Inspiratory Flowthrough Dry-Powder Inhalers (DPIs) in Asthmatic Children 2 to 12 Years Old

The Confusing World of Dry Powder Inhalers: It Is All About Inspiratory Pressures, Not Inspiratory Flow Rates

Dry powder inhalers (DPIs) all have the ability to aerosolize dry powders, but they each offer different operating mechanisms and resistances to inhaled airflow. This variety has resulted in both clinician and patient confusion concerning DPI performance, use, and effectiveness. Particularly, there is a growing misconception that a single peak inspiratory flow rate (PIFR) can determine a patient's ability to use a DPI effectively, regardless of its design or airflow resistance. For this review article, we have sifted through the relevant literature concerning DPIs, inspiratory pressures, and inspiratory flow rates to provide a comprehensive and concise discussion and recommendations for DPI use. We ultimately clarify that the controlling parameter for DPI performance is not the PIFR but the negative pressure generated by the patient's inspiratory effort. A pressure drop ∼≥1 kPa (∼10 cm H2O) with any DPI is a reasonable threshold above which a patient should receive an adequate lung dose. Overall, we explore the underlying factors controlling inspiratory pressures, flow rates and dispensing, and dispersion characteristics of the various DPIs to clarify that inspiratory pressures, not flow rates, limit and control a patient's ability to generate sufficient flow for effective DPI use.

The Impact of Inspiratory Flow Rate on Drug Delivery to the Lungs with Dry Powder Inhalers

Current marketed dry powder inhalers utilize the energy from patient inspiration to fluidize and disperse bulk powder agglomerates into respirable particles. Variations in patient inspiratory flow profiles can lead to marked differences in total lung dose (TLD), and ultimately patient outcomes for an inhaled therapeutic. The present review aims to quantitate the flow rate dependence in TLD observed for a number of drug/device combinations using a new metric termed the Q index. With this data in hand, the review explores key attributes in the design of the formulation and device that impact flow rate dependence. The review also proposes alternative in vitro methods to assess flow rate dependence that more closely align with in vivo observations. Finally, the impact of variations in flow rate on lung function for inhaled bronchodilators is summarized.

Inhaled anticholinergics and short-acting beta(2)-agonists versus short-acting beta2-agonists alone for children with acute asthma in hospital

BACKGROUND

Inhaled anticholinergics given in addition to β2-agonists are effective in reducing hospital admissions in children presenting to the emergency department with a moderate to severe asthma exacerbation. It seems logical to assume a similar beneficial effect in children hospitalised for an acute asthma exacerbation.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the efficacy and safety of anticholinergics added to β2-agonists as inhaled or nebulised therapy in children hospitalised for an acute asthma exacerbation. To investigate the characteristics of patients or therapy, if any, that would influence the magnitude of response attributable to the addition of anticholinergics.

SEARCH METHODS

We identified trials from the Cochrane Airways Group Specialised Register of trials (CAGR), which is derived through systematic searches of bibliographic databases including the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL, AMED and PsycINFO and through handsearching of respiratory journals and meeting abstracts. The search is current to November 2013.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomised trials comparing the combination of inhaled or nebulised anticholinergics and short-acting β2-agonists versus short-acting β2-agonists alone in children one to 18 years of age hospitalised for an acute asthma exacerbation were eligible.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently assessed the methodological quality of trials and extracted data; disagreement was resolved by consensus or with the input of a third review author, when needed. Primary outcomes were duration of hospital stay and serious adverse events. Secondary outcomes included admission and duration of stay in the intensive care unit (ICU), ventilation assistance, time to short-acting β2-agonists spaced at four hours or longer, supplemental asthma therapy, duration of supplemental oxygen, change from baseline in asthma severity, relapse after discharge, adverse health effects and withdrawals.

MAIN RESULTS

Seven randomised trials were included, four of which reported usable data on 472 children with asthma one to 18 years of age who were admitted to paediatric wards. No trials included patients admitted to the ICU. The anticholinergic used, ipratropium bromide 250 μg, was given every one to eight hours over a period from four hours to the entire length of the hospital stay. Two of four trials (50%) contributing data were deemed of high methodological quality. The addition of anticholinergics to β2-agonists showed no evidence of effect on the duration of hospital admission (mean difference (MD) -0.28 hours, 95% confidence interval (CI) -5.07 to 4.52, 3 studies, 327 participants, moderate quality evidence) and no serious or non-serious adverse events were reported in any included trials. As a result of the similarity of trials, we could not explore the influence of age, admission site, intensity of anticholinergic treatment and co-interventions on primary outcomes. No statistically significant group difference was noted in other secondary outcomes, including the need for supplemental asthma therapy, time to short-acting β2-agonists spaced at four hours or longer, asthma clinical scores, lung function and overall withdrawals for any reason.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

In children hospitalised for an acute asthma exacerbation, no evidence of benefit for length of hospital stay and other markers of response to therapy was noted when nebulised anticholinergics were added to short-acting β2-agonists. No adverse health effects were reported, yet the small number of trials combined with inadequate reporting prevent firm reassurance regarding the safety of anticholinergics. In the absence of trials conducted in ICUs, no conclusion can be drawn regarding children with impending respiratory failure. These findings support current national and international recommendations indicating that healthcare practitioners should refrain from using anticholinergics in children hospitalised for acute asthma.

Comparison of Inhaled Corticosteroids: What You Need to Know in Choosing a Product

Inhaled corticosteroids (ICS) are recommended by The National Asthma Education and Prevention Program's Expert Panel Report 3 for all levels of persistent asthma in the pediatric population. The recommended ICS doses are based on assessment of severity and control of asthma. The pharmacodynamics and pharmacokinetics of the current ICSs are reviewed. While comparable efficacy can be achieved with equipotent dosing, some of the newer ICSs, fluticasone propionate, mometasone furoate, and ciclesonide, have pharmacokinetic profiles that produce less risk of systemic effects. However, at high doses systemic activity increases with all ICSs. The clinicians need to weigh the benefits and risks of these different products and dosing schemes in their patients for optimal use.