We have located links that may give you full text access.
Comparative Study
Journal Article
Multicenter Study
Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't
Enhanced persistence with tiotropium compared with other respiratory drugs in COPD.
Respiratory Medicine 2007 July
BACKGROUND: Tiotropium is a once-daily inhaled anticholinergic maintenance treatment with demonstrated effectiveness in chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD).
OBJECTIVE: To compare persistence of tiotropium-use with other inhaled respiratory drugs in COPD in current clinical practice.
METHODS: The PHARMO database includes, among others, drug-dispensing and hospital discharge records for 2> or = million subjects in the Netherlands. All probable COPD-patients were identified by new respiratory drug use (age >54 years) or COPD-hospitalisations. New users of tiotropium, ipratropium, long-acting beta-agonists (LABAs), or fixed combination of LABA and inhaled corticosteroids (LABA+ICS), in 1998-2003, were included in the study. Persistence was assessed quarterly during the first year of follow-up. Patients with a proportion of days covered (PDC) > or =80% were considered persistent. Persistence was analysed using generalised estimating equations model.
RESULTS: About 37% of new users of tiotropium continued treatment for 1 year, compared with 14% for ipratropium, 13% for LABA, and 17% for LABA+ICS. Multivariate analyses showed that tiotropium-users were 2-3 times more persistent with their therapy than patients using ipratropium (relative risk [RR]: 2.0; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.8-2.3), LABA (RR: 2.9; 95% CI: 2.4-3.6), or LABA+ICS (RR: 2.4; 95% CI: 2.1-2.8), respectively. Sub-analyses in patients with a prior hospitalisation for COPD showed that 1-year persistence rates were increased for all treatments (varying from 33% for patients using LABA+ICS to 61% for patients using tiotropium), while persistence with tiotropium was again 2-3 times higher compared with other treatments.
CONCLUSION: Persistence with tiotropium was higher compared to other inhaled respiratory drugs in COPD in clinical practice.
OBJECTIVE: To compare persistence of tiotropium-use with other inhaled respiratory drugs in COPD in current clinical practice.
METHODS: The PHARMO database includes, among others, drug-dispensing and hospital discharge records for 2> or = million subjects in the Netherlands. All probable COPD-patients were identified by new respiratory drug use (age >54 years) or COPD-hospitalisations. New users of tiotropium, ipratropium, long-acting beta-agonists (LABAs), or fixed combination of LABA and inhaled corticosteroids (LABA+ICS), in 1998-2003, were included in the study. Persistence was assessed quarterly during the first year of follow-up. Patients with a proportion of days covered (PDC) > or =80% were considered persistent. Persistence was analysed using generalised estimating equations model.
RESULTS: About 37% of new users of tiotropium continued treatment for 1 year, compared with 14% for ipratropium, 13% for LABA, and 17% for LABA+ICS. Multivariate analyses showed that tiotropium-users were 2-3 times more persistent with their therapy than patients using ipratropium (relative risk [RR]: 2.0; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.8-2.3), LABA (RR: 2.9; 95% CI: 2.4-3.6), or LABA+ICS (RR: 2.4; 95% CI: 2.1-2.8), respectively. Sub-analyses in patients with a prior hospitalisation for COPD showed that 1-year persistence rates were increased for all treatments (varying from 33% for patients using LABA+ICS to 61% for patients using tiotropium), while persistence with tiotropium was again 2-3 times higher compared with other treatments.
CONCLUSION: Persistence with tiotropium was higher compared to other inhaled respiratory drugs in COPD in clinical practice.
Full text links
Related Resources
Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university
For the best experience, use the Read mobile app
All material on this website is protected by copyright, Copyright © 1994-2024 by WebMD LLC.
This website also contains material copyrighted by 3rd parties.
By using this service, you agree to our terms of use and privacy policy.
Your Privacy Choices
You can now claim free CME credits for this literature searchClaim now
Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university
For the best experience, use the Read mobile app