A Cost Analysis of Salbutamol Administration by Metered-Dose Inhalers with Spacers versus Nebulization for Patients with Wheeze in the Pediatric Emergency Department: Evidence from Observational Data in Nova Scotia

Emergency physicians' preferences in bronchodilator delivery for asthma exacerbations: a cross-sectional study

OBJECTIVE

Asthma is a chronic respiratory disorder characterized by airway inflammation and narrowing often leading to acute exacerbations that necessitate a visit to the emergency department (ED). While life threatening cases usually require bronchodilator delivery by nebulizers, mild to moderate acute asthma exacerbations can be treated by bronchodilators delivered either by metered dose inhalers (MDI). Numerous studies have attempted to compare between the two modalities and have drawn similar conclusions in that both are comparable in efficacy with minimal differences. What is evident, however, is that physicians remain inclined to favor nebulizers in the majority of acute asthma exacerbations.

METHODS

In this questionnaire-based study, a survey was distributed to physicians who treat asthma exacerbations to examine demographics, knowledge, beliefs, and current practice in regard to bronchodilator therapy.

RESULTS

The majority (90.8%) of physicians prefer short-acting beta agonists via nebulizer, with 9.2% favoring MDI + spacer. Participants include consultants, residents, and specialists across various emergency disciplines. While 90.1% find MDI + spacer equally effective as nebulizers, advantages cited include cost-effectiveness (49.6%), shorter ED stays (63.4%), quicker administration (67.9%), and ease of use (58.8%). Challenges include availability (66.4%) and ineffectiveness in younger patients (45%). Despite this, 65.6% are willing to switch to MDI for initial asthma management in the ED, while 34.4% are resistant.

CONCLUSION

Concerns about availability and effectiveness in younger patients remain barriers. However, a significant number are willing to adopt MDIs with spacers, indicating potential for broader use with better availability and training.

Emerging Roles of Malaysian Pharmacists in Asthma Management Amidst the COVID-19 Pandemic: A Narrative Review

The arrival of COVID-19 pandemic in March 2020 adversely affected every aspect of human life, including the management of asthma. The pandemic has forced clinicians to revisit the application of high-risk aerosol-generating procedures in asthma management, including spirometry and nebuliser therapy. The use of commercial spacers with pressurised metered-dose inhalers to replace nebulisation is limited by the high cost and pandemic-induced stock unavailability of these inhalers. The need for social distancing, healthcare reserves reallocation, and scarce personal protective equipment has promote increased telemedicine uptake for patients' asthma control and monitoring. Malaysian pharmacists have been providing long-term care of asthma through the introduction of the respiratory Medication Therapy Adherence Clinic (MTAC) to empower patients' general health literacy, train and regularly evaluate their inhalation technique, and reinforce the importance of medication compliance. To minimise the use of unplanned healthcare resources and avoidable COVID-19 infection exposure, Malaysian pharmacists need to better support asthma self-management via increased uptake of written Asthma Action Plans (AAPs). Pharmacist-led asthma treatment step-down to attain the lowest effective dose of inhaled corticosteroids (ICS) has become increasingly relevant during the pandemic, as its prolonged use carries risk of numerous side effects and possible hospitalisation. Telepharmacy offers a promising model for exploration and an alternative to the traditional service delivery of asthma education. Despite not being authorised as vaccinators, Malaysian pharmacists hold strong positions in COVID-19 immunisation programmes for pharmacovigilance and advocacy. The pandemic demands an increased role for pharmacists within medication management to prevent patients from the stockpiling that can cause adverse effects on pharmaceutical supply chain. This review intends to summarise the impact of COVID-19 on asthma management, with a focus on the transitional roles of Malaysian pharmacists before and after the pandemic era.

Metered-dose inhalers versus nebulization for the delivery of albuterol for acute exacerbations of wheezing or asthma in children: A systematic review with meta-analysis

OBJECTIVES

The benefits of metered-dose inhalers with a spacer (MDI+S) have increasingly been recognized as an alternative method of albuterol administration for treating pediatric asthma exacerbations. The aim of this systematic review was to compare the response to albuterol delivered through nebulization (NEB) with albuterol delivered through MDI+S in pediatric patients with asthma exacerbations.

METHODS

We conducted an electronic search in MEDLINE/PubMed, EMBASE, Ovid, and ClinicalTrials. To be included in the review, a study had to a randomized clinical trial comparing albuterol delivered via NEB versus MDI+S; and had to report the rate of hospital admission (primary outcome), or any of the following secondary outcomes: oxygen arterial saturation, heart rate (HR), respiratory rate (RR), the pulmonary index score (PIS), adverse effects, and need for additional treatment.

RESULTS

Fifteen studies (n = 2057) met inclusion criteria. No significant differences were found between the two albuterol delivery methods in terms of hospital admission (relative risk, 0.89; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.55-1.46; I²  = 32%; p = .65). There was a significant reduction in the PIS score (mean difference [MD], -0.63; 95% CI, -0.91 to -0.35; I²  = 0%; p < .00001), and a significantly smaller increase in HR (better; MD -6.47; 95% CI, -11.69 to -1.25; I²  = 0%; p = .02) when albuterol was delivered through MDI+S than when it was delivered through NEB.

CONCLUSIONS

This review, an update of a previously-published meta-analysis, showed a significant reduction in the PIS and a significantly smaller increase in HR when albuterol was delivered through MDI+S than when it was delivered through NEB.

Metered-dose inhalers vs nebulization for the delivery of albuterol in pediatric asthma exacerbations: A cost-effectiveness analysis in a middle-income country

OBJECTIVES

Although the benefits of albuterol delivered via metered-dose inhalers with a spacer (MDI+S) have been increasingly recognized, the evidence regarding the cost-effectiveness of MDI+S compared to nebulization (NEB) is not sufficient, especially in less-affluent countries, where the clinical and economic burden of the disease is the greatest. The aim of the present study was to evaluate the cost-effectiveness of MDI+S vs NEB for delivering albuterol for the treatment of pediatric asthma exacerbations.

METHODS

A decision-analysis model was developed to estimate the cost-effectiveness of MDI+S vs NEB for delivering albuterol for the treatment of pediatric asthma exacerbations. Effectiveness parameters were obtained from a systematic review of the literature. Cost data were obtained from hospital bills and from the national manual of drug prices in Colombia. The study was carried out from the perspective of the national healthcare system in Colombia, a middle-income country (MIC). The main outcome of the model was the avoidance of hospital admission.

RESULTS

For the base-case analysis, the model showed that compared to NEB, using MDI+S for the delivery of albuterol was associated with lower total costs (US$96.68 vs US$121.41 average cost per patient) and a higher probability of hospital admission avoided (0.9219 vs 0.8900), thus leading to dominance.

CONCLUSIONS

This study shows that in Colombia, an MIC, compared with NEB, the use of MDI+S for delivering albuterol for the treatment of pediatric asthma exacerbations is the preferred strategy because it is associated with a lower probability of hospital admission at lower total treatment costs.

Salbutamol and ipratropium by inhaler is superior to nebulizer in children with severe acute asthma exacerbation: Randomized clinical trial

INTRODUCTION

In moderate-severe asthma exacerbation, salbutamol by inhaler (MDI) is superior to salbutamol delivered by nebulizer (NEB); however, to our knowledge, no studies in children with exclusively severe exacerbations were performed.

OBJECTIVE

To compare the efficacy of salbutamol and ipratropium bromide by MDI versus by NEB in severe asthma exacerbations.

METHODS

We performed a clinical trial enrolling 103 children (2-14 years of age) with severe asthma exacerbations (defined by the Pulmonary Score ≥ 7) seen at the emergency room in Asuncion, Paraguay. One group received salbutamol and ipratropium (two puff every 10 min for 2 h and then every 30 min for 2 h more) by MDI with a valved-holding chamber and mask along with oxygen by a cannula separately (MDI-SIB); and the other received nebulization with oxygen (NEB-SIB) of salbutamol and ipratropium (1 every 20 min for 2 h and then every 30 min for 2 h more). Primary outcome was the rate of hospitalization (Pulmonary Score ≥ 7) after 4 h and secondary outcome was oxygen saturation.

RESULTS

Fifty two children received MDI-SIB and 51 NEB-SIB. After the 4th hour, children on MDI-SIB had significantly (P = 0.003) lower rate of hospital admission than on NEB-SIB (5.8% vs 27.5%, RR: 0.21 [0.06-0.69], respectively). Similarly, a significant improved clinical score after 60 min and increase in oxygen saturation after 90 min of treatment was observed in MDI-SIB versus NEB-SIB group (4.46 ± 0.7 vs 5.76 ± 0.65, P < 0.00001; and 90.5 ± 1.7 vs 88.43 1 ± 1, P < 0.00001, respectively).

CONCLUSION

Even in severe asthma exacerbations administration of salbutamol and ipratropium by MDI with valved-holding chamber and mask along with oxygen by a cannula separately was more effective than by a nebulizer.