Proper inhaler technique is crucial for effective management of asthma and COPD. This multicentre, cross-sectional, observational study investigates the prevalence of inhaler mishandling in a large population of experienced patients referring to chest clinics; to analyze the variables associated with misuse and the relationship between inhaler handling and health-care resources use and disease control. We enrolled 1664 adult subjects (mean age 62 years) affected mostly by COPD (52%) and asthma (42%). Respectively, 843 and 1113 patients were using MDIs and DPIs at home; of the latter, the users of Aerolizer®, Diskus®, HandiHaler® and Turbuhaler® were 82, 467, 505 and 361. We have a total of 2288 records of inhaler technique. Critical mistakes were widely distributed among users of all the inhalers, ranging from 12% for MDIs, 35% for Diskus® and HandiHaler® and 44% for Turbuhaler®. Independently of the inhaler, we found the strongest association between inhaler misuse and older age (p = 0.008), lower schooling (p = 0.001) and lack of instruction received for inhaler technique by health caregivers (p < 0.001). Inhaler misuse was associated with increased risk of hospitalization (p = 0.001), emergency room visits (p < 0.001), courses of oral steroids (p < 0.001) and antimicrobials (p < 0.001) and poor disease control evaluated as an ACT score for the asthmatics (p < 0.0001) and the whole population (p < 0.0001). We conclude that inhaler mishandling continues to be common in experienced outpatients referring to chest clinics and associated with increased unscheduled health-care resource use and poor clinical control. Instruction by health caregivers is the only modifiable factor useful for reducing inhaler mishandling.

Background Long-term effects of Coronavirus Disease of 2019 (COVID-19) and their sustainability are of the utmost relevance. We aimed to determine: 1) functional capacity of COVID-19 survivors by cardiopulmonary exercise testing (CPET); 2) characteristics associated with cardiopulmonary exercise testing (CPET) performance; 3) safety and tolerability of CPET. Methods We prospectively enrolled consecutive patients with laboratory-confirmed COVID-19 discharged alive at Azienda Sanitaria Locale-3, Genoa. At 3-month from hospital discharge, complete clinical evaluation, trans-thoracic echocardiography, CPET, pulmonary function test, and dominant leg extension (DLE) maximal strength evaluation were performed. Results From 225 patients discharged from March to November 2020, we excluded 12 incomplete/missing cases, 13 unable to perform CPET leading to a final population of 200. Median percent-predicted peak oxygen uptake (%pVO2) was 88% (78.3–103.1). Ninety-nine(49.5%) patients had %pVO2 below, whereas 101(50.5%) above the 85% predicted value (indicating normality). Of 61/99 patients with reduced %pVO2 but normal anaerobic threshold, 9(14.8%) had respiratory, 21(34.4%) cardiac, and 31(50.8%) non-cardiopulmonary limitation of exercise. One-hundred sixty(80.0%) patients complain at least one symptom, without relationship with pVO2. Multivariate linear regression analysis showed percent-predicted forced expiratory volume in one-second(β = 5.29, p = 0.023), percent-predicted diffusing capacity of lungs for carbon monoxide(β = 6.31, p = 0.001), and DLE maximal strength(β = 14.09, p = 0.008) independently associated with pVO2. None adverse event was reported during/after CPET neither the involved health professionals developed COVID-19. Conclusions CPET after COVID-19 is safe and about 1/3rd of COVID-19 survivors show functional capacity limitation mainly explained by muscular impairment, calling for future research to identify patients at higher risk of long-term effects that may benefit from careful surveillance and targeted rehabilitation.

Omalizumab is a humanized murine monoclonal antibody directed toward a portion of the IgE indicated in Europe for the treatment of severe persistent allergic asthma, inadequately controlled despite high-dose of ICS (mean BDP equivalent dose of inhaled corticosteroid 2224.68microg/die) in association with long-acting beta(2) agonists. Our aim was to describe the experience, efficacy and safety in a cohort of Italian patients treated with omalizumab in a real-life clinical setting. One hundred and forty two patients from 13 Italian Centers were observed and analysed. The dosage of omalizumab was established according to the labelling indication, with a median dose of IgE of 297.38IU/ml or kU/l. During the previous year, all patients experienced frequent exacerbations (mean=4.87), emergency visits (mean=4.45) and hospitalisation (mean=1.53). Following treatment with omalizumab, the annual rate of exacerbations, emergency visits and hospitalisation decreased by 79%, 88% and 95%, respectively. The proportion of patients without exacerbation, not needing emergency visits and hospitalization increased by 610%, 154% and 28%, respectively. The response to omalizumab measured with the GETE (global evaluation of treatment effectiveness) scale rated as good to excellent in 77% of patients. Overall, 9.6% (n=9) of the patients experienced one single adverse effect. Only one patient reported a serious adverse event (local reaction at the site of injection) leading to interruption of treatment. The observed reduction of asthma-related events in particularly poorly controlled patients in this Italian real-life setting is consistent with the results of other observational studies.

No abstract