Comparative performance study of paperboard disposable spacers versus commercial valved holding chambers for aerosol delivery

IF 5.3 2区医学 Q1 PHARMACOLOGY & PHARMACY

International Journal of Pharmaceutics Pub Date : 2024-09-28 DOI:10.1016/j.ijpharm.2024.124774

{"title":"Comparative performance study of paperboard disposable spacers versus commercial valved holding chambers for aerosol delivery","authors":"","doi":"10.1016/j.ijpharm.2024.124774","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><h3>Purpose</h3><div>The aim of this study is to evaluate and compare the performance, for the administration of fluticasone propionate with a pressurized metered-dose inhaler (pMDI), of two low-tech paperboard spacers versus two commercially available valved holding chambers (VHC).</div></div><div><h3>Methods</h3><div>According to the Canadian standard CAN/CSA-Z264.1–02, total emitted dose (TED) and aerodynamic size distribution were measured for the pMDI in combination with 4 different spacers: a homemade paper cup spacer, the DispozABLE® paperboard spacer, the AeroChamber Plus® plastic VHC, and the Vortex® aluminium VHC.</div></div><div><h3>Results</h3><div>The two disposable paperboard spacers had a lower TED compared to the aluminium VHC, but delivered more than 2.5 times the dose of fluticasone than the commercial plastic VHC. The 3 antistatic devices (<em>i.e.</em> the aluminium VHC, the paperboard DispozABLE® spacer and the paper cup spacer) delivered a significantly higher dose of fine particles than the less antistatic plastic VHC. Their fine particle fraction was statistically similar to that obtained with pMDI without spacer. This respirable fraction ensures an optimal therapeutic effect. All spacers limited the flow of coarse particles, thus avoiding adverse effects on the trachea and oropharynx.</div></div><div><h3>Conclusion</h3><div>We have shown that inexpensive and low-tech paperboard spacers are interesting alternatives for the administration of aerosols<em>.</em></div></div>","PeriodicalId":14187,"journal":{"name":"International Journal of Pharmaceutics","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":5.3000,"publicationDate":"2024-09-28","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"International Journal of Pharmaceutics","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0378517324010081","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"PHARMACOLOGY & PHARMACY","Score":null,"Total":0}

引用次数: 0

Abstract

Purpose

The aim of this study is to evaluate and compare the performance, for the administration of fluticasone propionate with a pressurized metered-dose inhaler (pMDI), of two low-tech paperboard spacers versus two commercially available valved holding chambers (VHC).

Methods

According to the Canadian standard CAN/CSA-Z264.1–02, total emitted dose (TED) and aerodynamic size distribution were measured for the pMDI in combination with 4 different spacers: a homemade paper cup spacer, the DispozABLE® paperboard spacer, the AeroChamber Plus® plastic VHC, and the Vortex® aluminium VHC.

Results

The two disposable paperboard spacers had a lower TED compared to the aluminium VHC, but delivered more than 2.5 times the dose of fluticasone than the commercial plastic VHC. The 3 antistatic devices (i.e. the aluminium VHC, the paperboard DispozABLE® spacer and the paper cup spacer) delivered a significantly higher dose of fine particles than the less antistatic plastic VHC. Their fine particle fraction was statistically similar to that obtained with pMDI without spacer. This respirable fraction ensures an optimal therapeutic effect. All spacers limited the flow of coarse particles, thus avoiding adverse effects on the trachea and oropharynx.

Conclusion

We have shown that inexpensive and low-tech paperboard spacers are interesting alternatives for the administration of aerosols.

查看原文本刊更多论文

用于气溶胶输送的纸板一次性间隔器与商用阀式保持室的性能比较研究。

目的：本研究旨在评估和比较两种技术含量较低的纸板垫片与两种市售阀式容纳腔（VHC）在使用加压计量吸入器（pMDI）吸入丙酸氟替卡松时的性能：根据加拿大标准 CAN/CSA-Z264.1-02，测量了 pMDI 与 4 种不同隔板（自制纸杯隔板、DispozABLE® 纸板隔板、AeroChamber Plus® 塑料 VHC 和 Vortex® 铝制 VHC）组合使用时的总发射剂量（TED）和气动尺寸分布：结果：与铝制 VHC 相比，两种一次性纸板间隔器的 TED 较低，但氟替卡松的剂量却是商用塑料 VHC 的 2.5 倍以上。三种抗静电装置（即铝制 VHC、纸板 DispozABLE® 隔板和纸杯隔板）的细颗粒剂量明显高于抗静电性较低的塑料 VHC。从统计学角度来看，它们的细颗粒分量与使用不带间隔器的 pMDI 得到的细颗粒分量相似。这种可吸入部分确保了最佳治疗效果。所有间隔器都限制了粗颗粒的流动，从而避免了对气管和口咽的不良影响：我们的研究表明，价格低廉、技术含量不高的纸板垫片是施用气溶胶的有趣替代品。

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

International Journal of Pharmaceutics 医学-药学

CiteScore

10.70

自引率

8.60%

发文量

951

审稿时长

72 days

期刊介绍： The International Journal of Pharmaceutics is the third most cited journal in the "Pharmacy & Pharmacology" category out of 366 journals, being the true home for pharmaceutical scientists concerned with the physical, chemical and biological properties of devices and delivery systems for drugs, vaccines and biologicals, including their design, manufacture and evaluation. This includes evaluation of the properties of drugs, excipients such as surfactants and polymers and novel materials. The journal has special sections on pharmaceutical nanotechnology and personalized medicines, and publishes research papers, reviews, commentaries and letters to the editor as well as special issues.