Evidence map›Paper›PMID 24938617›Full record

ArticleAAPS PharmSciTech2014

Aerodynamic and electrostatic properties of model dry powder aerosols: a comprehensive study of formulation factors.

M J Telko, A J Hickey

Abstract readComparative Study
In one paragraph

Article in AAPS PharmSciTech, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

3 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Review
  2. Dry powder inhaler design and particle technology in enhancing Pulmonary drug deposition: challenges and future strategies.Daru : journal of Faculty of Pharmacy, Tehran University of Medical Sciences · 2024
    Review
  3. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

2 authors.

M J TelkoDivision of Molecular Pharmaceutics, Eshelman School of Pharmacy, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Chapel Hill, North Carolina, 27599-7571, USA, martin.telko@novartis.com.
A J Hickey

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The impact of formulation variables on aerodynamic and electrostatic properties of dry powder aerosol particles is of great importance to the development of efficient and reproducible inhaler products. Systematic evaluation requires a well-designed series of experiments using appropriate methods. A factorial experimental design was employed. In broad terms, the conditions considered were two drugs, albuterol and budesonide, in combination with different excipients, drug concentrations, delivered doses, and metering system (capsule composition) and sampled under different flow conditions using standard entrainment tubes. Samples were collected in an electrical low-pressure impactor, to evaluate distribution of electrostatic properties, and an Andersen eight-stage nonviable cascade impactor, to estimate aerodynamic particle size distribution, concurrently. The deposition studies allowed calculation of approximate per particle charge levels for drug. The results showed very high particle charge levels, often in the 1,000-10,000 of elementary charges per particle range, orders of magnitude higher than charge levels predicted by the Boltzmann charge distribution. The charge levels are considerably higher than had previously been estimated (200e per particle).

Indexed as

Administration, InhalationAdrenergic beta-2 Receptor AgonistsAerosolsAlbuterolBronchodilator AgentsBudesonideChemistry, PharmaceuticalDry Powder InhalersExcipientsGlucocorticoidsModels, StatisticalParticle SizePowdersStatic ElectricityTechnology, PharmaceuticalAdrenergic beta-2 Receptor AgonistsAerosolsAlbuterolBronchodilator AgentsBudesonideExcipientsGlucocorticoidsPowders

Identifiers

PMID24938617
PMCPMC4245432

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.