Trial reportBritish journal of clinical pharmacology1998
Early lung absorption profile of non-CFC salbutamol via small and large volume plastic spacer devices.
Trial report in British journal of clinical pharmacology, 1998. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.
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
3 citing papers in PubMed, 41 citations in OpenAlex.
- Pharmacokinetics and systemic beta2-adrenoceptor-mediated responses to inhaled salbutamol.British journal of clinical pharmacology · 2001Trial
- Randomised controlled study of clinical efficacy of spacer therapy in asthma with regard to electrostatic charge.Archives of disease in childhood · 2001Trial
- The Bioavailability of Salbutamol in Urine via Volumatic and Nonvolumatic Valved Holding Chambers.The World Allergy Organization journal · 2011Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
aimsTo evaluate the lung dose of a non-CFC salbutamol metered dose inhaler (MDI) formulation via three commonly used plastic spacer devices, of both large and small volume, compared with the MDI used on its own.
methodsTen healthy volunteers were studied in a randomized single (investigator) blind crossover design. Single 1200 microg nominal doses of salbutamol from a non-CFC MDI (Airomir), as 12 sequential 100 microg puffs over 6 min, were delivered from the MDI alone and via two large volume spacer devices (Nebuhaler, Volumatic), and a small volume spacer (Aerochamber). All spacers were prewashed prior to each study day and mouth rinsing was performed after each drug sequence. Plasma salbutamol was measured at 5, 10, 15 and 20 min, with calculation of maximum (Cmax) and average (Cav) concentrations. This lung dose was assessed using the early lung absorption profile of salbutamol in the first 20 min after inhalation.
resultsBoth of the large volume spacers, the Nebuhaler and the Volumatic, delivered significantly more salbutamol than the MDI alone. For Cav this amounted to a 2.07-fold difference (95% CI 1.48-2.90) between Nebuhaler vs MDI, and a 1.49-fold difference (95%CI 1.19-1.87) between Volumatic vs MDI. The Nebuhaler also produced greater deposition than either the Volumatic or the Aerochamber spacers; Nebuhaler vs Volumatic: 1.39-fold difference (95% CI 1.09-1.76), Nebuhaler vs Aerochamber: 1.63-fold difference (95% CI 1.20-2.21). There were no significant differences between the Aerochamber and the MDI alone.
conclusionsUsing the early lung absorption profile, for administration of the same nominal dose, both of the large volume spacers (Nebuhaler and Volumatic) but not the small volume spacer (Aerochamber) delivered significantly more salbutamol than the MDI alone. The Nebuhaler also produced greater delivery than either the Volumatic or the Aerochamber spacer devices. Our results show that whilst lung delivery of non-CFC salbutamol MDI is improved by the use of a plastic spacer, there may be appreciable differences in performance, particularly between large and small volume devices.
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.