不管采用的系统类型为何,通过入院吸入适当的吸入技术

P. Haidl
{"title":"不管采用的系统类型为何,通过入院吸入适当的吸入技术","authors":"P. Haidl","doi":"10.1159/000527243","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"For optimal drug delivery, dry powder inhalers (DPIs) depend on the patient’s peak inspiratory flow (PIF) and the internal resistance of the device to create turbulent energy and disaggregate the powder. A suboptimal PIF may lead to ineffective drug inhalation into the lungs. Our objective was to report the prevalence of suboptimal PIF in patients with COPD hospitalized for any reason using 1 or more DPIs. In this real-world, observational, single-site, retrospective study, PIF was measured for each DPI using the In-Check™ DIAL set to match the resistance of the DPI used by each patient. PIFs <60 and <30L/min were considered suboptimal for low to medium-high- and high-resistance DPIs, respectively. At initial hospitalization, the prevalence of suboptimal PIF was 44.6% in 829 patients (mean age, 71.7 years; 56.8% female); 21.2% were measured during admission for a COPD exacerbation. Suboptimal PIF percentages were 61.0% (38.1±9.5L/min [mean±standard deviation]) across low to medium-high-resistance DPIs and 17.2% (20.7±4.2L/min) for high-resistance DPIs. Overall, 190/829 patients had 1 or more 30-day all-cause readmission with 253 corresponding PIF measurements. For readmissions, suboptimal PIFs were observed in49.5% (94/190) of patients. Suboptimal PIF percentages were 65.4% (38.4±9.2L/min) for low to medium-high-resistance DPIs and 19.8% (22.4±3.3L/min) for high-resistance DPIs. As the overall prevalence of suboptimal PIFs in hospitalized patients with COPD varied according to the specific internal resistance of the DPI, these findings may have clinical implications for inhaler selection.","PeriodicalId":402207,"journal":{"name":"Kompass Pneumologie","volume":"280 1 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2022-10-11","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Bei stationärer Aufnahme korrekte Inhalationstechnik prüfen – unabhängig von der Art des verwendeten Systems\",\"authors\":\"P. Haidl\",\"doi\":\"10.1159/000527243\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"For optimal drug delivery, dry powder inhalers (DPIs) depend on the patient’s peak inspiratory flow (PIF) and the internal resistance of the device to create turbulent energy and disaggregate the powder. A suboptimal PIF may lead to ineffective drug inhalation into the lungs. Our objective was to report the prevalence of suboptimal PIF in patients with COPD hospitalized for any reason using 1 or more DPIs. In this real-world, observational, single-site, retrospective study, PIF was measured for each DPI using the In-Check™ DIAL set to match the resistance of the DPI used by each patient. PIFs <60 and <30L/min were considered suboptimal for low to medium-high- and high-resistance DPIs, respectively. At initial hospitalization, the prevalence of suboptimal PIF was 44.6% in 829 patients (mean age, 71.7 years; 56.8% female); 21.2% were measured during admission for a COPD exacerbation. Suboptimal PIF percentages were 61.0% (38.1±9.5L/min [mean±standard deviation]) across low to medium-high-resistance DPIs and 17.2% (20.7±4.2L/min) for high-resistance DPIs. Overall, 190/829 patients had 1 or more 30-day all-cause readmission with 253 corresponding PIF measurements. For readmissions, suboptimal PIFs were observed in49.5% (94/190) of patients. Suboptimal PIF percentages were 65.4% (38.4±9.2L/min) for low to medium-high-resistance DPIs and 19.8% (22.4±3.3L/min) for high-resistance DPIs. As the overall prevalence of suboptimal PIFs in hospitalized patients with COPD varied according to the specific internal resistance of the DPI, these findings may have clinical implications for inhaler selection.\",\"PeriodicalId\":402207,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Kompass Pneumologie\",\"volume\":\"280 1 1\",\"pages\":\"0\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2022-10-11\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Kompass Pneumologie\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1159/000527243\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Kompass Pneumologie","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1159/000527243","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

为了获得最佳的药物输送,干粉吸入器(dpi)依赖于患者的峰值吸气流量(PIF)和设备的内阻来产生湍流能量并分解粉末。不理想的PIF可能导致药物吸入肺部无效。我们的目的是报告在任何原因住院的COPD患者中使用1个或多个dpi的亚理想PIF的患病率。在这项现实世界的、观察性的、单点的、回顾性研究中,使用In- check™DIAL装置测量每个DPI的PIF,以匹配每个患者使用的DPI的耐药性。pif <60和<30L/min分别被认为是低至中高阻和高阻dpi的次优值。初次住院时,829例患者中PIF次优发生率为44.6%(平均年龄71.7岁;56.8%女性);21.2%是因COPD加重入院时测量的。低至中高阻dpi的次优PIF百分比为61.0%(38.1±9.5L/min[平均±标准差]),高阻dpi的次优PIF百分比为17.2%(20.7±4.2L/min)。总的来说,190/829例患者有1次或更多的30天全因再入院,并有253例相应的PIF测量。再入院时,49.5%(94/190)患者的pif不理想。低至中高阻dpi的次优PIF百分比为65.4%(38.4±9.2L/min),高阻dpi的次优PIF百分比为19.8%(22.4±3.3L/min)。由于住院COPD患者pif不理想的总体患病率根据DPI的特定内阻而变化,这些发现可能对吸入器的选择具有临床意义。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Bei stationärer Aufnahme korrekte Inhalationstechnik prüfen – unabhängig von der Art des verwendeten Systems
For optimal drug delivery, dry powder inhalers (DPIs) depend on the patient’s peak inspiratory flow (PIF) and the internal resistance of the device to create turbulent energy and disaggregate the powder. A suboptimal PIF may lead to ineffective drug inhalation into the lungs. Our objective was to report the prevalence of suboptimal PIF in patients with COPD hospitalized for any reason using 1 or more DPIs. In this real-world, observational, single-site, retrospective study, PIF was measured for each DPI using the In-Check™ DIAL set to match the resistance of the DPI used by each patient. PIFs <60 and <30L/min were considered suboptimal for low to medium-high- and high-resistance DPIs, respectively. At initial hospitalization, the prevalence of suboptimal PIF was 44.6% in 829 patients (mean age, 71.7 years; 56.8% female); 21.2% were measured during admission for a COPD exacerbation. Suboptimal PIF percentages were 61.0% (38.1±9.5L/min [mean±standard deviation]) across low to medium-high-resistance DPIs and 17.2% (20.7±4.2L/min) for high-resistance DPIs. Overall, 190/829 patients had 1 or more 30-day all-cause readmission with 253 corresponding PIF measurements. For readmissions, suboptimal PIFs were observed in49.5% (94/190) of patients. Suboptimal PIF percentages were 65.4% (38.4±9.2L/min) for low to medium-high-resistance DPIs and 19.8% (22.4±3.3L/min) for high-resistance DPIs. As the overall prevalence of suboptimal PIFs in hospitalized patients with COPD varied according to the specific internal resistance of the DPI, these findings may have clinical implications for inhaler selection.
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
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
COPD, Bronchiektasen und neutrophile Inflammation: Den Einfluss von Atemwegsentzündungen, Infektionen und Rauchen bedenken ILD: Monozytenverhältnis als ergänzender Biomarker für die Prognose Besondere klinische Aspekte bei der Diagnostik und Behandlung der akuten Lungenembolie MPE beim mutierten NSCLC: Intrapleurale Applikation von Bevacizumab stellt effektive Therapie dar Weaning von invasiver Beatmung: Multiresistente Bakterien beeinflussen den Erfolg
×
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
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 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 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1