Demodulation of Spatial Carrier Images: Performance Analysis of Several Algorithms Using a Single Image

http://link.springer.com/article/10.1007%2Fs11340-013-9741-6#Optical full-field techniques have a great importance in modern experimental mechanics. Even if they are reasonably spread among the university laboratories, their diffusion in industrial companies remains very narrow for several reasons, especially a lack of metrological performance assessment. A full-field measurement can be characterized by its resolution, bias, measuring range, and by a specific quantity, the spatial resolution. The present paper proposes an original procedure to estimate in one single step the resolution, bias and spatial resolution for a given operator (decoding algorithms such as image correlation, low-pass filters, derivation tools ...). This procedure is based on the construction of a particular multi-frequential field, and a Bode diagram representation of the results. This analysis is applied to various phase demodulating algorithms suited to estimate in-plane displacements.GDR CNRS 2519 “Mesures de Champs et Identification en Mécanique des Solide

Comparison of serious inhaler technique errors made by device-naïve patients using three different dry powder inhalers: a randomised, crossover, open-label study

Background: Serious inhaler technique errors can impair drug delivery to the lungs. This randomised, crossover, open-label study evaluated the proportion of patients making predefined serious errors with Pulmojet compared with Diskus and Turbohaler dry powder inhalers. Methods: Patients ≥18 years old with asthma and/or COPD who were current users of an inhaler but naïve to the study devices were assigned to inhaler technique assessment on Pulmojet and either Diskus or Turbohaler in a randomised order. Patients inhaled through empty devices after reading the patient information leaflet. If serious errors potentially affecting dose delivery were recorded, they repeated the inhalations after watching a training video. Inhaler technique was assessed by a trained nurse observer and an electronic inhalation profile recorder. Results: Baseline patient characteristics were similar between randomisation arms for the Pulmojet-Diskus (n = 277) and Pulmojet-Turbohaler (n = 144) comparisons. Non-inferiority in the proportions of patients recording no nurse-observed serious errors was demonstrated for both Pulmojet versus Diskus, and Pulmojet versus Turbohaler; therefore, superiority was tested. Patients were significantly less likely to make ≥1 nurse-observed serious errors using Pulmojet compared with Diskus (odds ratio, 0.31; 95 % CI, 0.19–0.51) or Pulmojet compared with Turbohaler (0.23; 0.12–0.44) after reading the patient information leaflet with additional video instruction, if required. Conclusions These results suggest Pulmojet is easier to learn to use correctly than the Turbohaler or Diskus for current inhaler users switching to a new dry powder inhaler

Performance Characteristics of Breezhaler((R)) and Aerolizer((R)) in the Real-World Setting

The evaluation of errors in use with different inhaler devices is challenging to quantify as there are a number of definitions of critical and non-critical errors with respect to inhaler use; in addition, performance characteristics of the device, such as airflow resistance, can also influence effective use in the real-world setting. Repeated observations and checking/correcting inhaler use are essential to optimise clinical effectiveness of inhaled therapy in patients. Breezhaler® is a single unit-dose dry powder inhaler used in chronic obstructive pulmonary disease and in asthma (budesonide) that has low airflow resistance, making it easier for patients of varying disease severities to achieve the inhalation flow rate required for lung deposition of treatment. Similar to Breezhaler®, the Aerolizer® is a single unit-dose dry powder inhaler used in asthma management with low airflow resistance. Studies have shown relatively low rates of critical errors with Breezhaler® and Aerolizer®, with similarities in the critical errors reported; these data on critical errors together with similarities in the usability of Breezhaler® and Aerolizer® further support the functional similarity between the two devices in both asthma and chronic obstructive pulmonary disease. Breezhaler® also has patient-feedback features, including use of a transparent drug capsule that can be checked after inhalation to see it is empty. The low resistance of the dose-confirming Breezhaler® results in less inspiratory effort being required by patients for its effective use, which allows the device to be used effectively across a wide age range of patients and disease severities

Assessment of digital image correlation measurement errors: methodology and results

Optical full-field measurement methods such as Digital Image Correlation (DIC) are increasingly used in the field of experimental mechanics, but they still suffer from a lack of information about their metrological performances. To assess the performance of DIC techniques and give some practical rules for users, a collaborative work has been carried out by the Workgroup “Metrology” of the French CNRS research network 2519 “MCIMS (Mesures de Champs et Identification en Mécanique des Solides / Full-field measurement and identification in solid mechanics, http://www.ifma.fr/lami/gdr2519)”. A methodology is proposed to assess the metrological performances of the image processing algorithms that constitute their main component, the knowledge of which being required for a global assessment of the whole measurement system. The study is based on displacement error assessment from synthetic speckle images. Series of synthetic reference and deformed images with random patterns have been generated, assuming a sinusoidal displacement field with various frequencies and amplitudes. Displacements are evaluated by several DIC packages based on various formulations and used in the French community. Evaluated displacements are compared with the exact imposed values and errors are statistically analyzed. Results show general trends rather independent of the implementations but strongly correlated with the assumptions of the underlying algorithms. Various error regimes are identified, for which the dependence of the uncertainty with the parameters of the algorithms, such as subset size, gray level interpolation or shape functions, is discussed

Asthma control in patients receiving inhaled corticosteroid and long-acting beta2-agonist fixed combinations. A real-life study comparing dry powder inhalers and a pressurized metered dose inhaler extrafine formulation

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>Although patients have more problems using metered dose inhalers, clinical comparisons suggest they provide similar control to dry powder inhalers. Using real-life situations this study was designed to evaluate asthma control in outpatients with moderate to severe persistent asthma and to compare efficacy of fixed combinations of inhaled corticosteroids (ICS) and long acting beta-agonists (LABA).</p> <p>Methods</p> <p>This real-life study had a cross-sectional design. Patients using fixed combinations of ICS and LABA had their asthma control and spirometry assessed during regular visits.</p> <p>Results</p> <p>111 patients were analyzed: 53 (47.7%) received maintenance therapy of extrafine beclomethasone-formoterol (BDP/F) pressurized metered dose inhaler (pMDI), 25 (22.5%) fluticasone-salmeterol (FP/S) dry powder inhaler (DPI), and 33 (29.7%) budesonide-formoterol (BUD/F) DPI. Severity of asthma at time of diagnosis, assessed by the treating physician, was comparable among groups. Asthma control was achieved by 45.9% of patients; 38.7% were partially controlled and 15.3% were uncontrolled. In the extrafine BDF/F group, asthma control total score, daytime symptom score and rescue medication use score were significantly better than those using fixed DPI combinations (5.8 ± 6.2 vs. 8.5 ± 6.8; 1.4 ± 1.8 vs. 2.3 ± 2.1; 1.8 ± 2.2 vs. 2.6 ± 2.2; p = 0.0160; p = 0.012 and p = 0.025, respectively) and the mean daily ICS dose were significantly lower.</p> <p>Conclusions</p> <p>pMDI extrafine BDP/F combination demonstrated better asthma control compared to DPIs formulated with larger particles. This could be due to the improved lung deposition of the dose or less reliance on the optimal inhalation technique or both.</p

Evaluation of inhaler technique and achievement and maintenance of mastery of budesonide/formoterol Spiromax® compared with budesonide/formoterol Turbuhaler® in adult patients with asthma: the Easy Low Instruction Over Time (ELIOT) study

Background: Incorrect inhaler technique is a common cause of poor asthma control. This two-phase pragmatic study evaluated inhaler technique mastery and maintenance of mastery with DuoResp® (budesonide-formoterol [BF]) Spiromax® compared with Symbicort® (BF) Turbuhaler® in patients with asthma who were receiving inhaled corticosteroids/long-acting β2-agonists. Methods: In the initial cross-sectional phase, patients were randomized to a 6-step training protocol with empty Spiromax and Turbuhaler devices. Patients initially demonstrating ≥1 error with their current device, and then achieving mastery with both Spiromax and Turbuhaler (absence of healthcare professional [HCP]-observed errors), were eligible for the longitudinal phase. In the longitudinal phase, patients were randomized to BF Spiromax or BF Turbuhaler. Co-primary endpoints were the proportions of patients achieving device mastery after three training steps and maintaining device mastery (defined as the absence of HCP-observed errors after 12 weeks of use). Secondary endpoints included device preference, handling error frequency, asthma control, and safety. Exploratory endpoints included assessment of device mastery by an independent external expert reviewing video recordings of a subset of patients. Results: Four hundred ninety-three patients participated in the cross-sectional phase, and 395 patients in the longitudinal phase. In the cross-sectional phase, more patients achieved device mastery after three training steps with Spiromax (94%) versus Turbuhaler (87%) (odds ratio [OR] 3.77 [95% confidence interval (CI) 2.05–6.95], p < 0.001). Longitudinal phase data indicated that the odds of maintaining inhaler mastery at 12 weeks were not statistically significantly different (OR 1.26 [95% CI 0.80–1.98], p = 0.316). Asthma control improved in both groups with no significant difference between groups (OR 0.11 [95% CI -0.09–0.30]). An exploratory analysis indicated that the odds of maintaining independent expert-verified device mastery were significantly higher for patients using Spiromax versus Turbuhaler (OR 2.11 [95% CI 1.25–3.54]). Conclusions: In the cross-sectional phase, a significantly greater proportion of patients using Spiromax versus Turbuhaler achieved device mastery; in the longitudinal phase, the proportion of patients maintaining device mastery with Spiromax versus Turbuhaler was similar. An exploratory independent expert-verified analysis found Spiromax was associated with higher levels of device mastery after 12 weeks. Asthma control was improved by treatment with both BF Spiromax and BF Turbuhaler

BMJ Open

INTRODUCTION: Antineoplastic drugs (AD) are potentially carcinogenic and/or reprotoxic molecules. Healthcare professionals are increasingly exposed to these drugs and can be potentially contaminated by them. Internal contamination of professionals is a key concern for occupational physicians in the assessment and management of occupational risks in healthcare settings. Objectives of this study are to report AD internal contamination rate in nursing staff and to identify factors associated with internal contamination. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: This trial will be conducted in two French hospital centres: University Hospital of Bordeaux and IUCT-Oncopole of Toulouse. The target population is nurses practicing in one of the fifteen selected care departments where at least one of the five studied AD is handled (5-fluorouracil, cyclophosphamide, doxorubicin, ifosfamide, methotrexate). The trial will be conducted with the following steps: (1) development of analytical methods to quantify AD urine biomarkers, (2) study of the workplace and organization around AD in each care department (transport and handling, professional practices, personal and collective protection equipments available) (3) development of a self-questionnaire detailing professional activities during the day of inclusion, (4) nurses inclusion (urine samples and self-questionnaire collection), (5) urine assays, (6) data analysis. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: The study protocol has been approved by the French Advisory Committee on the Treatment of Information in Health Research (CCTIRS) and by the French Data Protection Authority (CNIL). Following the opinion of the Regional Committee for the Protection of Persons, this study is outside the scope of the provisions governing biomedical research and routine care (n degrees 2014/87). The results will be submitted to peer-reviewed journals and reported at suitable national and international meetings. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: NCT03137641