No abstract

BackgroundCorret inhaler technique is recommended by guidelines for optimum asthma care. The objective of the study is to determine real life predictors of correct pressurized metered dose inhaler (pMDI) technique in Asthma and COPD patients.MethodsTwo hundred eight adult patients aged 18+ from respiratory outpatients (69.2%) and the community on regular pMDI for a diagnosis of Asthma (78.9%) or COPD, were recruited. A questionnaire containing 31 possible predictors was administered and pMDI technique with or without spacer was observed by trained researchers on 12 point steps, of which 4 were considered critical.Results23.1% of patients had no errors in inhaler technique and 32.2% had no critical errors. Patients had a median of 10 correct steps (IQR9-11), and 3(IQR2-4) correct critical steps. Using binary logistic regression the predictors of 10 correct steps were, other healthcare professional (pharmacist, nurse, physiotherapist) explained OR 3.73(1.63–8.54, p = 0.001), male gender 2.70(1.35–5.39, p = 0.004), self-score 1–10 1.21(1.05–1.39, p = 0.007), spacer use 0.38(0.19–0.79, p = 0.007), inhaled steroid 3.71(1.34–10.25, p = 0.01), heart disease 0.31(0.13–0.77, p = 0.01), pneumococcal vaccine 2.48(1.0–6.15, p = 0.043), education level 1–4 1.44(1.00–2.06, p = 0.05) and respiratory physician explained 0–7 times, 1.11(0.99–1.26, p = 0.08). Using ordinal logistic regression, predictors for correct critical steps 0–4, were: technique self-score 1–10 1.2(1.05–1.42, p = 0.006), inhaled corticosteroid use 2.78(1.1–7.31, p = 0.03) and education level 1–4 1.41(1.02–1.95, p = 0.03 Times respiratory physician explained inhaler technique 0–7 1.1(0.98–1.24, p = 0.1), married status 1.55(0.85–2.82, p = 0.15), hypercholesterolaemia 0.52(0.25–1.01, p = 0.054) and male gender 1.76(0.97–3.18, p = 0.06).ConclusionsKnown predictors of correct pMDI use, such as gender and education level were confirmed, while age and concomitant use of dry powder inhaler were not. Pneumococcal vaccination and awareness of steroid side effects were possible novel positive predictors, while the use of a spacer and co-morbidity with heart disease were found to be negative predictors. Patients’ self-assessment correlated well with actual performance. This information may be useful in defining approaches to optimize inhaler techniques which are so susceptible to human error.Electronic supplementary materialThe online version of this article (doi:10.1186/s12890-017-0386-6) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

This study aimed at surveying lower secondary schools in southern Italy, in a highly polluted area. A community close to an industrial area and three villages in rural areas was investigated. Indoor temperature, relative humidity (RH), gaseous pollutants (CO2 and NO2), selected biological pollutants in indoor dust, and the indoor/outdoor mass concentration and elemental composition of PM2.5 were ascertained. Temperature and RH were within, or close to, the comfort range, while CO2 frequently exceeded the threshold of 1000 ppm, indicating inadequate air exchange rate. In all the classrooms, median NO2 levels were above the WHO threshold value. Dermatophagoides p. allergen concentration was below the sensitizing threshold, while high endotoxin levels were detected in the classrooms, suggesting schools may produce significant risks of endotoxin exposure. Concentration and solubility of PM2.5 elements were used to identify the sources of indoor particles. Indoor concentration of most elements was higher than outdoors. Resuspension was responsible for the indoor increase in soil components. For elements from industrial emission (Cd, Co, Ni, Pb, Sb, Tl, V), the indoor concentration depended on penetration from the outside. For these elements, differences in rural vs industrial concentrations were found, suggesting industrial sources may influence indoor air quality nearby schools.

No abstract

The second COVID-19 wave is sweeping the globe as restrictions are lifted. Malta, the 'poster child of Europe's COVID-19 first wave success' also fell victim shortly after it welcomed the first tourists on 1st of July 2020. Only four positive cases were reported over the successive 15 days. Stability was disrupted when two major mass events were organized despite various health professional warnings. In a matter of few just days, daily cases rose to two-digit figures, with high community transmission, a drastic rise in active cases, and a rate per hundred thousand in Europe second only to Spain. Frontliners were swamped with swabbing requests while trying to sustain robust case management, contact tracing and follow-up. Indeed, the number of hospitalizations and the need for intensive ventilation increased. Despite the initial cases were among young adults, within weeks a small spill off on the more elderly population was observed. Restrictions were reintroduced including mandatory mask wearing in specific locations and capping of the total number of people in a single gathering. Malta is an island and the potential for containment would have been relatively simple and effective and permitting mass gatherings was unwise. Protecting the health of the population should take centre stage while carrying out extensive testing, contact tracing and surveillance. Containment and mitigation along with public cooperation is the key to curbing resurgences especially with the influenza season around the corner.