Impact of cough and mucus on COPD patients: primary insights from an exploratory study with an Online Patient Community

Abstract

Background: Qualitative research provides real-life information on patients’ condition and facilitates informed design of future clinical studies.

Objective: We used Online Communities as a qualitative research tool to evaluate the effect of cough and mucus on COPD patients.

Methods: Two 2-week Online Communities were run in parallel in the UK and in the USA, including COPD patients with persistent cough and excessive mucus. Patients anonymously posted their responses to pre-assigned tasks, supervised and guided by a trained moderator. Five themes around the impact of cough and mucus were explored with new questions posted every 2–3 days. On the final day, high-level conclusions were shared with patients for feedback. Data were analyzed following the principles of grounded theory.

Results: Twenty COPD patients (UK, n=10; USA, n=10) participated in the Online Communities. We found that cough and mucus disrupted COPD patients’ lives at functional, emotional, social and economic levels. Patients created daily rituals and adjusted their lifestyle to cope with the impact of these symptoms. Patients identified themselves with our conclusions and saw the Online Community as an effective forum to share their experiences.

Conclusion: Findings of our study add to the body of evidence on the negative impact of COPD symptoms and unmet needs of these patients.

Keywords:

• chronic obstructive pulmonary disease
• cough
• mucus
• Online Community
• online bulletin board
• qualitative research

Acknowledgments

The authors thank Rahul Lad, PhD of Novartis for providing medical writing and editorial support. The project was funded by Novartis Pharma AG in accordance with Good Publication Practice (GPP3) guidelines. The authors also thank Ipsos Healthcare for conducting the fieldwork on behalf of Novartis. This study was funded by Novartis Pharma AG.

Author contributions

All authors contributed to data analysis, drafting or revising the article, gave final approval of the version to be published, and agree to be accountable for all aspects of the work.

Disclosure

NC is an employee of Novartis Pharma AG; NC has non-financial involvement in the following working groups and activities: Innovative Medicines Initiative-Patient Preferences in Benefit-Risk Assessments during the Drug Life Cycle (IMI-PREFER), Health Technology Assessment international (HTAi) Patient and Citizen’s Interest Group, International Society for Pharmacoeconomics and Outcomes Research (ISPOR) Patient Preferences Task Force, and National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE)-Myeloma UK Patient Preferences Project. He is also a member of the HTAi Policy Forum. NL was an employee of Novartis during the study; he is now an employee of Glanbia. JG is an employee of Novartis Pharma AG. JH is an employee of Novartis Global Service Center. CK and VPK are employees of Novartis Healthcare Private Ltd. SVM is an employee of Ipsos Healthcare UK (an independent market research agency). BO is an employee of Novartis as Head of Patient Advocacy for Respiratory. AJM reports personal fees from AstraZeneca, personal fees from Pfizer, outside the submitted work; and at the time this work was conducted he was an ERS Fellow in Industry located at Novartis Campus in Basel, Switzerland. FSG is an employee of Novartis Pharma AG owning stocks through employment. The authors report no other conflicts of interest in this work.