ArticlePharmaceutical research2004
Aerosol profile extracted from spacers as a determinant of actual dose.
Article in Pharmaceutical research, 2004. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
1 citing paper in PubMed, 9 citations in OpenAlex.
- Spacer devices for inhaled therapy: why use them, and how?ERJ open research · 2018Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeWe propose a novel method to evaluate the efficacy of a pressurized metered dose inhaler (pMDI) in combination with a spacer, by not only considering the total dose extractable from the spacer but also the dependence of dose on the volume available for aerosol inhalation.
methodsWe studied volume-dependence of aerosol concentration during extraction from two commonly used plastic spacers (150 ml AerochamberPlus; 750 ml Volumatic) after a single puff of a 100 microg salbutamol pMDI (HFA-Ventolin), using laser photometric measurements.
resultsAfter a delay of is in each spacer, the aerosol peak dose for AerochamberPlus was 2-fold that for Volumatic (p < 0.001), with the peak appearing well within the first 0.5 L even for the largest spacer. The opposite dose relationship is reached when considering total cumulative dose, which was 2-fold higher for Volumatic than for AerochamberPlus (p < 0.001); >95% of total cumulative dose was extracted well within 3 L for the largest spacer. The 2-fold cumulative dose relationship was confirmed by chemical assay on an absolute filter [AerochamberPlus: 21.4+/-3.2 (SD) microg; Volumatic: 43.8+/-9.1 (SD) microg].
conclusionsActual aerosol dose available to patients during inhalation via spacers can only be done on the basis of a quantification of aerosol peak dose and cumulative dose as a function of extracted volume.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.