This laboratory study compared the performance of four different OPEP devices, each utilizing distinctly different mechanisms to generate oscillatory pressure.
Joignez-vous à Dr. Brian Grondin-Beaudoin, pneumologue, pour une discussion sur la MPOC, afin d'en savoir plus sur les nouvelles lignes directrices et découvri des stratégies pour aider vos patients à mieux respirer et ultimement, améliorer leur qualité de vie.
This study assessed people with COPD suffering with mucus hypersecretion, post exacerbation in Wales, UK, following treatment with a handheld, OPEP device or the ACBT breathing technique.
This laboratory and clinical overview demonstrates appreciable differences in pressure pulse waveforms for differing OPEP devices and then links these for the leading laboratory performing device into reported airway physiological changes and improved clinical outcomes.
New information regarding the efficiency and effectiveness of different oscillating positive expiratory pressure devices was presented at CHEST 2017 in Toronto, Canada.
Valved holding chambers are widely prescribed to assist patients receiving inhaled medications by avoiding losses caused by imperfect coordination of inhalation and actuation and also to reduce oropharyngeal deposition.
Regardless of whether using a solution based formulation (like Qvar) or a suspension formulation (Flovent), the use of a valved holding chamber reduced the amount of medication deposited in the mouth (oropharynx) and increased the potential for lung delivery
This study can be used to help demonstrate the value of using a valved holding chamber for both solution and suspension formulated metered dose inhalers and for all patient populations, including adults
Does Spacer/Adapter Device Choice Affect Delivery of a Pressurized Metered Dose Inhaler (pMDI) through a Humidified Circuit to a Simulated Patient on Mecha
COPD/chronic bronchitis patients given an Aerobika* OPEP device compared to an alternative OPEP device had delayed time to re-admission. This supports use of the Aerobika* OPEP device as an add-on to usual care post-exacerbation and highlights differences in OPEP device effectiveness.
COPD/chronic bronchitis patients given an Aerobika* OPEP device compared to an alternative OPEP device had delayed time to re-admission. This supports use of the Aerobika* OPEP device as an add-on to usual care post-exacerbation and highlights differences in OPEP device effectiveness.
Results from this study demonstrate a reduction in the proportion of patients requiring COPD/chronic bronchitis related readmission within 30 days and 12 months of the Aerobika® OPEP device therapy initiation compared to an alternative OPEP device.
This further supports the use of the Aerobika®OPEP device as an add-on to usual care to manage COPD/chronic bronchitis patients post-exacerbation and highlights that not all OPEP devices are the same in terms of 30-day and 12-month readmissions
The most efficient and effective delivery method remains that recommended in the device IFU (one actuation inhaled at a time, as well inhalation as soon as possible after actuation)
However, this laboratory-based study has indicated that a modified common-canister protocol with an anti-static VHC as the aerosol transfer vehicle has the potential to be a viable ‘off-label’ proposition in hospital situations where there is an urgent need to conserve pMDI medication as well as avoid cross-contamination from pathogenic viruses or bacteria
