Background: Secondary inhalation of medical aerosols is a significant occupational hazard in both clinical and homecare settings. Exposure to fugitive emissions generated during aerosol therapy increases the risk of the unnecessary inhalation of medication, as well as toxic side effects. Methods: This study examines fugitively-emitted aerosol emissions when nebulising albuterol sulphate, as a tracer aerosol, using two commercially available nebulisers in combination with an open or valved facemask or using a mouthpiece with and without a filter on the exhalation port. Each combination was connected to a breathing simulator during simulated adult breathing. The inhaled dose and residual mass were quantified using UV spectrophotometry. Time-varying fugitively-emitted aerosol concentrations and size distributions during nebulisation were recorded using aerodynamic particle sizers at two distances relative to the simulated patient. Different aerosol concentrations and size distributions were observed depending on the interface. Results: Within each nebuliser, the facemask combination had the highest time-averaged fugitively-emitted aerosol concentration, and values up to 0.072 ± 0.001 mg m−3 were recorded. The placement of a filter on the exhalation port of the mouthpiece yielded the lowest recorded concentrations. The mass median aerodynamic diameter of the fugitively-emitted aerosol was recorded as 0.890 ± 0.044 µm, lower the initially generated medical aerosol in the range of 2–5 µm. Conclusions: The results highlight the potential secondary inhalation of exhaled aerosols from commercially available nebuliser facemask/mouthpiece combinations. The results will aid in developing approaches to inform policy and best practices for risk mitigation from fugitive emissions.

Background: Nebulised medical aerosols are designed to deliver drugs to the lungs to aid in the treatment of respiratory diseases. However, an unintended consequence is the potential for fugitive emissions during patient treatment, which may pose a risk factor in both clinical and homecare settings. Methods: The current study examined the potential for fugitive emissions, using albuterol sulphate as a tracer aerosol during high-flow therapy. A nasal cannula was connected to a head model or alternatively, a interface was connected to a tracheostomy tube in combination with a simulated adult and paediatric breathing profile. Two aerodynamic particle sizers (APS) recorded time-series aerosol concentrations and size distributions at two different distances relative to the simulated patient. Results: The results showed that the quantity and characteristics of the fugitive emissions were influenced by the interface type, patient type and supplemental gas-flow rate. There was a trend in the adult scenarios; as the flow rate increased, the fugitive emissions and the mass median aerodynamic diameter (MMAD) of the aerosol both decreased. The fugitive emissions were comparable when using the adult breathing profiles for the nasal cannula and tracheostomy interfaces; however, there was a noticeable distinction between the two interfaces when compared for the paediatric breathing profiles. The highest recorded aerosol concentration was 0.370 ± 0.046 mg m−3 from the tracheostomy interface during simulated paediatric breathing with a gas-flow rate of 20 L/min. The averaged MMAD across all combinations ranged from 1.248 to 1.793 µm by the APS at a distance of 0.8 m away from the patient interface. Conclusions: Overall, the results highlight the potential for secondary inhalation of fugitive emissions released during simulated aerosol treatment with concurrent high-flow therapy. The findings will help in developing policy and best practice for risk mitigation from fugitive emissions.

Background Current clinical practice during high-flow nasal therapy (HFNT) involves utilization of a nasal cannula to provide humidification, with a facemask placed over the cannula to deliver aerosol. Few studies have compared aerosol delivery across various delivery interfaces during HFNT. The objective of this study was to address this gap in the literature and evaluate aerosol delivery using two nebulizer types across different drug delivery interfaces, nasal cannula, facemask, and mouthpiece, during simulated adult HFNT. Methods A facemask or mouthpiece and/or a nasal cannula were positioned on an anatomically correct adult head model. The head model was connected to a breathing simulator via a collection filter. Both healthy breathing pattern and distressed breathing patterns were utilized. Aerosol dose was determined by quantifying the mass of drug captured on a filter positioned distal to the trachea. Results During simulated healthy breathing, a significantly greater aerosol dose was observed when the vibrating mesh nebulizer (VMN) was integrated with HFNT alone, supplying aerosol and humidified air simultaneously (2.88 ± 0.15%), as opposed to using with a facemask (0.33 ± 0.07%, 1.62 ± 0.46%, and 1.07 ± 0.25% at 0 L/min (LPM), 2LPM, and 6LPM, respectively) or mouthpiece (0.56 ± 0.13%, 2.16 ± 0.06%, and 1.82 ± 0.41% at 0LPM, 2LPM, and 6LPM). In addition, aerosol delivery was also significantly greater when the VMN was integrated into simulated HFNT (2.88 ± 0.15%), in comparison with using the jet nebulizer (JN) with a facemask (0.82 ± 0.16%) or a mouthpiece (0.86 ± 0.11%). During simulated distressed breathing, a significantly greater aerosol dose was observed when the VMN was integrated with HFNT, supplying aerosol and humidified air simultaneously (6.81 ± 0.45%), compared with using a facemask (0.86 ± 0.04%, 2.96 ± 0.26%, and 4.23 ± 0.93% at 0LPM, 2LPM, and 6LPM) or mouthpiece (0.73 ± 0.37%, 0.97 ± 0.20%, and 3.11 ± 0.53% at 0LPM, 2LPM, and 6LPM, respectively). Aerosol delivery was also greater when the VMN was integrated into HFNT (6.81 ± 0.45%), in comparison with using the JN with a facemask (5.72 ± 0.71%) or a mouthpiece (0.69 ± 0.53%). Furthermore, across all drug delivery interfaces, and in line with previous reports, aerosol delivery was greater during simulated distressed breathing, in comparison with simulated healthy adult breathing. Conclusions This article will be of considerable benefit in enhancing the understanding of aerosol delivery during HFNT, an increasingly adopted therapeutic intervention by healthcare professionals.

Introduction: The use of concurrent aerosol delivery during high-flow nasal therapy (HFNT) may be exploited to facilitate delivery of a variety of prescribed medications for inhalation. The study assessed the effect of tidal volume, breath rate, and inspiratory:expiratory (I:E) ratio on the quantity of aerosol captured at the level of the trachea during simulated HFNT. Methods: Testing was completed according to a factorial statistical design of experiments (DOE) approach. Tracheal dose was characterized with a vibrating mesh nebulizer (Aerogen Solo, Aerogen Ltd) using simulated adult, small child, and infant HFNT models. Furthermore, aerosol delivery was evaluated across a range of adult patient profiles with clinically representative test setups. Results: Aerosol delivery increased with a large tidal volume, a rapid breath rate, and a long inspiratory time. Tidal volume, breath rate, and I:E ratio each had a significant effect on tracheal dose across simulated adult, small child, and infant breathing. Conclusion: The main trends that were identified in the statistical DOE predicted aerosol delivery across adult patient breathing profiles, in terms of tidal volume, breath rate, and I:E ratio. Therefore, patients with distressed breathing profiles may be expected to receive a larger aerosol dose than those with normal breathing rates. Funding: Aerogen Limited.

Introduction: The use of concurrent aerosol delivery during high-flow nasal therapy (HFNT) may be exploited to facilitate the delivery of a variety of prescribed medications for inhalation. Until now, a systematic approach to determine the conditions required to yield an optimal emitted dose has not been reported. The aim of this study was to establish the effects of gas flow rate, input droplet size, and nebulizer position on the amount of aerosol exiting the nasal cannula during HFNT and thus becoming available for inhalation. Methods: Testing was completed according to a factorial statistical design of experiments (DOE) approach. Emitted dose was characterized with a vibrating mesh nebulizer (Aerogen Solo, Aerogen Ltd) for an adult model of HFNT at three clinically relevant gas flow rates, using three nebulizers producing varying input droplet sizes and placed at two different nebulizer positions.

Recent evidence indicates that local immune responses and tissue resident memory T cells (T RM) are critical for protection against respiratory infections but there is little information on the contributions of upper and lower respiratory tract (URT and LRT) immunity. To provide a rational basis for designing methods for optimal delivery of vaccines to the respiratory tract in a large animal model, we investigated the distribution of droplets generated by a mucosal atomization device (MAD) and two vibrating mesh nebulizers (VMNs) and the immune responses induced by delivery of influenza virus by MAD in pigs. We showed that droplets containing the drug albuterol, a radiolabel (99m Tc-DTPA), or a model influenza virus vaccine (S-FLU) have similar aerosol characteristics. 99m Tc-DTPA scintigraphy showed that VMNs deliver droplets with uniform distribution throughout the lungs as well as the URT. Surprisingly MAD administration (1ml/nostril) also delivered a high proportion of the dose to the lungs, albeit concentrated in a small area. After MAD administration of influenza virus, antigen specific T cells were found at high frequency in nasal turbinates, trachea, broncho-alveolar lavage, lungs, tracheobronchial nodes, and blood. Anti-influenza antibodies were detected in serum, BAL and nasal swabs. We conclude that the pig is useful for investigating optimal targeting of vaccines to the respiratory tract.

COVID-19 may lead to serious respiratory complications which may necessitate ventilatory support. There is concern surrounding potential release of patient-derived bioaerosol during nebuliser drug refill, which could impact the health of caregivers. Consequently, mesh nebulisers have been recommended by various clinical practice guidelines. Currently, there is a lack of empirical data describing the potential for release of patient-derived bioaerosol during drug refill. This study examined the release of simulated patient-derived bioaerosol, and the effect on positive end expiratory pressure during nebuliser refill during mechanical ventilation of a simulated patient. During jet nebuliser refill, the positive end expiratory pressure decreased from 4.5 to 0 cm H2O. No loss in pressure was noted during vibrating mesh nebuliser refill. A median particle number concentration of 710 particles cm−3 above ambient was detected when refilling the jet nebuliser in comparison to no increase above ambient detected when using the vibrating mesh nebuliser. The jet nebuliser with the endotracheal tube clamped resulted in 60 particles cm−3 above ambient levels. This study confirms that choice of nebuliser impacts both the potential for patient-derived bioaerosol release and the ability to maintain ventilator circuit pressures and validates the recommended use of mesh nebulisers during mechanical ventilation.

The risk of unintended inhalation of fugitive aerosols is becoming a topic of increasing interest in the healthcare arena. These fugitive aerosols may be bioaerosols, generated by the patient themselves through cough or sneeze, or they may be therapeutic medical aerosols, generated by therapeutic medical aerosol generators with the intent of delivery to a specific patient's respiratory tract. This review focus' on therapeutic aerosols in the intensive care unit (ICU) only, those typically generated by nebulisers. In the intensive care environment, patients are generally in receipt of ventilatory support, and the literature suggests that these different support interventions influence fugitive therapeutic medical aerosol emissions in a variety of ways. Predominant ventilatory support interventions include, but are not limited to, invasive mechanical ventilation (MV), non-invasive mechanical ventilation (NIV), high flow nasal therapy (HFNT), and supplemental oxygen delivery in spontaneously breathing patients. Further, factors such as nebuliser type, patient interface, patient breathing pattern, nebuliser position in the patient breathing circuit and medication formulation characteristics also have been shown to exert influence on aerosol concentrations and distance from the source. Here we present the state of the art knowledge in this, as yet, poorly described field of research, and identify the key risks, and subsequently, opportunities to mitigate the risks of unintended exposure of both patients and bystanders during and for periods following the administration of therapeutic aerosols.