Evaluation of a breath actuated pressurized aerosol

Coady, T.; Davies, H J; Barnes, Peter J.

doi:10.1111/j.1365-2222.1976.tb01406.x

Cited by 33 publications

(9 citation statements)

References 4 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Such instructions are hard to reconcile with the facts known about aerosol deposition, as a fast flow rate causes aerosol to deposit in central airways and a deep inhalation produces a more peripheral distribution of aerosol (Pavia et al 1977). The fast inhalation flow rate used in this study (80 l/min) is typical of that normally attained by patients when using their inhalers (Coady et al 1976), and substantial re-education would be required to ensure a slow inhalation flow rate. The manufacturers of the pressurized aerosols could assist in this by reducing the width of the annulus between actuator and canister so that air could only he drawn through at a slow rate.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 92%

Simple Instructions for using Pressurized Aerosol Bronchodilators¹

1980

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Although the manufacturers of pressurized aerosol bonchodilators issue instructions for using the inhalers, little or no experimental verification exists. Bronchodilatation has been measured after controlled inhalations of 500 μg terbutaline sulphate given in a systematic series of investigations to 8 patients with reversible airways obstruction at 2 different inhalation flow rates (25 1/min and 80 1/min), 3 different lung volumes (20%, 50% and 80% vital capacity) and followed by 2 different breath-holding pauses (4 and 10 seconds). The results indicate that patients may release the aerosol at any time during the course of a slow deep inhalation which should be followed by 10 seconds of breath-holding. This will ensure an optimal bronchodilator response.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 92%

Simple Instructions for using Pressurized Aerosol Bronchodilators¹

1980

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Numerous studies have identified sub-optimal inhaler technique as a common problem in patients with respiratory disease [8,9]. Early studies clearly showed that patients struggled with conventional pMDIs.…”

Section: Patient and Caregiver Knowledge Of Inhalersmentioning

confidence: 99%

Inhaler choice in primary practice

Chapman¹,

Voshaar²,

Jc³

2005

European Respiratory Review

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

A broad range of inhaler devices is available for physicians to prescribe. Although newer devices are often easier to use than conventional pressurised metered-dose inhalers (pMDIs), many patients still use inhalers sub-optimally. Physicians must become familiar with the characteristics of several inhalers and choose the device that their patients can use correctly and beneficially if they are to prescribe successfully to those with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD). The selection of a device may also be influenced by patient comorbidities and by their ability to handle and inhale correctly from the device. A further challenge in the COPD setting is measuring the desired treatment outcome.A simple algorithm or checklist can guide device selection in primary care. The device must be affordable for the patient, the patient must be able to handle it correctly and the practitioner or other trained professional should monitor that it is being used correctly. The patient's and physician's preferences should also be taken into account. The most important device-handling skills that should be assessed are whether the patient can: properly prepare and actuate the device; take an adequate inspiration; and coordinate actuation of a pMDI with inspiration.Testing the practicality and advantages of such checklists will mean better use can be made of the inhaler types currently available as well as newer designs. In the interim, caregiver and patient education are needed.

show abstract

“…One of the first auxiliary aerosol delivery systems was a breath-actuated pressurized aerosol device introduced in 1976 by Coady et al 43 This consisted of a vane and spring attached to a conventional MDI. Negative pressure, gener¬ ated during an inhalation maneuver, caused the automatic release of aerosol when a flow rate of approximately 0.8 L/s was attained.…”

Section: Breath-actuated Pressurized Aerosol Inhalermentioning

confidence: 99%

Use of Bronchodilator Aerosols

Tobin¹

1985

Arch Intern Med

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Evaluation of a breath actuated pressurized aerosol

Cited by 33 publications

References 4 publications

Simple Instructions for using Pressurized Aerosol Bronchodilators¹

Simple Instructions for using Pressurized Aerosol Bronchodilators¹

Inhaler choice in primary practice

Use of Bronchodilator Aerosols

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About

Evaluation of a breath actuated pressurized aerosol

Cited by 33 publications

References 4 publications

Simple Instructions for using Pressurized Aerosol Bronchodilators1

Simple Instructions for using Pressurized Aerosol Bronchodilators1

Inhaler choice in primary practice

Use of Bronchodilator Aerosols

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About

Simple Instructions for using Pressurized Aerosol Bronchodilators¹

Simple Instructions for using Pressurized Aerosol Bronchodilators¹