Assessing the effectiveness of inhalation therapy in patients with chronic airway diseases: A new digital measurement

IF 2.2 4区 医学 Q3 RESPIRATORY SYSTEM
Yongyi Peng , Shubing Chen , Zhongping Wu , Junfeng Lin, Jinhai Huang, Xuedong Lei, Peitao Ye, Jinping Zheng, Yi Gao
{"title":"Assessing the effectiveness of inhalation therapy in patients with chronic airway diseases: A new digital measurement","authors":"Yongyi Peng ,&nbsp;Shubing Chen ,&nbsp;Zhongping Wu ,&nbsp;Junfeng Lin,&nbsp;Jinhai Huang,&nbsp;Xuedong Lei,&nbsp;Peitao Ye,&nbsp;Jinping Zheng,&nbsp;Yi Gao","doi":"10.1016/j.resmer.2024.101095","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><h3>Background</h3><p>This study aimed to evaluate the effectiveness of inhalation therapy in patients with chronic airway diseases via the use of a new multiparametric inhalation assessment device.</p></div><div><h3>Methods</h3><p>A multiparametric inhalation evaluation device (PF810, UBREATH, Zhejiang, China) that could simulate common inhalation devices with 6 different levels (0-V) of resistance was used in this study. The device was considered suitable if the three parameters of peak inspiratory flow rate (PIFR), effective inspiratory time (EIT), and breath-hold time (BHT) after inspiration met the minimum requirements.</p></div><div><h3>Results</h3><p>A total of 4,559 tests were performed. The qualification rates of 0-V resistance gear from low to high were 3.38 % (I), 8.42 % (0), 15.31 % (II), 16.71 % (III), 20.27 % (IV), and 46.91 % (V). The COPD patients in the 3 experimental groups had the lowest percentages of isolates classified as resistant 0, III, and V, which were 5.65 %, 11.93 %, and 40.43 %, respectively. The lowest percentage was 39.67 % (V) for insufficient EIT and 18.40 % (V) for BHT less than 5 s after inspiration. The results of 149 subjects who had used the inhalation device showed that the VIE and EIT at 0 levels were significantly greater than those before training (<em>Z</em>= -5.651, -5.646, <em>P</em> &lt; 0.001). The VIE and EIT at I-III and V significantly increased after training (all <em>P</em> &lt; 0.05).</p></div><div><h3>Conclusions</h3><p>Patients using portable inhaler devices do not always inhale with adequate flow patterns. The multiparametric inhalation assessment device may be useful in outpatient settings.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":48479,"journal":{"name":"Respiratory Medicine and Research","volume":"86 ","pages":"Article 101095"},"PeriodicalIF":2.2000,"publicationDate":"2024-03-04","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Respiratory Medicine and Research","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2590041224000126","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"RESPIRATORY SYSTEM","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background

This study aimed to evaluate the effectiveness of inhalation therapy in patients with chronic airway diseases via the use of a new multiparametric inhalation assessment device.

Methods

A multiparametric inhalation evaluation device (PF810, UBREATH, Zhejiang, China) that could simulate common inhalation devices with 6 different levels (0-V) of resistance was used in this study. The device was considered suitable if the three parameters of peak inspiratory flow rate (PIFR), effective inspiratory time (EIT), and breath-hold time (BHT) after inspiration met the minimum requirements.

Results

A total of 4,559 tests were performed. The qualification rates of 0-V resistance gear from low to high were 3.38 % (I), 8.42 % (0), 15.31 % (II), 16.71 % (III), 20.27 % (IV), and 46.91 % (V). The COPD patients in the 3 experimental groups had the lowest percentages of isolates classified as resistant 0, III, and V, which were 5.65 %, 11.93 %, and 40.43 %, respectively. The lowest percentage was 39.67 % (V) for insufficient EIT and 18.40 % (V) for BHT less than 5 s after inspiration. The results of 149 subjects who had used the inhalation device showed that the VIE and EIT at 0 levels were significantly greater than those before training (Z= -5.651, -5.646, P < 0.001). The VIE and EIT at I-III and V significantly increased after training (all P < 0.05).

Conclusions

Patients using portable inhaler devices do not always inhale with adequate flow patterns. The multiparametric inhalation assessment device may be useful in outpatient settings.

评估慢性气道疾病患者的吸入疗法效果:一种新的数字测量方法
背景 本研究旨在通过使用一种新型多参数吸入评估装置来评估慢性气道疾病患者的吸入治疗效果。方法 本研究使用了一种多参数吸入评估装置(PF810,UBREATH,中国浙江),该装置可模拟具有 6 种不同阻力水平(0-V)的普通吸入装置。如果吸气峰值流速(PIFR)、有效吸气时间(EIT)和吸气后屏气时间(BHT)这三个参数达到最低要求,则认为该装置是合适的。0-V 阻力档的合格率从低到高分别为 3.38 %(I)、8.42 %(0)、15.31 %(II)、16.71 %(III)、20.27 %(IV)和 46.91 %(V)。在 3 个实验组中,慢性阻塞性肺病患者的分离物被归类为耐药性 0、III 和 V 的比例最低,分别为 5.65 %、11.93 % 和 40.43 %。吸气后 5 秒内吸入不足 EIT 和 BHT 的最低百分比分别为 39.67 %(V)和 18.40 %(V)。149 名使用过吸气装置的受试者的结果显示,0 水平时的 VIE 和 EIT 显著高于训练前(Z= -5.651,-5.646,P <0.001)。结论使用便携式吸入器的患者并非总能以适当的流量模式吸入。多参数吸入评估装置在门诊环境中可能很有用。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Respiratory Medicine and Research
Respiratory Medicine and Research RESPIRATORY SYSTEM-
CiteScore
2.70
自引率
0.00%
发文量
82
审稿时长
50 days
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信