Chest
Clinical Investigations: COPDNebulized Wet Aerosol Treatment in Emergency Department—Is It Essential?: Comparison With Large Spacer Device for Metered-Dose Inhaler
Section snippets
Patients
Fifty patients, referred to the DEM at the Edith Wolfson Medical Center (a university-affiliated, community-based general hospital) with severe obstructive pulmonary event between October 1, 1994 and March 31, 1995 were enrolled into the trial. To represent the actual population visiting the emergency department, we did not limit enrollment into the study by considerations of age, sex, severity of underlying illness, or primary diagnosis. We limited exclusion criteria to apparent active cardiac
Results
Of the 50 patients who entered the study, only 9 patients did not receive the last treatment because of side effects (palpitations, headache, or tremor), of whom 3 of 25 were from the salbutamol-MDI group (group 2) and 6 of 25 from the placebo-MDI group (group 1). Although the improvement in spirometric measurement was nominally slightly better in the salbutamol-MDI (test) group, no statistically significant difference was detected at any point during the study (Figure 2, Figure 3, Figure 4).
Discussion
A current consensus conference concluded that an MDI with reservoir chamber is the preferred mode of aerosol therapy for patients outside of the hospital.19
The advantages of the MDIs (smaller amount of the drug, convenient, portable, less expensive, no drug preparation required, and difficult to contaminate) in addition to the advantage of the accessory (spacer) devices (easy handling, less patient coordination needed, less pharyngeal deposition) compared favorably to the small-volume
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
Diklah Geva of the Edith Wolfson Medical Center, Holon, advised on statistics. We are grateful also to Sally Izakov for secretarial assistance.
References (22)
- et al.
Equivalence of continuous flow nebulizer and metered-dose inhaler with a reservoir for treatment of acute airflow obstruction
Chest
(1988) Emergency department management of life-threatening asthma: are nebulizers obsolete
Chest
(1993)- et al.
Emergency department treatment of severe asthma: metered-dose inhaler plus holding chamber is equivalent in effectiveness to nebulizer
Chest
(1993) - et al.
Aerosolized metaproterenol in the treatment of asthmatics with severe airflow obstruction: comparison of two delivery methods
Chest
(1989) - et al.
Comparative trial of continuous nebulization versus metered-dose inhaler in the treatment of acute bronchospasm
Ann Emerg Med
(1995) The National Association for Medical Direction of Respiratory Care (NAMDRC) Consensus Group. Guidelines for the use of nebulizers in the home and at domiciliary sites: report of a consensus conference
Chest
(1996)- et al.
Comparison of a hand-held nebulizer with a metered dose inhaler-spacer combination in acute obstructive pulmonary disease
Chest
(1991) - et al.
Substitution of metered-dose inhalers for hand-held nebulizers: success and cost savings in a large, acute-care hospital
Chest
(1992) - International consensus report on diagnosis and treatment of asthma. Bethesda, Md: National Heart, Lung and Blood...
- et al.
Experience with metered-dose inhaler with a spacer in the pediatric emergency department
Am J Dis Child
(1989)
Response to bronchodilator drug administration by a new reservoir aerosol delivery system and a review of other auxiliary delivery systems
Am Rev Respir Dis
Cited by (39)
Characteristics of Spacer Device Use by Patients with Asthma and COPD
2008, Journal of Emergency MedicineCitation Excerpt :Although there was no difference in rates of hospitalization, discharged patients who were instructed in MDI spacer use had significantly reduced 14- and 21-day relapse rates. Numerous other studies over the past 15 years have demonstrated improved outcomes with MDI used in conjunction with a SD, as compared to either the MDI alone or nebulizers (7–12). This is particularly apparent in the pediatric population, where multiple studies have shown equal efficacy of treatment of asthma exacerbations with MDI-SD and nebulizers, but fewer side effects and lower economic cost with the MDI-SD (13–17).
Life-Threatening Asthma
2008, Critical Care Medicine: Principles of Diagnosis and Management in the AdultChronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease
2008, Critical Care Medicine: Principles of Diagnosis and Management in the AdultComparison of the effects of nebulised and inhaled salbutamol on breathlessness in severe COPD
2005, Respiratory MedicineCitation Excerpt :Patients were randomised to receive three doses of 200 mcg salbutamol from an MDI and spacer (in addition to nebulised saline) or 2.5 mg salbutamol via nebuliser (plus placebo MDI) over 15 min. There was no difference in lung function between the treatments at any of the three time points up to 15 min.13 None of these studies suggest that the more rapid improvement in breathlessness seen with nebulised salbutamol is likely to be due to an effect on lung function.
Device selection and outcomes of aerosol therapy: Evidence-based guidelines: American College of Chest Physicians/American College of Asthma, Allergy, and Immunology
2005, ChestCitation Excerpt :One study38 found vomiting to be more common with nebulizer use than with use of an MDI with a spacer/holding chamber, which likely was due to the larger dose given by nebulizer in these subjects. Considering the common use of aerosolized drugs in hospitalized patients, there are surprisingly few studies that have compared aerosol delivery devices in this setting (Table 11).53585960616263 Six type 1 studies535859606163 included in the analysis compared nebulizers with MDIs having spacer/holding chambers in adult and pediatric patients.
Update on pharmacologic therapy for chronic obstructive pulmonary disease
2000, Clinics in Chest Medicine