Inhalation characteristics of asthma patients, COPD patients and healthy volunteers with the Spiromax® and Turbuhaler® devices: a randomised, cross-over study.

BACKGROUND: Spiromax® is a novel dry-powder inhaler containing formulations of budesonide plus formoterol (BF). The device is intended to provide dose equivalence with enhanced user-friendliness compared to BF Turbuhaler® in asthma and chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD). The present study was performed to compare inhalation parameters with empty versions of the two devices, and to investigate the effects of enhanced training designed to encourage faster inhalation. METHODS: This randomised, open-label, cross-over study included children with asthma (n = 23), adolescents with asthma (n = 27), adults with asthma (n = 50), adults with COPD (n = 50) and healthy adult volunteers (n = 50). Inhalation manoeuvres were recorded with each device after training with the patient information leaflet (PIL) and after enhanced training using an In-Check Dial device. RESULTS: After PIL training, peak inspiratory flow (PIF), maximum change in pressure (∆P) and the inhalation volume (IV) were significantly higher with Spiromax than with the Turbuhaler device (p values were at least <0.05 in all patient groups). After enhanced training, numerically or significantly higher values for PIF, ∆P, IV and acceleration remained with Spiromax versus Turbuhaler, except for ∆P in COPD patients. After PIL training, one adult asthma patient and one COPD patient inhaled <30 L/min through the Spiromax compared to one adult asthma patient and five COPD patients with the Turbuhaler. All patients achieved PIF values of at least 30 L/min after enhanced training. CONCLUSIONS: The two inhalers have similar resistance so inhalation flows and pressure changes would be expected to be similar. The higher flow-related values noted for Spiromax versus Turbuhaler after PIL training suggest that Spiromax might have human factor advantages in real-world use. After enhanced training, the flow-related differences between devices persisted; increased flow rates were achieved with both devices, and all patients achieved the minimal flow required for adequate drug delivery. Enhanced training could be useful, especially in COPD patients

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

Study of the Emitted Dose After Two Separate Inhalations at Different Inhalation Flow Rates and Volumes and an Assessment of Aerodynamic Characteristics of Indacaterol Onbrez Breezhaler® 150 and 300 μg

Onbrez Breezhaler® is a low-resistance capsule-based device that was developed to deliver indacaterol maleate. The study was designed to investigate the effects of both maximum flow rate (MIF) and inhalation volume (Vin) on the dose emission of indacaterol 150 and 300 μg dose strengths after one and two inhalations using dose unit sampling apparatus (DUSA) as well as to study the aerodynamic characteristics of indacaterol Breezhaler® using the Andersen cascade impactor (ACI) at a different set of MIF and Vin. Indacaterol 150 and 300 μg contain equal amounts of lactose per carrier. However, 150 μg has the smallest carrier size. The particle size distribution (PSD) of indacaterol DPI formulations 150 and 300 μg showed that the density of fine particles increased with the increase of the primary pressure. For both strengths (150 μg and 300 μg), ED1 increased and ED2 decreased when the inhalation flow rate and inhaled volume increased. The reduction in ED1 and subsequent increase in ED2 was such that when the Vin is greater than 1 L, then 60 L/min could be regarded as the minimum MIF. The Breezhaler was effective in producing respirable particles with an MMAD ≤5 μm irrespective of the inhalation flow rate, but the mass fraction of particles with an aerodynamic diameter <3 μm is more pronounced between 60 and 90 L/min. The dose emission of indacaterol was comparable for both dose strengths 150 and 300 μg. These in vitro results suggest that a minimum MIF of 60 L/min is required during routine use of Onbrez Breezhaler®, and confirm the good practice to make two separate inhalations from the same dose

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

Effect of a web-based chronic disease management system on asthma control and health-related quality of life: study protocol for a randomized controlled trial

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>Asthma is a prevalent and costly disease resulting in reduced quality of life for a large proportion of individuals. Effective patient self-management is critical for improving health outcomes. However, key aspects of self-management such as self-monitoring of behaviours and symptoms, coupled with regular feedback from the health care team, are rarely addressed or integrated into ongoing care. Health information technology (HIT) provides unique opportunities to facilitate this by providing a means for two way communication and exchange of information between the patient and care team, and access to their health information, presented in personalized ways that can alert them when there is a need for action. The objective of this study is to evaluate the acceptability and efficacy of using a web-based self-management system, My Asthma Portal (MAP), linked to a case-management system on asthma control, and asthma health-related quality of life.</p> <p>Methods</p> <p>The trial is a parallel multi-centered 2-arm pilot randomized controlled trial. Participants are randomly assigned to one of two conditions: a) MAP and usual care; or b) usual care alone. Individuals will be included if they are between 18 and 70, have a confirmed asthma diagnosis, and their asthma is classified as not well controlled by their physician. Asthma control will be evaluated by calculating the amount of fast acting beta agonists recorded as dispensed in the provincial drug database, and asthma quality of life using the Mini Asthma Related Quality of Life Questionnaire. Power calculations indicated a needed total sample size of 80 subjects. Data are collected at baseline, 3, 6, and 9 months post randomization. Recruitment started in March 2010 and the inclusion of patients in the trial in June 2010.</p> <p>Discussion</p> <p>Self-management support from the care team is critical for improving chronic disease outcomes. Given the high volume of patients and time constraints during clinical visits, primary care physicians have limited time to teach and reinforce use of proven self-management strategies. HIT has the potential to provide clinicians and a large number of patients with tools to support health behaviour change.</p> <p>Trial Registration</p> <p>Current Controlled Trials <a href="http://www.controlled-trials.com/ISRCTN34326236">ISRCTN34326236</a>.</p