Page 11 of 12
PH5.1-2 | Respiratory Pharmacology — Assignment
CLINICAL SCENARIO
Competencies addressed: PH5.1 (Devise management of various stages of bronchial asthma and COPD; pharmacokinetics, pharmacodynamics, therapeutic uses, and ADRs of drugs used in obstructive airway diseases and rhinitis) and PH5.2 (Explain types, salient pharmacology of cough management drugs; describe management of dry and productive cough).
This assignment develops your ability to apply drug knowledge to real clinical decisions — moving beyond recall to devise stepwise management plans, justify drug choices pharmacologically, and critically identify prescribing errors.
Instructions
Answer ALL three sections. Each section has a structured task and a word limit. Support your answers with pharmacological mechanisms (PK/PD), NMC competency-mapped evidence, and GINA/GOLD guideline references where applicable. Use clear subheadings. Avoid lists unless they follow a minimum of two explanatory sentences.
Length: Total: 1050-1450 words. Prose preferred over bullet lists. Each drug mentioned must be accompanied by its mechanism of action.
What to Submit
Section A — Asthma Step Therapy (40 marks)
A 24-year-old engineering student presents with wheezing, breathlessness, and nocturnal cough occurring 4-5 days per week for the past 2 months. She has used her salbutamol inhaler on 3 of the past 7 days. Spirometry: FEV1 72% predicted, FEV1/FVC 0.68, >12% post-bronchodilator reversibility.
(a) State her GINA classification (step and severity) and justify it with at least two criteria. (8 marks)
(b) Devise a pharmacological management plan with drug name, formulation, dose, frequency, and device. Justify each drug choice using its mechanism of action. (20 marks)
(c) She is prescribed ICS. Three months later she reports a white coating on her tongue and throat. Name this complication, explain its mechanism (pathophysiology linked to the drug's pharmacodynamics), and describe two preventive strategies with a pharmacological rationale for each. (12 marks)
Section B — COPD Management and Phenotype-Based Prescribing (35 marks)
A 58-year-old retired factory worker (35 pack-year smoker) presents with progressive breathlessness, productive cough, and two hospital admissions in the past year for respiratory exacerbations requiring oral steroids and antibiotics. Spirometry: post-bronchodilator FEV1 38% predicted (GOLD Stage III), FEV1/FVC 0.55. Blood eosinophil count: 340 cells/μL. He is currently on salbutamol as needed only.
(a) Classify this patient's COPD using GOLD 2023 (group, severity, exacerbation risk). (5 marks)
(b) Devise a complete pharmacological management plan. For each drug, state: class, specific agent, dose, route, and mechanism of action. Justify WHY each drug is appropriate for this patient's phenotype. (20 marks)
(c) Discuss ONE important drug-class safety issue relevant to his COPD management and explain its mechanism. (10 marks)
Section C — Cough Pharmacotherapy and Prescribing Errors (25 marks)
You are reviewing prescriptions in a busy outpatient clinic.
Case 1: A 40-year-old man with COPD has a productive cough producing 20 mL of purulent sputum daily. He has been prescribed: (i) dextromethorphan 30 mg TDS; (ii) salbutamol MDI PRN; (iii) azithromycin 500 mg OD x5 days.
Case 2: A 68-year-old woman on enalapril (ACE inhibitor) for hypertension reports a persistent dry, tickling cough for 6 weeks. She has been prescribed codeine linctus 10 mL TDS.
(a) For Case 1: Identify the prescribing error and explain WHY it is harmful using the pharmacology of cough. Correct the management plan. (10 marks)
(b) For Case 2: Explain the mechanism of enalapril-induced cough (name the mediator, its source, and the receptor it activates). Identify the error in the prescribed treatment. State the most appropriate pharmacological intervention. (15 marks)
Grading Rubric — Respiratory Pharmacology Assignment Rubric
| Criterion | Points | Full-marks descriptor |
|---|---|---|
| GINA/GOLD classification accuracy — correct step, severity grade, and eosinophil-phenotype identification with supporting evidence | 15 pts | Both GINA and GOLD classifications correct with all supporting criteria stated accurately; eosinophil phenotype identified and its prescribing implication explained |
| Pharmacological management plan — completeness, drug-mechanism justification, and phenotype-appropriateness for both asthma and COPD cases | 30 pts | Complete regimen for both cases (correct drug, dose, route, device); each drug's mechanism stated accurately and linked to the patient's pathophysiology; LABA+ICS in asthma, LABA+LAMA+ICS in COPD correctly justified; no inappropriate agents |
| ICS oral candidiasis — mechanism linked to PD (oropharyngeal deposition + local immunosuppression), two prevention strategies with rationale | 12 pts | Mechanism correctly identifies oropharyngeal deposition → local ICS-mediated immune suppression → Candida overgrowth; two prevention strategies (mouth-rinsing + spacer/DPI switch) each with full pharmacological rationale |
| Cough prescribing error identification and correction — antitussive in productive cough harm + ACE inhibitor cough mechanism + correct interventions | 25 pts | Case 1: dextromethorphan correctly identified as harmful (mechanism — retention of infected secretions via cough suppression); management corrected to mucolytic/expectorant + antibiotic + bronchodilator. Case 2: bradykinin accumulation (kininase II inhibition) correctly named; B2 receptor on C-fibres identified; codeine error identified (antitussive for a drug-induced cough with known cause); ARB substitution correctly recommended |
| Drug-class safety issue for COPD (Section B-c) — COPD-specific safety concern explained with mechanism | 10 pts | Clinically relevant safety issue correctly selected (e.g., ICS-associated pneumonia in COPD — discussed with immunosuppression of alveolar macrophages; or LABA without ICS safety rule correctly nuanced as a COPD-NOT-asthma concern; or theophylline narrow TI); full mechanism explanation provided |
| Writing quality — clinical clarity, mechanistic depth over description, use of pharmacological terminology, absence of lists without explanatory prose | 8 pts | Fluent medical prose with precise pharmacological terminology; mechanisms explained rather than listed; clinical reasoning flows logically from classification → mechanism → drug choice → monitoring |