Efficacy of a home-made spacer with acute exacerbation of bronchial asthma: a randomized controlled trial

Usefulness of Nonvalved Spacers for Administration of Inhaled Steroids in Young Children with Recurrent Wheezing and Risk Factors for Asthma

Background

In vitro and scintigraphic studies have suggested that effectiveness of metered-dose inhalers (MDI) with nonvalved spacers (NVS) is similar to that of MDI with valved holding chambers (VHC). Nevertheless, there are no clinical studies that compare these techniques in long-term treatment with inhaled steroids in young children with recurrent wheezing and risk factors for asthma.

Objective

To compare the efficacy of a long-term treatment with Fluticasone Propionate administered by an MDI through both type of spacers, with and without valves, in young children with recurrent wheezing and risk factors for asthma.

Patients and Methods

Outpatient children (6 to 20 months old) with recurrent wheezing and risk factors for asthma were randomized to receive a 6-month treatment with metered-dose inhaler (MDI) of Fluticasone Propionate 125 mcg BID through an NVS or through a VHC. Parents recorded daily their child's respiratory symptoms and rescue medication use.

Results

46 patients of 13.4 ± 5 months old were studied. During the study period, the NVS group (n=25) experienced 3.9 ± 2.4 obstructive exacerbations, and the VHC group (n=21) had 2.6 ± 1.6 (p=0.031). The NVS group had 17.4 ± 14% of days with respiratory symptoms, and the VHC group had 9.7 ± 7% (p=0.019). The NVS group spent 29.8 ± 22 days on albuterol while the VHC group spent 17.9 ± 11 days (p=0.022).

Conclusion

Long-term treatment with inhaled steroids administered by MDI and NVS is less effective than such treatment by MDI and VHC in infants with recurrent wheezing and risk factors for asthma.

A Rationale for Going Back to the Future: Use of Disposable Spacers for Pressurised Metered Dose Inhalers

The introduction of pressurised metered dose inhalers (MDIs) in the mid-1950s completely transformed respiratory treatment. Despite decades of availability and healthcare support and development of teaching aids and devices to promote better use, poor pMDI user technique remains a persistent issue. The main pMDI user aid is the spacer/valved holding chamber (VHC) device. Spacer/chamber features (size, shape, configuration, construction material, and hygiene considerations) can vie with clinical effectiveness (to deliver the same dose as a correctly used pMDI), user convenience, cost, and accessibility. Unsurprisingly, improvised, low-cost alternatives (plastic drink bottles, paper cups, and paper towel rolls) have been pressed into seemingly effective service. A UK law change permitting schools to hold emergency inhalers and spacers has prompted a development project to design a low-cost, user-friendly, disposable, and recyclable spacer. This paper spacer requires neither preuse priming nor washing, and has demonstrated reproducible lung delivery of salbutamol sulphate pMDI, comparable to an industry-standard VHC, an alternative paperboard VHC, and pMDI alone. This new device appears to perform better than these other VHC devices at the low flow rates thought achievable by paediatric patients. The data suggest that this disposable spacer may have a place in the single-use emergency setting.

Comparison of the bronchodilating effects of albuterol delivered by valved vs. non-valved spacers in pediatric asthma

INTRODUCTION

Inhaled therapy using a metered-dose inhaler (MDI) with attached valved holding chamber has been increasingly recognized as the optimal method for delivering bronchodilators for asthma treatment. However, mainly due to the high cost of these valved holding chambers in many developing countries, the use of non-valved spacers is frequent, despite the scarce evidence that supports their efficacy. The aim of this study was to compare the bronchodilator response to albuterol administered by MDI with and without a valved spacer.

METHODS

In a randomized, two-period, two-sequence crossover clinical trial, we analyzed 31 stable asthmatic children (6-18 yrs of age) on two consecutive days, who were randomly assigned to receive 100 μg of albuterol MDI through either a locally produced valved spacer or a non-valved spacer. The next day, a crossover treatment was employed through the use of the other spacer. Spirometry was recorded before and after each albuterol administration.

RESULTS

As we were not able to identify any sequence or carryover effect, we tested for treatment effects in both periods. No significant differences in the absolute change in FEV(1) (0.20 ± 0.17 vs. 0.18 ± 0.16, p = 0.63), FVC (0.07 ± 0.13 vs. 0.07 ± 0.16, p = 0.88), or MMEF (0.49 ± 0.31 vs. 0.43 ± 0.39, p = 0.53) after bronchodilator administration were found between the use of valved and non-valved spacers.

CONCLUSIONS

In stable asthmatic children, albuterol administered through MDI using a non-valved spacer produces a bronchodilator response similar to that of a spacer with a valve that requires an inhalatory opening pressure (with flows between 2 and 32 l/min) that even toddlers with bronchial obstruction can easily generate.

Acute asthma management in children: knowledge of the topic among health professionals at teaching hospitals in the city of Recife, Brazil

OBJECTIVE

Knowledge of acute asthma management in children is a subject that has rarely been explored. The objective of this study was to assess the level of such knowledge among health professionals in the city of Recife, Brazil.

METHODS

This was a cross-sectional survey involving 27 pediatricians and 7 nurses, all with at least two years of professional experience, at two large pediatric teaching hospitals in Recife. The participants completed a self-administered multiple-choice questionnaire.

RESULTS

The pediatricians and nurses all possessed insufficient knowledge regarding the use of metered dose inhalers, nebulization, and types/doses of medications, as well as techniques for decontamination and disinfection of the equipment.

CONCLUSIONS

Insufficient knowledge of acute asthma management in children can lead to less effective treatment in hospitals such as those evaluated here. Educational programs should be developed in order to minimize this problem.

Commercial versus home-made spacers in delivering bronchodilator therapy for acute therapy in children

BACKGROUND

Strong evidence supports the use of metered-dose inhalers combined with a spacer for delivering rapid-acting inhaled beta-2 agonists in the treatment of acute exacerbations of asthma in children. The high cost and lack of availability of commercially produced spacers however, have limited their use in developing countries.

OBJECTIVES

The aim of this review was to compare the response to inhaled beta-2 agonists delivered through metered-dose inhaler using home-made spacers, to the use of commercially produced spacers, in children with acute exacerbations of wheezing or asthma.

SEARCH STRATEGY

We searched the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) The Cochrane Library Issue 3, 2007,(up to August 2007) MEDLINE , EMBASE, CINHAL, LILACS and reference lists of included studies. We contacted authors and known experts in the field, and approached pharmaceutical companies that manufacture inhalation spacers to identify additional published or unpublished data. No language restrictions were applied.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Trials comparing treatment with rapid acting beta 2-agonists delivered though MDI attached to home-made spacers, with the same bronchodilator therapy delivered with MDI and commercially produced spacers, in children under 18 years with acute exacerbations of wheezing or asthma.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently extracted the data and assessed trial quality. Missing data were obtained from the authors or estimated from information available in published reports.

MAIN RESULTS

Six trials with 658 participants met the inclusion criteria . At the time of this report, five trials were published in full text, and one study was available in abstract form only. No significant differences were demonstrated between the two delivery methods in terms of need for hospital admission (RR 1.00, 95% CI 0.63 to 1.59), change in oxygen saturation (SMD -0.03, 95% CI -0.39 to 0.33), PEFR (SMD 0.04, 95% CI -0.72 to 0.80), clinical score (WMD 0.00, 95% CI -0.37 to 0.37), in terms of need for additional treatment (RR 1.18, 95% CI 0.84 to 1.65), or regarding change in heart rate per minute (SMD 0.09, 95% CI -0.24 to 0.42).

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Overall, this review supports did not identify a difference between these two methods for delivering bronchodilator therapy to children with acute asthma or lower airways obstruction attacks. Care should be taken in the interpretation and applicability of our results because of the small number of RCTs along with few events available meeting the criteria for inclusion in the review, absence of the primary outcome of interest and other clinically important outcomes in the majority of included studies. The possible need for a face-mask in younger children using home-made spacers should also be considered in practice.

Randomized trial of spacers in asthma

OBJECTIVE

To compare the efficacy of all types of spacers commonly available to children in India.

METHODS

150 children 5-14 yr of age with persistent asthma presenting with peak expiratory flow (PEF) < 70% of personal best were randomized to receive 200 mg salbutamol through one of five spacers: A) 750 ml spacer with valve, B) 165 ml spacer with valve, C) 250 ml spacer without valve, D) 1000 ml indigenously made spacer without valve and E) 500 ml indigenously made spacer without valve. PEF measurement was repeated 15 minutes later. Children> 8 yr old performed spirometry in addition to PEF. Absolute change and percentage improvement of PEF and FEV1 were compared among the groups.

RESULTS

Subjects in all groups had comparable baseline demographic characteristics and PEF. All showed significant improvement in PEF and FEV1 over baseline values. The change in PEF and percentage improvement were comparable among all five groups (p=0.780 and p=0.955 respectively). Likewise change in FEV1 and percentage improvement were also comparable. The five groups showed no difference in efficacy, irrespective of severity of baseline airway obstruction.

CONCLUSION

The five spacers were equally efficacious for the delivery of bronchodilator in children with moderate persistent asthma presenting with airway obstruction.

Perceptual reasons for resistance to change in the emergency department use of holding chambers for children with asthma

STUDY OBJECTIVE

We explore perceptions surrounding use of portable inhalers and holding chambers (spacers) for delivery of beta-agonist respiratory medications to children in the emergency department (ED) and factors influencing practice change.

METHODS

This was a qualitative study guided by principles of grounded theory. Data were collected through focus groups and individual interviews at 2 sites in eastern Canada: Hospital A, where inhalers and holding chambers are used routinely; and Hospital B, where prevailing practice is the use of nebulization. Participant encounters were transcribed verbatim and analyzed for emerging themes.

RESULTS

At Hospital A, 6 physicians and 7 nurses participated in separate focus groups. Four interviews were conducted with physician, nurse, respiratory therapy, and pharmacy leaders. At Hospital B, 4 physicians and 3 nurses participated in focus groups, and 6 leaders were interviewed. Perceptions negatively influencing the adoption of inhalers and holding chambers included increased workload, increased equipment costs, myths about the superiority of nebulization, and interprofessional conflict. Health professionals reported that their most prominent concern about administering medications with inhalers and holding chambers was the time demand. Nurses especially seemed to think this way, tipping the balance in favor of nebulization despite knowledge of evidence to the contrary and affecting physician decisionmaking as well. Professional territorialism appeared to hinder efforts to ameliorate workload issues through the use of respiratory therapists in the ED.

CONCLUSION

Findings from this study could be used to inform a change program to close the gap between evidence and practice with respect to use of inhalers and holding chambers in the ED.

Metered-dose inhalers: actuators old and new

The actuator has been the patient interface of the metered-dose inhaler for the past 50 years. The original 1956 design remains a significant influence upon today's actuators and, moreover, its distinct geometry is still recognisable on the market. The actuator has contributed to the metered-dose inhaler's success as a clinically effective and cost-effective device. This review focuses upon developments since the actuator's introduction as an integral part of the metered-dose inhaler and discusses key aspects of its design that influence lung deposition potential. The ability of the actuator to reduce unwanted oropharyngeal drug deposition, facilitate correct patient use and provide valuable patient feedback is highlighted.

Randomised controlled trial of the efficacy of a metered dose inhaler with bottle spacer for bronchodilator treatment in acute lower airway obstruction

BACKGROUND

Inhaled bronchodilator treatment given via a metered dose inhaler (MDI) and spacer is optimal for relief of bronchoconstriction. Conventional spacers are expensive or unavailable in developing countries, but there is little information on the efficacy of low-cost spacers in young children.

OBJECTIVE

To compare the response to bronchodilator treatment given via a conventional or a low-cost bottle spacer

METHODS

A randomised controlled trial of the efficacy of a conventional spacer compared with a bottle spacer for bronchodilator treatment in young children with acute lower airway obstruction. Bronchodilator treatment was given from an MDI via an Aerochamber or a bottle spacer. Clinical score and oximetry recording were carried out before and after 15 min of treatment. MDI-spacer treatment was repeated up to three times, depending on clinical response, after which nebulisation was used. The primary outcome was hospitalisation.

RESULTS

400 children, aged (median (25th-75th centile)) 12 (6-25) months, were enrolled. The number of children hospitalised (n = 60, 15%) was identical in the conventional and bottle spacer groups (n = 30, 15% in each). Secondary outcomes including change in clinical score (-2 (-3 to -1)), oxygen saturation (0 (-1 to 1)) and number of bronchodilator treatments (2 (1 to 3)) were similar in both groups. Oral corticosteroids, prescribed for 78 (19.5%) children, were given to a similar number in the conventional (37 (18.5%)) and bottle spacer groups (41 (20.5%)).

CONCLUSION

A low-cost bottle spacer is as effective as a conventional spacer for bronchodilator treatment in young children with acute obstruction of the lower airways.

Performance of a corticosteroid inhaler with a spacer fashioned from a plastic cold-drink bottle: effects of changing bottle volume

Some clinicians advocate using metered-dose inhaler (MDI) spacers prepared from common household bottles. We evaluated the in vitro aerosol characteristics of fluticasone from the MDI alone and through spacers fashioned from 237-, 500-, 1000-, and 1500-mL polyethylene terephlate plastic cold drink bottles using a cascade impactor. Ten 110-microg actuations of fluticasone were sampled into the impactor during each of five runs with each configuration. The primary outcomes were the respirable dose (i.e., quantity aerosol 1.1-4.7 microm in size) and the quantity trapped in the oropharynx. The mean fluticasone respirable dose from the MDI alone (46.2 microg/actuation) was no different (p > 0.05) compared with the same MDI mated to any of the bottle spacers, regardless of volume. The mean quantity of fluticasone trapped in the oropharynx from the MDI alone (39.2 microg/actuation) was greater (p < 0.001) than the same MDI mated with any bottle spacer (range 1.5-3.5 microg/actuation). These data suggest that any of the bottle spacers tested would be an acceptable method to decrease the quantity of fluticasone that would deposit onto the oropharynx and thereby diminish the risk of topical adverse effects. Among the range of volumes tested, there was no relationship between spacer volume and respirable dose of fluticasone.

Long-term management of asthma

Long-term management of asthma includes identification and avoidance of precipitating factors of asthma, pharmacotherapy and home management plan. Common precipitating factors include viral upper respiratory infections, exposure to smoke, dust, cold food and cold air. Avoidance of common precipitating factors has been shown to help in better control of asthma. Pharmacotherapy is the main stay of treatment of asthma. Commonly used drugs for better control of asthma are long and short acting bronchodilators, mast cell stabilizers, inhaled steroids, theophylline and steroid sparing agents. After assessment of severity most appropriate medications are selected. For mild episodic asthma the medications are short acting beta agonists as and when required. For mild persistent asthma: as and when required bronchodilators along with a daily maintenance treatment in form of low dose inhaled steroids or cromolyn or oral theophylline or leukotriene antagonists are required. Moderate persistent asthma should be treated with inhaled steroids along with long acting beta agonists for symptom control. For severe persistent asthma the recommended treatment includes inhaled steroids, long acting beta agonists with or without theophylline. If symptoms are not well controlled, a minimal dose of oral prednisolone preferably on alternate days may be needed in few patients. Patients should be followed up every 8-12 weeks. On each follow up visit patients should be examined by a doctor, compliance to medications should be checked and actual inhalation technique is observed. Depending on the assessment, medications may be decreased or stepped up. For exercise induced bronchoconstriction: cromolyn, short or long acting beta agonists or leukotriene antagonists may be used. In children with seasonal asthma, maintenance treatment according to assessed severity should be started 2 weeks in advance and continued throughout the season. These patients should be reassessed after discontinuing the treatment. Parents should be given a written plan for management of acute exacerbation at home.