Abstract
Objectives Dry powder inhalers (DPIs) and soft mist inhalers have a substantially lower global warming potential than pressurized metered-dose inhalers (pMDIs). To help mitigate climate change, we assessed the potential emission reduction in CO2-equivalents when replacing pMDIs by non-propellant inhalers in Dutch respiratory healthcare, and estimated the associated costs.
Design We performed a four-step analysis based on data from two national databases of two independent governmental bodies (the Dutch National Healthcare Institute and the Dutch Healthcare Authority). First, we calculated the number of patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease and asthma that were using inhalation medication (2020). Second, we calculated the number and total of daily defined doses of pMDIs and non-propellant inhalers (NPIs) that include dry powder inhalers and soft mist inhalers, as well as the number of spacers per patient dispensed by non-hospital based pharmacies in 2020. Third, we estimated the potential reduction in greenhouse gas emission if 70% of patients would switch from using pMDIs to using NPIs as eco-friendly alternatives. Fourth, we performed a budget impact analysis.
Results In 2020, 1.4 million patients used inhalers for COPD or asthma treatment. A total of 460 million defined daily doses (DDDs) from inhalers were dispensed, of which – after the exclusion of nebulizers – 50.4% through pMDIs. We estimated that this usage could be reduced by 70% which would lead to an annual reduction in greenhouse gas emission of 77 - 84 million kg. CO2eq. saving at best EUR 49.8 million per year.
Conclusions In the Netherlands, substitution of pMDIs to NPIs for eligible patients is theoretically safe and in accordance with medical guidelines, while reducing greenhouse gas emission by 80 million kg. CO2eq. on average and saving at best EUR 49.8 million per year. This study confirms the potential climate and economic benefit of delivering a more eco-friendly respiratory care.
Strengths and limitations of this study
Given availability and reliability of the data, the present analysis can easily be replicated elsewhere which allows for international comparison and aggregation.
Implementation challenges remain underexposed.
Competing Interest Statement
PtH, PvH, IW, PdH, EB, NC, PdH and HCO, report no competing interests. JK reports personal fees from BENU Pharmacists, BENU Nederland B.V. / Brocacef Groep N.V.
Funding Statement
This study was funded by the Dutch National Health Care Institute
Author Declarations
I confirm all relevant ethical guidelines have been followed, and any necessary IRB and/or ethics committee approvals have been obtained.
Yes
The details of the IRB/oversight body that provided approval or exemption for the research described are given below:
Data sources are openly available at - GIP database (2021). Genees- en hulpmiddelen Informatie Project | Medicines and medical devices Information Project. Available: https://www.gipdatabank.nl/ - DIS database (2021). DBC Informatie Systeem | Diagnosis-Treatment Combination Information system. Available: https://www.opendisdata.nl/
I confirm that all necessary patient/participant consent has been obtained and the appropriate institutional forms have been archived, and that any patient/participant/sample identifiers included were not known to anyone (e.g., hospital staff, patients or participants themselves) outside the research group so cannot be used to identify individuals.
Yes
I understand that all clinical trials and any other prospective interventional studies must be registered with an ICMJE-approved registry, such as ClinicalTrials.gov. I confirm that any such study reported in the manuscript has been registered and the trial registration ID is provided (note: if posting a prospective study registered retrospectively, please provide a statement in the trial ID field explaining why the study was not registered in advance).
Yes
I have followed all appropriate research reporting guidelines and uploaded the relevant EQUATOR Network research reporting checklist(s) and other pertinent material as supplementary files, if applicable.
Yes
Footnotes
Due to an updated pharmaceutical reference-table the data-analist in our team has generated new figures over 2020 that suggest a higher environmental impact and an increasd budget impact of theoretically replacing pMD-inhalers in Dutch respiratory care. We have adapted the figure and tables in our paper accordingly and conclude that the internal argumentation is not affected by these revised outcomes. We have changed 'MDIs' for 'pMDI' because this is more accurate in practice. We have introduced 'non-propellant inhalers' (NPIs), a class of inhalers consisting of both dry powder inhalers (DPIs) and soft mist inhalers, in order to include the latter in the calculation. Corrected order of authors. We have adapted the language.
Data Availability
All data produced in the present work are contained in the manuscript or in its attachments
