance of PT is low. The objective of this study was to investigate whether a new kind of PT is effective and can improve compliance. METHODS: 29 patients were treated with the Sleep Position Trainer (SPT), 26 patients with the Tennis Ball Technique (TBT). At baseline and 1 month polysomnography, Epworth Sleepiness Scale (ESS) and the Quebec Sleep Questionnaire (QSQ) were taken. Daily compliance was objectively measured in both groups. RESULTS: Both therapies prevent supine sleep position to a median of 0% (min-max: SPT 0.0% to 67%, TBT 0.0% to 38.9%), resulting in a treatment success (AHI <5) in 68.0% of the SPT and 42.9% of the TBT patients. The ESS at baseline was <10 in both groups. Sleep quality parameters as wake after sleep onset (WASO; p = 0.001) and awakenings (p = 0.006) improved more in the SPT group. Total QSQ scores (0.4±0.2, p = 0.03) and the QSQ domains nocturnal symptoms (0.7±0.2, p = 0.01) and social interactions (0.8±0.3, p = 0.02) changed in favor of the SPT group. Effective compliance (≥4 h/night + ≥5 days/week) was 75.9% for the SPT and 42.3% for the TBT users (p = 0.01). CONCLUSION: In mild POSAS with normal EES the new SPT device and the standard TBT are equally effective in reducing respiratory indices. However, compared to the TBT, sleep quality, quality of life, and compliance improved significantly more in the SPT group.

Comparison of two methods for selection of out of hospital treatment in patients with acute pulmonary embolism.

The aim of this study is to compare the performance of two clinical decision rules to select patients with acute pulmonary embolism (PE) for outpatient treatment: the Hestia criteria and the simplified Pulmonary Embolism Severity Index (sPESI). From 2008 to 2010, 468 patients with PE were triaged with the Hestia criteria for outpatient treatment: 247 PE patients were treated at home and 221 were treated as inpatients. The outcome of interest was all-cause 30-day mortality. In a post-hoc fashion, the sPESI items were scored and patients were classified according to the sPESI in low and high risk groups. Of the 247 patients treated at home, 189 (77%) patients were classified as low risk according to the sPESI and 58 patients (23%) as high risk. In total, 11 patients died during the first month; two patients treated at home and nine patients treated in-hospital. None of the patients treated at home died of fatal PE. Both the Hestia criteria and sPESI selected >50% of patients as low risk, with good sensitivity and negative predictive values for 30-day mortality: 82% and 99% for the Hestia criteria and 91% and 100% for the sPESI, respectively. The Hestia criteria and the sPESI classified different patients eligible for outpatient treatment, with similar low risks for 30-day mortality. This study suggests that the Hestia criteria may identify a proportion of high risk sPESI patiennts who can be safely treated at home, this however requires further validation.

[Aspiration pneumonitis after fire-eating: fire-eater's lung]. / Aspiratiepneumonitis na vuurspuwen: de vuurspuwerslong.

On the emergency department we saw two men aged 19 and 26 with symptoms of lipoid pneumonitis (fire-eater's lung) following aspiration of petroleum during fire-eating. They were both admitted to hospital and treated with amoxicillin and clavulanic acid. Both patients were clinically recovered within a few days. Following aspiration of petroleum there is often a period of latency from 8-24 hours before the symptoms occur; it is recommended that patients should be admitted for observation. Known symptoms are coughing, shortness of breath, thoracic pain, fever, tachypnoea and sometimes haemoptysis. Apart from chest radiographs and laboratory values, taking into account the specific history, unless complications are expected additional diagnostic tests are often considered unnecessary. Treatment is symptomatic: administration of oxygen, pain relief, bronchodilation and potentially antibiotics if a bacterial superinfection is suspected. Clinical recovery is usually quick. Temporary restrictive disorders of lung function and reduced diffusion capacity have been described. Recovery of lung function and radiological recovery are seen within weeks to months. Mortality is less than 1%.

Comparison of the Diskus inhaler and the Handihaler regarding preference and ease of use.

Many chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) patients use their inhaler ineffectively and there is a trend towards increased inhaler resistance. We wanted to answer two questions: Is there a difference in preference and ease of use between Diskus (DK) and Handihaler (HH)? How acceptable are inhalation resistances? Sixty COPD patients, naive to DK and HH, but experienced in the use of other inhalers, had to read the instruction leaflet and demonstrate their inhalation technique. If errors were made, instruction was given and inhalation technique was checked again. Patients had to state a preference for DK or HH. Subsequently they inhaled through a range of resistances and scored the acceptability. There was no difference in the number of instructions needed for both inhalers. One third inhaled perfectly after reading the instruction leaflet, which increased to 85% after one instruction. More patients preferred the DK (43) than the HH (16). With decreasing resistance acceptability increases, but it reaches a plateau. Patients have a clear preference for the DK. There is no difference in the number of instructions needed to obtain a perfect inhalation technique, but for some patients one instruction is not enough. The trend to increase the resistance of inhalers has reached a critical point with regard to acceptability.