Drug delivery interfaces: A way to optimize inhalation therapy in spontaneously breathing children

Individualized aerosol medicine: Integrating device into the patient

Pulmonary drug delivery is complex due to several challenges including disease-, patient-, and clinicians-related factors. Although many inhaled medications are available in aerosol medicine, delivering aerosolized medications to patients requires effective disease management. There is a large gap in the knowledge of clinicians who select and provide instructions for the correct use of aerosol devices. Since improper device selection, incorrect inhaler technique, and poor patient adherence to prescribed medications may result in inadequate disease control, individualized aerosol medicine is essential for effective disease management and control. The components of individualized aerosol medicine include: (1) Selecting the right device, (2) Selecting the right interface, (3) Educating the patient effectively, and (4) Increasing patient adherence to therapy. This paper reviews each of these components and provides recommendations to integrate the device and interface into the patient for better clinical outcomes.

Indian Guidelines on Nebulization Therapy

Inhalational therapy, today, happens to be the mainstay of treatment in obstructive airway diseases (OADs), such as asthma, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD), and is also in the present, used in a variety of other pulmonary and even non-pulmonary disorders. Hand-held inhalation devices may often be difficult to use, particularly for children, elderly, debilitated or distressed patients. Nebulization therapy emerges as a good option in these cases besides being useful in the home care, emergency room and critical care settings. With so many advancements taking place in nebulizer technology; availability of a plethora of drug formulations for its use, and the widening scope of this therapy; medical practitioners, respiratory therapists, and other health care personnel face the challenge of choosing appropriate inhalation devices and drug formulations, besides their rational application and use in different clinical situations. Adequate maintenance of nebulizer equipment including their disinfection and storage are the other relevant issues requiring guidance. Injudicious and improper use of nebulizers and their poor maintenance can sometimes lead to serious health hazards, nosocomial infections, transmission of infection, and other adverse outcomes. Thus, it is imperative to have a proper national guideline on nebulization practices to bridge the knowledge gaps amongst various health care personnel involved in this practice. It will also serve as an educational and scientific resource for healthcare professionals, as well as promote future research by identifying neglected and ignored areas in this field. Such comprehensive guidelines on this subject have not been available in the country and the only available proper international guidelines were released in 1997 which have not been updated for a noticeably long period of over two decades, though many changes and advancements have taken place in this technology in the recent past. Much of nebulization practices in the present may not be evidence-based and even some of these, the way they are currently used, may be ineffective or even harmful. Recognizing the knowledge deficit and paucity of guidelines on the usage of nebulizers in various settings such as inpatient, out-patient, emergency room, critical care, and domiciliary use in India in a wide variety of indications to standardize nebulization practices and to address many other related issues; National College of Chest Physicians (India), commissioned a National task force consisting of eminent experts in the field of Pulmonary Medicine from different backgrounds and different parts of the country to review the available evidence from the medical literature on the scientific principles and clinical practices of nebulization therapy and to formulate evidence-based guidelines on it. The guideline is based on all possible literature that could be explored with the best available evidence and incorporating expert opinions. To support the guideline with high-quality evidence, a systematic search of the electronic databases was performed to identify the relevant studies, position papers, consensus reports, and recommendations published. Rating of the level of the quality of evidence and the strength of recommendation was done using the GRADE system. Six topics were identified, each given to one group of experts comprising of advisors, chairpersons, convenor and members, and such six groups (A-F) were formed and the consensus recommendations of each group was included as a section in the guidelines (Sections I to VI). The topics included were: A. Introduction, basic principles and technical aspects of nebulization, types of equipment, their choice, use, and maintenance B. Nebulization therapy in obstructive airway diseases C. Nebulization therapy in the intensive care unit D. Use of various drugs (other than bronchodilators and inhaled corticosteroids) by nebulized route and miscellaneous uses of nebulization therapy E. Domiciliary/Home/Maintenance nebulization therapy; public & health care workers education, and F. Nebulization therapy in COVID-19 pandemic and in patients of other contagious viral respiratory infections (included later considering the crisis created due to COVID-19 pandemic). Various issues in different sections have been discussed in the form of questions, followed by point-wise evidence statements based on the existing knowledge, and recommendations have been formulated.

Aerosolized drug delivery in awake and anesthetized children to treat bronchospasm

Bronchospasm is a common respiratory adverse event in pediatric anesthesia. First-line treatment commonly includes inhaled salbutamol. This review focuses on the current best practice to deliver aerosolized medications to awake as well as anesthetized pediatric patients and discusses the advantages and disadvantages of various administration techniques. Additionally, we detail the differences between various airway devices used in anesthesia. We highlight the unmet need for innovation of orally inhaled drug products to deliver aerosolized medications during pediatric respiratory critical events such as bronchospasm. It is therefore important that clinicians remain up to date with the best clinical practice for aerosolized drug delivery in order to prevent and efficiently treat pediatric patients experiencing life-threatening respiratory emergencies.

Reconciling Oxygen and Aerosol Delivery with a Hood on In Vitro Infant and Paediatric Models

This study aimed to evaluate optimal aerosol and oxygen delivery with a hood on an infant model and a paediatric model. A facemask and a hood with three inlets, with or without a front cover, were used. A small-volume nebuliser with a unit-dose of salbutamol was used for drug delivery and an air entrainment nebuliser was used to deliver oxygen at 35%. Infant and paediatric breathing patterns were mimicked; a bacterial filter was connected to the end of a manikin trachea for aerosol drug collection, and an oxygen analyser was used to measure the oxygen concentration. For the infant model, inhaled drug dose was significantly higher when the nebuliser was placed in the back of the hood and with a front cover. This was verified by complementary computational simulations in a comparable infant-hood model. For the paediatric model, the inhaled dose was greater with a facemask than with a hood. Oxygen delivery with a facemask and a hood with a front cover achieved a set concentration in both models, yet a hood without a front cover delivered oxygen at far lower concentrations than the set concentration.

Treating COPD Patients with Inhaled Medications in the Era of COVID-19 and Beyond: Options and Rationales for Patients at Home

COVID-19 has affected millions of patients, caregivers, and clinicians around the world. Severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) spreads via droplets and close contact from person to person, and there has been an increased concern regarding aerosol drug delivery due to the potential aerosolizing of viral particles. To date, little focus has been given to aerosol drug delivery to patients with COVID-19 treated at home to minimize their hospital utilization. Since most hospitals were stressed with multiple admissions and experienced restricted healthcare resources in the era of COVID-19 pandemic, treating patients with COPD at home became essential to minimize their hospital utilization. However, guidance on how to deliver aerosolized medications safely and effectively to this patient population treated at home is still lacking. In this paper, we provide some strategies and rationales for device and interface selection, delivery technique, and infection control for patients with COPD who are being treated at home in the era of COVID-19 and beyond.

A path to successful patient outcomes through aerosol drug delivery to children: a narrative review

Although using aerosolized medications is a mainstay of treatment in children with asthma and other respiratory diseases, there are many issues in terms of device and interface selection, delivery technique and dosing, as well as patient and parental education that have not changed for half a century. Also, due to many aerosol devices and interfaces available on the market and the broad range of patient characteristics and requirements, providing effective aerosol therapy to children becomes a challenge. While aerosol delivery devices are equally effective, if they are age-appropriate and used correctly, the majority of aerosol devices require multiple steps to be used efficiently. Unfortunately, many children with pulmonary diseases have problems with the correct delivery technique and do not gain therapeutic benefits from therapy that result in poor disease management and increased healthcare costs. Therefore, the purpose of this paper is to review the current knowledge on aerosol delivery devices used in children and guide clinicians on the optimum device- and interface-selection, delivery technique, and dosing in this patient population. Strategies on how to deliver aerosolized medications in crying and distressed children and how to educate parents on aerosol therapy and promote patient adherence to prescribed medications are also provided. Future directions of aerosol therapy in children should focus on these issues and implement policies and clinical practices that highlight the potential solutions to these problems.

Quantifying continuous nebulization via high flow nasal cannula and large volume nebulizer in a pediatric model

BACKGROUND

Use of high flow nasal cannula (HFNC) to deliver aerosolized medications to children has gained considerable interest. However, data on continuous albuterol delivery (CAD) via HFNC are lacking. This study quantified CAD via HFNC/vibrating mesh nebulizer (VMN) and large-volume jet nebulizer (LVN) with face mask (FM) in a pediatric model. Aerosol delivery with two HFNC cannula designs were also compared.

METHODS

A pediatric manikin was connected to a lung simulator (Vt = 150 mL, RR = 28 breaths/minute, I:E 1:2.4) via collecting filter at the carina. XL Pediatric and SML Adult HFNC designs were tested to determine optimal cannula design for CAD. VMN was placed Before humidifier (37°C), albuterol (5 mg/mL) was nebulized at 3, 6, and 12 L/minute (n = 3). To compare HFNC/VMN with LVN and FM, albuterol (15 mg/hour) was aerosolized for 3 hours/device (n = 3). LVN was connected to FM and filled with 9 mL of albuterol (5 mg/mL) and 66 mL of normal saline to deliver 25 mL/hour at 13 L/minute. VMN was connected to the infusion pump to deliver 7.5 mL/hr of albuterol (2 mg/mL). Drug eluted from filters was assayed with UV spectrophotometry (276 nm).

RESULTS

Optimal aerosol delivery occurred at 3 L/minute (12.6% ± 0.5%) with SML Adult HFNC (P = .04). When used for CAD, inhaled drug delivery with HFNC/VMN (2.2 mg/hr ± 0.1, 14.8% ± 0.7%) was significantly greater than LVN and FM (0.48 ± 0.09 mg/hour, 3.2% ± 0.6%) (P = .001).

CONCLUSIONS

Administration of CAD via HFNC/VMN led to a greater than fourfold increase in drug delivery compared to LVN with FM. Optimal aerosol delivery occurred at 3 L/minute with SML Adult HFNC.

In vitro evaluation of aerosol drug delivery with and without high flow nasal cannula in children

OBJECTIVE

To quantify aerosol delivery with or without a high flow nasal cannula (HFNC) in place using pressurized metered-dose inhaler (pMDI) and jet nebulizer (JN) with facemask in a simulated spontaneously breathing pediatric lung model.

METHODS

An upper airway model of a 9-month-old infant (Sophia Anatomical Infant Nose-Throat) with an absolute filter distal to the trachea was connected to a breathing simulator to simulate pediatric parameters (tidal volume = 100 mL, respiratory rate = 30 breaths/min, and I:E ratio = 1:1.4). Oxygen at 3 L/min was administered through an infant HFNC (Fisher & Paykel Healthcare Ltd, Auckland, New Zealand) attached to the nares of the model. Albuterol sulfate (2.5 mg/3 mL) was delivered with JN attached to an aerosol facemask and powered by air at 8 L/min. Ventolin Hydrofluoroalkane (HFA) (360 μg) was administered using pMDI connected to a valved holding chamber (VHC) with a facemask. Aerosol was administered to the model with and without HFNC in the nares (n = 3). Drug was eluted from the filter and quantified using spectrophotometry. Independent t tests were performed for data analysis (P < .05).

RESULTS

Aerosol deposition was greater without HFNC (6.05% ± 1.53% and 39.54% ± 8.98% for JN and pMDI/VHC, respectively) than with HFNC using JN (2.91% ± 0.23%; P = .024) and pMDI/VHC (6.04% ± 0.28%; P = .003). Delivery efficiency of pMDI/VHC was greater than JN with or without nasal cannula in place (P = .0001 and .003, respectively).

CONCLUSION

Aerosol administered via facemask over HFNC was less efficient than removing HFNC during administration. When delivering medical aerosol by facemask, the benefit of increased aerosol delivery must be weighed against the changes in oxygen delivery and risk of lung derecruitment when nasal prongs are removed.

Effect of nebulizer type, delivery interface, and flow rate on aerosol drug delivery to spontaneously breathing pediatric and infant lung models

BACKGROUND

Different types of nebulizers, interfaces, and flow rates are used to deliver aerosolized medications to children. The purpose of this study was to determine the effect of nebulizer type, delivery interface, and flow rate on aerosol drug delivery to spontaneously breathing pediatric and infant lung models.

METHODOLOGY

A teaching mannequin was attached to a sinusoidal pump via a collecting filter at the bronchi to simulate a spontaneously breathing child (Vt: 250 mL, RR: 20 bpm and Ti: 1 second) and infant (Vt = 100 mL, RR = 30 bpm, Ti: 0.7 seconds). Albuterol sulfate was nebulized with jet (Misty Max 10; Cardinal Health) and mesh (Aerogen Solo; Aerogen) nebulizers using a low-flow nasal cannula (LFNC; Hudson), a high-flow nasal cannula (HFNC; Fisher & Paykel), face mask (FM; Hudson), and mouthpiece (MP; Cardinal Health). While all interfaces were used in the pediatric study, only LFNC, HFNC, and FM were tested in the infant study. The mesh nebulizer was tested at 2, 4, and 6 L/min with LFNC, 4 and 6 L/min with HFNC, and 6 L/min with FM and MP. The jet nebulizer was operated at 6 and 8 L/min with FM and 6 L/min with LFNC, HFNC, and MP (n = 5). The drug was eluted from the filter and analyzed by spectrophotometry. Factorial analysis of variance and post hoc comparisons were used for data analysis. P < .05 was considered statistically significant.

RESULTS

Delivery efficiency of mesh nebulizers is two to fourfold more than jet nebulizers used with HFNC, FM, and MP. No statistical difference was found between jet and mesh nebulizers used with LFNC in infants (P = .643) and pediatrics (P = .255). Aerosol delivery with MP was the best compared to other interfaces used in pediatrics (P < .05). As the second-best interface in aerosol drug delivery, the delivery efficiency of FM was greater than HFNC (P = .0001) and LFNC (P = .0001). Increasing flow rate with LFNC and HFNC decreased aerosol delivery with the mesh nebulizer in both infants and pediatrics.

CONCLUSION

The type of nebulizer, delivery interface, and flow rate used in the treatment of children affect aerosol drug delivery.

The Path to Perfect Pediatric Posology - Drug Development in Pediatrics

Reluctance to enroll pediatric subjects in clinical trials has left gaps in information about dosing, safety, and efficacy of medications. Pharmacotherapeutic information for pediatric patients may be available for only a small range of ages and may be deficient, as children respond differently as they grow and mature from prematurity to adolescence. Current regulations, however, require early planning for the participation of children in drug development, as pediatric plans must be submitted at the end of phase 1 (European Union) or the end of phase 2 (United States). These plans are extensive, outlining planned studies, subjects to be enrolled, dose and dosage form justification, planned observations, and statistical analysis as well as planned modeling, simulation, and extrapolation analyses. The extent to which efficacy information in adults can be extrapolated to children depends on how similar the disease is in adults and each of the 5 pediatric age groups. Extrapolation may not be possible for conditions that do not occur in adults, requiring a complete development plan in adults, or extrapolation may be complete because of similar pathology and response to treatment. Pharmacokinetic and safety information cannot be extrapolated and must be collected in children of all ages, unless a waiver is granted. Physiologically based pharmacokinetic modeling, optimal design, population pharmacokinetics, and scavenged samples are all examples of new methodologies being used to study pediatric therapeutics. Clinicaltrials.gov and EU Clinical Trials registry are good sources of results of pediatric trials, although sponsors are also working toward prompt publication of study results in peer-reviewed journals.

Aerosolization Performance of Jet Nebulizers and Biopharmaceutical Aspects

In this work, 13 jet nebulizers, some of which in different configurations, were investigated in order to identify the biopharmaceutical constraints related to the quality attributes of the medicinal products, which affect their safety, efficiency, compliance, and effectiveness. The aerosolization parameters, including the aerosol output, aerosol output rate, mass median aerodynamic diameter, and fine particle fraction, were determined according to the European Standard EN 13544-1, using sodium fluoride as a reference formulation. A comparison between the aerosol output nebulization time and the fine particle fraction displayed a correlation between the aerosol quality and the nebulization rate. Indeed, the quality of the nebulization significantly increased when the rate of aerosol emission was reduced. Moreover, the performance of the nebulizers was analyzed in terms of respirable delivered dose and respirable dose delivery rate, which characterize nebulization as the rate and amount of respirable product that could be deposited into the lungs. Depending on which of these two latter parameters was used, the nebulizers showed different performances. The differences, in terms of the rate and amount of delivered aerosol, could provide relevant information for the appropriate choice of nebulizer as a function of drug product, therapy, and patient characteristics.

Aerosolized surfactant in neonatal respiratory distress syndrome: Phase I study

BACKGROUND

Treating respiratory distress syndrome (RDS) with intratracheal surfactant requires endotracheal intubation and mechanical ventilation, (MV) with their attendant risks. Use of non-invasive respiratory support in the delivery room averts the need for MV but delays surfactant administration.

OBJECTIVE

We hypothesized that aerosolized surfactant is feasible and safe in infants 24^0/7-36^6/7 weeks gestational age (GA) with RDS, receiving non-invasive respiratory support.

DESIGN/METHODS

In an unblinded Phase I study, sequentially enrolled infants with RDS stratified by GA received increasing doses (100 or 200 mg/kg of phospholipid) and dilutions (12.5 or 8.3 mg/ml) of surfactant using a jet nebulizer. Infants were monitored clinically and with cerebral oximetry.

RESULTS

Seventeen infants were enrolled. Age at start of first dose and dose duration were 4.9 (3.4-10.1) and 2.1 (1.0-2.8) hours respectively. Two infants in the lowest GA stratum (24^0/7-28^6/7) required intubation within 2 h after the first dose. Fifteen infants completed the study; 13 received two doses. Infants tolerated the aerosol treatment well. No other significant adverse events were identified. Parental permission for cerebral oximetry was obtained in 16 infants. In the two infants who later exited the study, values prior to start of aerosolized surfactant were lower compared to 14 infants who completed the study (p = 0.0835), increased after start of study intervention (p = 0.0105) and decreased after intubation (p = 0.0003).

CONCLUSIONS

We have demonstrated the feasibility and safety of aerosolized surfactant in preterm infants receiving non-invasive respiratory support. The treatment was well tolerated by infants and clinical caregivers.