Chest ACCP Education Calendar
HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
QUICK SEARCH:   [advanced]


     

Guest Access | Sign In via User Name/Password
This Article
Right arrow Full Text (PDF) Free
Right arrow Submit a response
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me when eLetters are posted
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to My Personal Article Archive
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrow reprints & permissions
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via HighWire
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Chapman, K.
Right arrow Articles by Brubaker, H
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow Articles by Chapman, K.
Right arrow Articles by Brubaker, H

Chest, Vol 104, 1332-1337, Copyright © 1993 by American College of Chest Physicians

ARTICLES

A comparison of breath-actuated and conventional metered-dose inhaler inhalation techniques in elderly subjects

KR Chapman, L Love and H Brubaker
Asthma Centre, Toronto Hospital, Ontario, Canada.

BACKGROUND: Poor coordination of canister actuation and inspiration often prevents adequate metered-dose inhaler (MDI) usage by patients, perhaps especially so among the elderly. Breath-actuated inhalers (BAI) have been developed to prevent this problem. METHODS: We compared the adequacy of inhaler technique and patient preferences between MDI and BAI in a group of elderly subjects (mean age, 70.8 +/- 5.4 years). Half of the subjects were regular MDI users; half had never before used one. Two trained observers assessed the adequacy of MDI and BAI usage subjectively while performance was monitored objectively using a light source and infrared system to detect canister actuation and a spirometer to measure the inspiratory volume. If canister actuation was not followed by at least a 50 percent vital capacity, inhaler use was deemed unsuccessful. A brief teaching session preceded inhaler usage. RESULTS: By subjective assessment, BAI was used successfully more often than MDI (79 vs 60 percent, p < 0.05). By objective assessment, BAI was used successfully more often than MDI (64 vs 36 percent, p < 0.0005), although the percentage of inhalations scored adequate was lower than when assessment was subjective. Neither device was used correctly as often by those unfamiliar with MDIs as by those who were regular users. A significantly higher percentage of patients preferred BAI to MDI (71 vs 19 percent, p < 0.005), similar preferences being reported by MDI familiar and MDI unfamiliar groups. CONCLUSIONS: We conclude that (1) elderly subjects frequently handle inhalers poorly, (2) mishandling is better detected by objective than subjective monitoring, and (3) BAI is used correctly and preferred by patients more often than conventional MDIs.


This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
 ERRHome page
K. R. Chapman, T. H. Voshaar, and J. C. Virchow
Inhaler choice in primary practice
Eur. Respir. Rev., December 1, 2005; 14(96): 117 - 122.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 ThoraxHome page
M. L EVERARD
CFC transition: the Emperor's new clothes. Each class of drug deserves a delivery system that meets its own requirements
Thorax, October 1, 2000; 55(10): 811 - 814.
[Full Text]


HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
Copyright © 1993 by the American College of Chest Physicians.