# Determinants of Inhaler Choice at Hospital Discharge

**Authors:** Myriam Calle Rubio, Soha Esmaili, Iman Esmaili, Pedro José Adami Teppa, Miriam García Carro, José Carlos Tallón Martínez, Consolación Riesco Rubio, Laura Fernández Cortés, María Morales Dueñas, Valeria Chamorro del Barrio, Juan Luis Rodríguez Hermosa, Jorge García Aragón

PMC · DOI: 10.3390/medsci14010081 · Medical Sciences · 2026-02-11

## TL;DR

This study finds that inhaler choices at hospital discharge are often based on routine rather than patient needs, leading to errors and higher readmission rates.

## Contribution

The study introduces a framework to assess inhaler choice appropriateness and identifies clinical inertia and over-adjustment as key issues.

## Key findings

- Device changes were mainly influenced by pre-admission device class and treatment pathway, not clinical need.
- Clinical inertia affected 38.3% of Need-Positive patients, while over-adjustment affected 36.8% of Need-Negative patients.
- Resolving device mismatches was linked to a 48% lower 30-day readmission rate.

## Abstract

Background: Inhaler device changes at hospital discharge should address patient capacity yet often reflect routine. We evaluated the appropriateness of these decisions and their impact on clinical outcomes. Methods: In this prospective observational study (N = 480), we assessed patient technical capacity using a composite of critical errors, inspiratory flow, adherence, and knowledge. We stratified patients into ‘Need-Positive’ and ‘Need-Negative’ cohorts to quantify patterns of clinical inertia and over-adjustment. Multivariable models identified predictors of decision-making and associations with 30-day outcomes. Results: Device changes were primarily determined by the pre-admission device class (spacers: aOR 0.52; 95% CI 0.28–0.96; p = 0.037) and by the patient’s treatment pathway rather than by clinical need. This disconnect generated two types of errors: 38.3% of Need-Positive patients (n = 214) experienced clinical inertia (no corrective action), while 36.8% of Need-Negative patients (n = 266) underwent over-adjustment (unnecessary switching). Inertia perpetuated errors in patients with need, whereas over-adjustment was associated with the emergence of new errors in patients without need. Successful mismatch resolution was associated with a significantly lower 30-day readmission rate (12.1% vs. 32.5%; OR 0.48; 95% CI 0.26–0.88; p = 0.017). Conclusions: Discharge prescribing is driven more by habit than by objective assessment, leading to widespread missed opportunities for correction. Implementing evidence-based protocols to identify and resolve patient–device mismatches may represent a high-impact strategy to reduce readmissions and associated healthcare use.

## Full-text entities

- **Diseases:** COPD (MESH:D029424), DPI (MESH:D015208), cognitive impairment (MESH:D003072), Respiratory disease (MESH:D012140), death (MESH:D003643), Comorbidity (MESH:D004194), injury to (MESH:D014947), asthma (MESH:D001249)
- **Chemicals:** DIAL (-)
- **Species:** Homo sapiens (human, species) [taxon 9606]

## Full text

_Full body text omitted from this summary view._ Fetch the complete paper as Markdown: https://tomesphere.com/paper/PMC12921950/full.md

## Figures

4 figures with captions in the complete paper: https://tomesphere.com/paper/PMC12921950/full.md

## References

37 references — full list in the complete paper: https://tomesphere.com/paper/PMC12921950/full.md

---
Source: https://tomesphere.com/paper/PMC12921950