两种吸入技术在儿童哮喘中使用带带阀保持室的加压计量吸入器的比较疗效:一项随机对照试验。

IF 2 4区 医学 Q3 RESPIRATORY SYSTEM
Rashmi Ranjan Das, Amit Kumar Satapathy, Manoj Kumar Panigrahi
{"title":"两种吸入技术在儿童哮喘中使用带带阀保持室的加压计量吸入器的比较疗效:一项随机对照试验。","authors":"Rashmi Ranjan Das, Amit Kumar Satapathy, Manoj Kumar Panigrahi","doi":"10.1177/19412711251360981","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p><b><i>Introduction:</i></b> Inhaled medication delivered through a pressurized metered dose inhaler (pMDI) with a valved holding chamber (VHC) is the optimal treatment for asthma. The best technique is the breath-holding (BH) technique. Tidal breathing (TB) technique is also recommended by Global Initiative for Asthma (GINA) as an alternative. Clinical studies have shown variable results, but the scintigraphy study shows better lung deposition with the BH technique. The present study was designed to address the shortcomings in previous studies and to confirm the scintigraphy study findings by comparing the two techniques. <b><i>Methods:</i></b> This randomized controlled trial included children aged 5-14 years with nonsevere asthma not taking inhaled medications on entry to the study, but during the study, they were given inhaled medications by pMDI + VHC (according to GINA guidelines) over an 8-week period. Demography, clinical details, spirometry parameters, and asthma control were recorded/assessed. The primary outcome was change in spirometry parameters at 2 and 8 weeks. <b><i>Results:</i></b> Eighty-two children (mean age: 8.64 years, 46 boys) were included. There was no intergroup difference in the spirometry parameters and asthma control scores at any point in time (<i>p</i> > 0.05). A significant intragroup improvement was noted only for forced expiratory volume in the first second at 8 weeks (<i>p</i> < 0.05). Similarly, a significant intragroup improvement in asthma control score was noted at 8 weeks (<i>p</i> < 0.05). No adverse event was noted in either of the groups. <b><i>Conclusions:</i></b> The present study found no difference between the BH and the TB techniques while delivering aerosols through a pMDI with a VHC. Either the BH or the TB technique may be used in children (5-14 years) with nonsevere asthma. <b><i>Clinical trial registration number:</i></b> CTRI/2020/12/030078.</p>","PeriodicalId":14940,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Aerosol Medicine and Pulmonary Drug Delivery","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.0000,"publicationDate":"2025-07-15","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Comparative Efficacy of Two Inhalational Techniques when Using a Pressurized Meter Dose Inhaler with Valved Holding Chamber in Children with Asthma: A Randomized Controlled Trial.\",\"authors\":\"Rashmi Ranjan Das, Amit Kumar Satapathy, Manoj Kumar Panigrahi\",\"doi\":\"10.1177/19412711251360981\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p><b><i>Introduction:</i></b> Inhaled medication delivered through a pressurized metered dose inhaler (pMDI) with a valved holding chamber (VHC) is the optimal treatment for asthma. The best technique is the breath-holding (BH) technique. Tidal breathing (TB) technique is also recommended by Global Initiative for Asthma (GINA) as an alternative. Clinical studies have shown variable results, but the scintigraphy study shows better lung deposition with the BH technique. The present study was designed to address the shortcomings in previous studies and to confirm the scintigraphy study findings by comparing the two techniques. <b><i>Methods:</i></b> This randomized controlled trial included children aged 5-14 years with nonsevere asthma not taking inhaled medications on entry to the study, but during the study, they were given inhaled medications by pMDI + VHC (according to GINA guidelines) over an 8-week period. Demography, clinical details, spirometry parameters, and asthma control were recorded/assessed. The primary outcome was change in spirometry parameters at 2 and 8 weeks. <b><i>Results:</i></b> Eighty-two children (mean age: 8.64 years, 46 boys) were included. There was no intergroup difference in the spirometry parameters and asthma control scores at any point in time (<i>p</i> > 0.05). A significant intragroup improvement was noted only for forced expiratory volume in the first second at 8 weeks (<i>p</i> < 0.05). Similarly, a significant intragroup improvement in asthma control score was noted at 8 weeks (<i>p</i> < 0.05). No adverse event was noted in either of the groups. <b><i>Conclusions:</i></b> The present study found no difference between the BH and the TB techniques while delivering aerosols through a pMDI with a VHC. Either the BH or the TB technique may be used in children (5-14 years) with nonsevere asthma. <b><i>Clinical trial registration number:</i></b> CTRI/2020/12/030078.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":14940,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Aerosol Medicine and Pulmonary Drug Delivery\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-07-15\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Aerosol Medicine and Pulmonary Drug Delivery\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1177/19412711251360981\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"RESPIRATORY SYSTEM\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Aerosol Medicine and Pulmonary Drug Delivery","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/19412711251360981","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

摘要

简介:通过带带阀保持室(VHC)的加压计量吸入器(pMDI)输送吸入药物是哮喘的最佳治疗方法。最好的技术是屏气技术。潮汐呼吸(TB)技术也被全球哮喘倡议(GINA)推荐作为一种替代方法。临床研究显示了不同的结果,但闪烁成像研究显示BH技术更好的肺沉积。本研究旨在弥补以往研究的不足,并通过比较两种技术来证实闪烁成像研究的结果。方法:这项随机对照试验纳入了5-14岁的非严重哮喘儿童,他们在进入研究时没有服用吸入药物,但在研究期间,他们被给予pMDI + VHC吸入药物(根据GINA指南),为期8周。记录/评估人口统计学、临床细节、肺活量测定参数和哮喘控制情况。主要终点是2周和8周肺活量测定参数的变化。结果:共纳入82例患儿,平均年龄8.64岁,其中男孩46例。两组肺量测定指标及哮喘控制评分各时间点组间差异无统计学意义(p < 0.05)。8周时,只有第1秒用力呼气量组内显著改善(p < 0.05)。同样,8周时哮喘控制评分组内显著改善(p < 0.05)。两组均未发现不良事件。结论:目前的研究发现,在通过带有VHC的pMDI输送气溶胶时,BH和TB技术之间没有差异。无论是BH还是TB技术都可用于患有非严重哮喘的儿童(5-14岁)。临床试验注册号:CTRI/2020/12/030078。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Comparative Efficacy of Two Inhalational Techniques when Using a Pressurized Meter Dose Inhaler with Valved Holding Chamber in Children with Asthma: A Randomized Controlled Trial.

Introduction: Inhaled medication delivered through a pressurized metered dose inhaler (pMDI) with a valved holding chamber (VHC) is the optimal treatment for asthma. The best technique is the breath-holding (BH) technique. Tidal breathing (TB) technique is also recommended by Global Initiative for Asthma (GINA) as an alternative. Clinical studies have shown variable results, but the scintigraphy study shows better lung deposition with the BH technique. The present study was designed to address the shortcomings in previous studies and to confirm the scintigraphy study findings by comparing the two techniques. Methods: This randomized controlled trial included children aged 5-14 years with nonsevere asthma not taking inhaled medications on entry to the study, but during the study, they were given inhaled medications by pMDI + VHC (according to GINA guidelines) over an 8-week period. Demography, clinical details, spirometry parameters, and asthma control were recorded/assessed. The primary outcome was change in spirometry parameters at 2 and 8 weeks. Results: Eighty-two children (mean age: 8.64 years, 46 boys) were included. There was no intergroup difference in the spirometry parameters and asthma control scores at any point in time (p > 0.05). A significant intragroup improvement was noted only for forced expiratory volume in the first second at 8 weeks (p < 0.05). Similarly, a significant intragroup improvement in asthma control score was noted at 8 weeks (p < 0.05). No adverse event was noted in either of the groups. Conclusions: The present study found no difference between the BH and the TB techniques while delivering aerosols through a pMDI with a VHC. Either the BH or the TB technique may be used in children (5-14 years) with nonsevere asthma. Clinical trial registration number: CTRI/2020/12/030078.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
6.70
自引率
2.90%
发文量
34
审稿时长
>12 weeks
期刊介绍: Journal of Aerosol Medicine and Pulmonary Drug Delivery is the only peer-reviewed journal delivering innovative, authoritative coverage of the health effects of inhaled aerosols and delivery of drugs through the pulmonary system. The Journal is a forum for leading experts, addressing novel topics such as aerosolized chemotherapy, aerosolized vaccines, methods to determine toxicities, and delivery of aerosolized drugs in the intubated patient. Journal of Aerosol Medicine and Pulmonary Drug Delivery coverage includes: Pulmonary drug delivery Airway reactivity and asthma treatment Inhalation of particles and gases in the respiratory tract Toxic effects of inhaled agents Aerosols as tools for studying basic physiologic phenomena.
×
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:604180095
Book学术官方微信