Barriers to metered-dose inhaler/spacer use in Canadian pediatric emergency departments: A national survey

被引:26
|
作者
Osmond, Martin H. [1 ]
Gazarian, Madlen
Henry, Richard L.
Clifford, Tammy J.
Tetzlaff, Jennifer
机构
[1] Univ Ottawa, Dept Pediat, Ottawa, ON K1N 6N5, Canada
[2] Childrens Hosp Eastern Ontario, Ottawa, ON K1H 8L1, Canada
[3] Res Inst, Ottawa, ON, Canada
[4] Univ New S Wales, Sch Womens & Childrens Hlth, Sydney, NSW, Australia
关键词
asthma; children; nebulizer; spacers; barriers;
D O I
10.1197/j.aem.2007.05.009
中图分类号
R4 [临床医学];
学科分类号
1002 ; 100602 ;
摘要
Background: Metered-dose inhalers and spacers (MDI+S) are at least as effective as nebulizers for treating children with mild to moderate asthma exacerbations. Despite advantages in terms of efficacy, side effects, and ease of use, MDI+S are not used in many North American pediatric emergency departments (PEDs). Objectives: To survey emergency physicians, emergency nurses, and respirologists in Canadian pediatric teaching hospitals regarding their practices, beliefs, and barriers to change with respect to bronchodilator delivery. Methods: This was a cross-sectional, mailed survey of all emergency physicians, all respirologists, and a random sample of emergency nurses at ten Canadian PEDs. Results: A total of 291 of 349 health care professionals (83%) responded. Twenty-one percent of emergency physicians use MDI+S in the PED (largely concentrated at two "user sites"). A majority at nonuser sites, and virtually all professionals at user sites, responded that MDI+S are at least as effective as nebulizers, switching to MDI+S is justified by existing research, patient outcomes would be equal or better, and they have the required knowledge and skills to use MDI+S in the emergency department. The largest perceived barriers to MDI+S implementation include concerns regarding safety and costs, related to feasibility of providing and sterilizing spacers, and parental expectations for nebulizers. Other barriers included staff beliefs regarding the effectiveness of MDI+S, changes in nursing workload, and lack of a physician champion for change. Conclusions: MDI+S are infrequently used to treat patients with acute asthma in Canadian PEDs, despite the fact that most emergency staff believe they are effective. Important barriers to using MDI+S have been identified in this study and should be used to guide future implementation strategies.
引用
收藏
页码:1106 / 1113
页数:8
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [43] Metered-dose inhaler add-on devices: An in vitro evaluation of the BronchoAir inhaler and several spacer devices
    Steckel, H
    Muller, BW
    JOURNAL OF AEROSOL MEDICINE-DEPOSITION CLEARANCE AND EFFECTS IN THE LUNG, 1998, 11 (03): : 133 - 142
  • [44] ALBUTEROL ADMINISTERED BY METERED-DOSE INHALER AND SPACER TO YOUNG-CHILDREN WITH WHEEZING - REPLY
    HICKEY, RW
    GOCHMAN, RF
    CHANDE, V
    DAVIS, HW
    ARCHIVES OF PEDIATRICS & ADOLESCENT MEDICINE, 1994, 148 (12): : 1353 - 1354
  • [45] Nebulization versus metered-dose inhaler and spacer in bronchodilator responsiveness testing: a retrospective study
    Lu, Rongli
    Li, Ying
    Hu, Chengping
    Pan, Pinhua
    Zhao, Qiaohong
    He, Ruoxi
    THERAPEUTIC ADVANCES IN RESPIRATORY DISEASE, 2023, 17
  • [47] Survey of metered-dose inhaler technique in a subspecialty asthma clinic.
    Gosselin, VA
    Markus, PJ
    Li, JT
    JOURNAL OF ALLERGY AND CLINICAL IMMUNOLOGY, 1998, 101 (01) : S1 - S1
  • [48] Home-made spacer in-vitro performance with a fluticasone metered-dose inhaler
    Asmus, MJ
    Liang, J
    Coowanitwong, I
    Hochhaus, G
    JOURNAL OF ALLERGY AND CLINICAL IMMUNOLOGY, 2001, 107 (02) : S103 - S103
  • [49] Health care professionals' understanding of the use of a metered-dose inhaler Response
    Bonds, Rana S.
    Asawa, Ashish
    Ghazi, Aasia I.
    ANNALS OF ALLERGY ASTHMA & IMMUNOLOGY, 2015, 114 (06) : 538 - 538
  • [50] Validation of the Doser, a new device for monitoring metered-dose inhaler use
    Simmons, MS
    Nides, MA
    Kleerup, EC
    Chapman, KR
    Milgrom, H
    Rand, CS
    Spector, SL
    Tashkin, DP
    JOURNAL OF ALLERGY AND CLINICAL IMMUNOLOGY, 1998, 102 (03) : 409 - 413