...
首页> 外文期刊>Frontiers in Pediatrics >A Novel, Portable MESH Nebulizer—An Alternative to Metered Dose Inhaler: Efficacy and Usability in Preschool Wheezers
【24h】

A Novel, Portable MESH Nebulizer—An Alternative to Metered Dose Inhaler: Efficacy and Usability in Preschool Wheezers

机译:一种新颖的,便携的网状雾化器 - 计量剂量吸入器的替代方案:幼儿园喘息的功效和可用性

获取原文
           

摘要

Introduction and Objectives: Wheezing episodes are the first causes of doctor’s consultation in pre-school age. Treatment is usually administered with a MDI spacer. At variance, many parents and doctors prefer to use a compressor nebulizer which cannot be easily carried. The study is aimed at testing whether a pocket Mesh nebulizer has similar efficacy and acceptability than a standard MDI device. Materials and Methods: The IPAC study was a randomized, controlled, non-inferiority trial (number: 1616/2018, Ospedale Pediatrico Bambino Gesu' – IRCCS). The study had two arms: cases, using MicroAIR U100, and controls, using MDI+spacer device. Both devices were adopted for long term treatment and for exacerbations. Follow up was organized with clinical visits and a daily e-diary connected to an application for mobile phone. Results: 105 patients were enrolled. The frequency of asthmatic symptoms showed a non-inferiority for MicroAIR U100 group versus MDI. Accordingly, no significant difference was found in the average % of days with cough, wheezing, breathlessness after exercise, days lost at school and not-programmed visits. Considering only patients with &1 day with symptoms, no significant differences were found in the number of exacerbations nor in the cumulative days with symptoms. The acceptance and usability of both devices has been favourable. However, MDI+AeroChamber® device showed better acceptability. Conclusions: Our study shows that MicroAIR U-100, a MESH nebulizer, has similar clinical efficacy but lower acceptance and usability than an MDI plus Aerochamber® in delivering therapy in preschool wheezers. Therefore, MicroAIR U-100 might be a valuable second choice, when the delivery of medication with an MDI plus Aerochamber® is not accepted, or wrongly used by the parents.
机译:介绍和目标:喘息的剧集是医生在学前班前的第一个原因。治疗通常用MDI间隔物施用。在方差,许多父母和医生更喜欢使用不容易携带的压缩机雾化器。该研究旨在测试口袋网雾化器是否具有比标准MDI器件具有相似的功效和可接受性。材料和方法:IPAC研究是随机,受控,非劣势试验(数字:1616/2018,OSPEDALE Pediastrico Bambino Gesu' - IRCC)。该研究有两个臂:案例,使用MicroAir U100和控制,使用MDI +间隔装置。两种装置都采用长期治疗和加剧。随访,组织了临床访问以及连接到手机申请的日常电子日记。结果:注册了105名患者。哮喘症状的频率显示出微量U100组对MDI的非劣效性。因此,在咳嗽,运动后的咳嗽,喘息,呼吸困难的速度的平均每天没有显着差异,日子在学校和未编程的访问中丢失。仅考虑患有患者的患者,症状1天,在恶化的情况下没有显着差异,也没有患有症状的累积日。两个设备的接受和可用性都是有利的。但是,MDI +Aerochamber®设备显示出更好的可接受性。结论:我们的研究表明,MicroAir U-100是一种网状雾化器,具有相似的临床疗效,但比MDI加Aerochamber®在幼儿园喘息的疗法中较低,可用性降低。因此,微空气U-100可能是一个有价值的第二选择,当父母不接受用MDI PlusAerochamber®的药物递送或错误地使用。

著录项

获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号