Cited by 22Medication Adherence and ComplianceAsthma and respiratory diseasesMobile Health and mHealth Applications

Effectiveness, usability and acceptability of a smart inhaler programme in patients with asthma: protocol of the multicentre, pragmatic, open-label, cluster randomised controlled ACCEPTANCE trial

Open access
van de Hei, Susanne J, Poot, Charlotte C, van den Berg, Liselot N, Meijer, Eline, van Boven, Job F M, Flokstra-de Blok, Bertine M J, Postma, Maarten J, Chavannes, Niels H +1 more·2022·BMJ Open Respiratory Research

Abstract

Introduction: Suboptimal asthma control is associated with incorrect inhaler use and poor medication adherence, which could lead to unfavourable clinical and economic outcomes. Smart inhaler programmes using electronic monitoring devices (EMDs) could support self-management and increase medication adherence and asthma control. However, evidence on long-term benefits and acceptability is scarce. This study aims to investigate the effectiveness of a smart inhaler asthma self-management programme on medication adherence and clinical outcomes in adults with uncontrolled asthma, to evaluate its acceptability and to identify subgroups who would benefit most based on patient characteristics. Methods and analysis: This open-label cluster randomised controlled trial of 12 months will be conducted in primary care in the Netherlands. General practices will be randomly assigned to either intervention or control group. We aim to include 242 patients. The intervention consists of (1) an EMD attached to the patient’s inhaler that measures medication use; (2) a smartphone application to set medication reminders, receive motivational messages and track asthma symptoms; and (3) a portal for healthcare professionals to view data on medication use. The control group is passively monitored by the EMD but cannot view their inhaler data or receive feedback. Eligible patients are adults with suboptimal controlled asthma (Asthma Control Questionnaire score ≥0.75) with evidence of non-adherence established by the EMD during a 6-week run-in period. Primary outcome is the difference in mean medication adherence between intervention and control group. Secondary outcomes include asthma control, asthma-related quality of life, exacerbations, acceptance, cost-effectiveness and whether the effect of the intervention on medication adherence and asthma control is modified by patient characteristics (eg, self-efficacy, medication beliefs and eHealth literacy). Trial registration number NL7854.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1136/bmjresp-2022-001400

Cites

63 of 63 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 1

  1. [42]Brooke J. SUS - A quick and dirty usability scale. In: Jordan PW, Thomas B, Weerdmeester BA, et al, eds. Usability evaluation in industry. London: Taylor & Francis Ltd, 1996,: 189 p.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
van de Hei, S. J., Poot, C. C., van den Berg, L. N., Meijer, E., van Boven, J. F. M., Flokstra-de Blok, B. M. J., Postma, M. J., Chavannes, N. H., & Kocks, J. W. H.
Affiliations
  • Department of Health Sciences, University of Groningen, University Medical Center Groningen, Groningen, The Netherlands
  • Leiden University Medical Center (NL)
  • Department of Public Health and Primary Care, Leiden University Medical Center, Leiden, The Netherlands
  • Groningen Research Institute for Asthma and COPD (GRIAC), University of Groningen, University Medical Center Groningen, Groningen, Netherlands
  • General Practitioners Research Institute, Groningen, The Netherlands
  • University Medical Center Groningen (NL)
Venue
BMJ Open Respiratory Research
Publisher
BMJ
Published
2022-12
Volume
9
Issue
1
Pages
e001400
ISSN
2052-4439 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W4311534025
Cited by
22
References
63
Citations by year
2026: 6 · 2025: 5 · 2024: 7 · 2023: 4
FWCI
4.28
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • BMJ Open Respiratory Research (publishedVersion, cc-by-nc)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion, cc-by-nc)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • University of Groningen research database (University of Groningen / Centre for Information Technology) (publishedVersion, cc-by-nc)
  • Leiden Repository (Leiden University) (submittedVersion, cc-by-nc)
  • Data Archiving and Networked Services (DANS) (submittedVersion, cc-by-nc)
  • DOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals) (submittedVersion, cc-by-sa)
  • University of Groningen research database (University of Groningen / Centre for Information Technology) (submittedVersion, cc-by-nc)
Funders
AstraZeneca (Not applicable)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Family Practice › Medication Adherence and Compliance
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Physiology › Asthma and respiratory diseases
  • Health Sciences › Health Professions › General Health Professions › Mobile Health and mHealth Applications
Keywords
asthma, smart inhalers, electronic monitoring devices, medication adherence, asthma self-management, asthma control, mobile application, medication reminders, patient acceptability, cost-effectiveness, primary care, digital health literacy, self-efficacy, medication beliefs
MeSH terms
Adult, Asthma, Humans, Nebulizers and Vaporizers, Quality of Life, Multicenter Studies as Topic, Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic, Medication Adherence, Mobile Applications, Pragmatic Clinical Trials as Topic

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review