ABSTRACT
Dry powder inhalers (DPIs) are now widely prescribed and preferred by the majority of patients. These devices have many advantages over the traditional pressurized metered-dose inhaler (pMDI) but they do have disadvantages. The characteristics of the dose emitted from a DPI are affected by the inhalation manoeuvre used by a patient. Each patient is different and the severity of their lung disease varies from mild to very severe. This affects how they use an inhaler and so determines the type of dose they inhale. An understanding of the pharmaceutical science related to DPIs is important to appreciate the relevance of how patients inhale through these devices. Also, each type of DPI has its unique dose preparation routine, and thus it is essential to follow these recommended steps because errors at this stage may result in no dose being inhaled. All issues related to the inhalation manoeuvre and dose preparation are addressed in this chapter. The importance of the inhalation technique is highlighted with a realization of inhale technique training and checking. During routine patient management, devices should not be switched nor doses increased unless the patient has demonstrated that they can and do use their DPI.
Subject(s)
Asthma , Pulmonary Disease, Chronic Obstructive , Humans , Dry Powder Inhalers , Administration, Inhalation , Asthma/drug therapy , Metered Dose Inhalers , Pulmonary Disease, Chronic Obstructive/drug therapyABSTRACT
The inhalation rate is important when patients use an inhaler. Dry powder inhalers (DPIs) require an inhalation rate >30 L min(-1) whereas metered dose inhalers (MDIs) should be used at <90 L min(-1). Within the setting of a routine clinic, we have measured peak inhalation flows (PIF) of COPD patients when they used a Diskus (SDSK), Turbuhaler (STBH), Handihaler (SHAND) and MDI. Subjects were then randomised into trained (VT) and non-trained (NT) groups. One hundred and sixty-three patients with a mean (S.D.) age and % predicted FEV(1) of 72.5 (9.9) years and 47.8 (22.2)% completed the study. Of the patients, 4.9%, 14.2% and 57.0% inhaled <30 L min(-1) through SDSK, STHB and SHAND, respectively and 59.5% inhaled >90 L min(-1) with the MDI. Generally, the more severe the COPD, the slower was their PIF with all inhalers. The MDI PIF values in the VT group (n=84) post-training were significantly (p<0.001) slower but there was no change for the DPIs. Of the 55 VT patients inhaling >90 L min(-1) through the MDI only 7 (p<0.001) inhaled too fast post-training. Pre-training 3, 15 and 46 VT subjects inhaled <30 L min(-1) through the SDSK, STBH and SHAND and after training none, 5 and 26 did not inhale faster than this minimum required rate. Some COPD patients have problems achieving required PIFs through DPIs but training is useful to help some exceed the minimum required rate despite only small improvements. The patients found it easier to slow their PIF through the MDI.
Subject(s)
Nebulizers and Vaporizers , Pulmonary Disease, Chronic Obstructive/drug therapy , Respiratory System Agents/administration & dosage , Administration, Inhalation , Aged , Humans , Patient Education as Topic , Respiratory Mechanics/physiology , Self Administration/methods , Self Administration/standardsABSTRACT
The dose emitted from dry powder inhalers may be inhalation flow-dependent. Using an ex vivo method, the Electronic Lung, we have measured the aerodynamic characteristics of the emitted dose for both active constituents from Seretide Diskus (salmeterol xinafoate 50 mcg; fluticasone propionate 500 mcg) and Symbicort Turbuhaler (formoterol 6 mcg; budesonide 200 mcg). Electronic inhalation profiles were collected from 20 severe asthmatics (mean PEFR 53% predicted) when they inhaled using a placebo Seretide Diskus and a placebo Symbicort Turbuhaler. These were replayed in the Electronic Lung with the respective active inhaler in situ. Mean(S.D.) peak inhalation flow rates (PIFR) through the Diskus and Turbuhaler were 94.7(32.9) and 76.8(26.2) l min(-1), respectively. From the Electronic Lung the Diskus inhalation profiles provided a mean(S.D.) fine particle dose (FPD) for fluticasone propionate and salmeterol of 20.4(4.8) and 18.4(4.4)% labelled dose. For Turbuhaler inhalation profiles the FPD was 23.1(12.9) and 20.7(11.1)% labelled dose for budesonide and formoterol, respectively. The linear (p < 0.001) relationships between FPD against PIFR for budesonide and formoterol were 3 (p = 0.002) and 2.8 (p = 0.007) times steeper than fluticasone propionate and salmeterol, respectively. The results highlight a more significant effect of inspiratory flow on variable dosage emission when using the Symbicort Turbuhaler compared with the Seretide Diskus.
