Greenhouse gas emissions associated with suboptimal asthma care in the UK: the SABINA healthCARe-Based envirONmental cost of treatment (CARBON) study.

BACKGROUND: Poorly controlled asthma is associated with increased morbidity and healthcare resource utilisation (HCRU). Therefore, to quantify the environmental impact of asthma care, this retrospective, cohort, healthCARe-Based envirONmental cost of treatment (CARBON) study estimated greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions in the UK associated with the management of well-controlled versus poorly controlled asthma. METHODS: Patients with current asthma (aged ≥12 years) registered with the Clinical Practice Research Datalink (2008‒2019) were included. GHG emissions, measured as carbon dioxide equivalent (CO2e), were estimated for asthma-related medication use, HCRU and exacerbations during follow-up of patients with asthma classified at baseline as well-controlled (<3 short-acting ß2-agonist (SABA) canisters/year and no exacerbations) or poorly controlled (≥3 SABA canisters/year or ≥1 exacerbation). Excess GHG emissions due to suboptimal asthma control included ≥3 SABA canister prescriptions/year, exacerbations and any general practitioner and outpatient visits within 10 days of hospitalisation or an emergency department visit. RESULTS: Of the 236 506 patients analysed, 47.3% had poorly controlled asthma at baseline. Scaled to the national level, the overall carbon footprint of asthma care in the UK was 750 540 tonnes CO2e/year, with poorly controlled asthma contributing excess GHG emissions of 303 874 tonnes CO2e/year, which is equivalent to emissions from >124 000 houses in the UK. Poorly controlled versus well-controlled asthma generated 3.1-fold higher overall and 8.1-fold higher excess per capita carbon footprint, largely SABA-induced, with smaller contributions from HCRU. CONCLUSIONS: These findings suggest that addressing the high burden of poorly controlled asthma, including curbing high SABA use and its associated risk of exacerbations, may significantly alleviate asthma care-related carbon emissions.

COVID-19 and pneumothorax: a multicentre retrospective case series.

INTRODUCTION: Pneumothorax and pneumomediastinum have both been noted to complicate cases of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) requiring hospital admission. We report the largest case series yet described of patients with both these pathologies (including nonventilated patients). METHODS: Cases were collected retrospectively from UK hospitals with inclusion criteria limited to a diagnosis of COVID-19 and the presence of either pneumothorax or pneumomediastinum. Patients included in the study presented between March and June 2020. Details obtained from the medical record included demographics, radiology, laboratory investigations, clinical management and survival. RESULTS: 71 patients from 16 centres were included in the study, of whom 60 had pneumothoraces (six with pneumomediastinum in addition) and 11 had pneumomediastinum alone. Two of these patients had two distinct episodes of pneumothorax, occurring bilaterally in sequential fashion, bringing the total number of pneumothoraces included to 62. Clinical scenarios included patients who had presented to hospital with pneumothorax, patients who had developed pneumothorax or pneumomediastinum during their inpatient admission with COVID-19 and patients who developed their complication while intubated and ventilated, either with or without concurrent extracorporeal membrane oxygenation. Survival at 28 days was not significantly different following pneumothorax (63.1±6.5%) or isolated pneumomediastinum (53.0±18.7%; p=0.854). The incidence of pneumothorax was higher in males. 28-day survival was not different between the sexes (males 62.5±7.7% versus females 68.4±10.7%; p=0.619). Patients aged ≥70 years had a significantly lower 28-day survival than younger individuals (≥70 years 41.7±13.5% survival versus <70 years 70.9±6.8% survival; p=0.018 log-rank). CONCLUSION: These cases suggest that pneumothorax is a complication of COVID-19. Pneumothorax does not seem to be an independent marker of poor prognosis and we encourage continuation of active treatment where clinically possible.

Sustainability in Inhaled Drug Delivery.

Asthma and chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) are amongst the most common chronic diseases worldwide, and are largely preventable by improving the quality of the air we breathe. The most commonly deployed treatment, the metered dose inhaler (MDI), uses hydrofluorocarbon propellants, which are powerful greenhouse gases that contribute disproportionately to the climate crisis. Alternative treatment strategies are required if we are to avoid contributing to the worst effects of climate change. These strategies include promoting non-pharmacological therapies like smoking cessation and pulmonary rehabilitation; empowering patients to gain better disease control through written management plans and encouraging preventer, rather than reliever therapies. Pharmacological strategies include: improving inhaler technique and spacer use; minimising propellant release by using smaller volume MDIs and simpler dosing regimes; dose counters to prevent waste; switching to low global warming potential inhalers; and inhaler recycling. There are also opportunities to improve disease control alongside reduced greenhouse gas emissions, including better matching of patients' devices to inhaler technique rather than defaulting to MDIs, stopping unnecessary inhaled steroids in COPD and maintenance and reliever therapy in asthma. New, lower global warming potential propellants are on the horizon, and their introduction could offer a golden opportunity to enhance MDIs usability and sustainability by making them refillable, integrating whistles to optimise inhalation technique, adding integrated caps, optimising materials for recycling and adding dose counters to all MDIs.

Carbon footprint impact of the choice of inhalers for asthma and COPD.

In the 1990s, metered dose inhalers (MDIs) containing chlorofluorocarbons were replaced with dry-powder inhalers (DPIs) and MDIs containing hydrofluorocarbons (HFCs). While HFCs are not ozone depleting, they are potent greenhouse gases. Annual carbon footprint (CO2e), per patient were 17 kg for Relvar-Ellipta/Ventolin-Accuhaler; and 439 kg for Seretide-Evohaler/Ventolin-Evohaler. In 2017, 70% of all inhalers sold in England were MDI, versus 13% in Sweden. Applying the Swedish DPI and MDI distribution to England would result in an annual reduction of 550 kt CO2e. The lower carbon footprint of DPIs should be considered alongside other factors when choosing inhalation devices.

Costs of switching to low global warming potential inhalers. An economic and carbon footprint analysis of NHS prescription data in England.

OBJECTIVES: Metered-dose inhalers (MDIs) contain propellants which are potent greenhouse gases. Many agencies propose a switch to alternative, low global warming potential (GWP) inhalers, such as dry powder inhalers (DPIs). We aimed to analyse the impact on greenhouse gas emissions and drug costs of making this switch. SETTING: We studied National Health Service prescription data from England in 2017 and collated carbon footprint data on inhalers commonly used in England. DESIGN: Inhalers were separated into different categories according to their mechanisms of action (eg, short-acting beta-agonist). Within each category we identified low and high GWP inhalers and calculated the cost and carbon impact of changing to low GWP inhalers. We modelled scenarios for swapping proportionally according to the current market share of each equivalent DPI (model 1) and switching to the lowest cost pharmaceutically equivalent DPI (model 2). We also reviewed available data on the carbon footprint of inhalers from scientific publications, independently certified reports and patents to provide more accurate carbon footprint information on different types of inhalers. RESULTS: If MDIs using HFA propellant are replaced with the cheapest equivalent DPI, then for every 10% of MDIs changed to DPIs, drug costs decrease by £8.2M annually. However if the brands of DPIs stay the same as 2017 prescribing patterns, for every 10% of MDIs changed to DPIs, drug costs increase by £12.7M annually. Most potential savings are due to less expensive long-acting beta-agonist (LABA)/inhaled corticosteroids (ICS) inhalers. Some reliever inhalers (eg, Ventolin) have a carbon footprint over 25 kg CO2e per inhaler, while others use far less 1,1,1,2-tetrafluoroethane (HFA134a) (eg, Salamol) with a carbon footprint of <10 kg CO2e per inhaler. 1,1,1,2,3,3,3-Heptafluoropropane (HFA227ea) LABA/ICS inhalers (eg, Flutiform) have a carbon footprint over 36 kg CO2e, compared with an equivalent HFA134a combination inhaler (eg, Fostair) at <20 kg CO2e. For every 10% of MDIs changed to DPIs, 58 kt CO2e could be saved annually in England. CONCLUSIONS: Switching to DPIs would result in large carbon savings and can be achieved alongside reduced drug costs by using less expensive brands. Substantial carbon savings can be made by using small volume HFA134a MDIs, in preference to large volume HFA134a MDIs, or those containing HFA227ea as a propellant.