Kisch G L, Paloucek F P
Butler University, Indianapolis, IN.
Ann Pharmacother. 1992 Jan;26(1):92-5. doi: 10.1177/106002809202600116.
This article evaluates the current literature comparing beta-adrenergic agonists administered via metered-dose inhalers (MDIs) with nebulizer devices in adult and pediatric patients. These studies focus on the acute treatment of asthma or chronic obstructive pulmonary disease in the emergency department and other acute care settings.
English-language journal articles published between 1980 and 1991.
Eight studies that compared beta-adrenergic agonists administered via an MDI or an MDI with a spacing device versus a nebulizer were identified. All of the studies were either poorly designed or had few subjects. By consensus of the authors, all were included in the review.
Studies were assessed according to methodologic strength (e.g., prospective, comparative).
Five studies found no differences between administration methods, one study found metered-dose inhalation to be superior, and another found nebulization to be superior based on observed improvements in pulmonary function tests. There were no significant differences in adverse-reaction rates. When surveyed, subjects preferred MDIs to nebulizers. There were marked variations in doses administered within and between studies. There was no consideration given to doses potentially delivered to the lungs.
There is no significant difference between nebulizers and MDIs plus a spacer with regard to the administration of beta-agonists in the treatment of acute asthma. There are insufficient data to conclusively support the role of spacers in this setting. The choice of a specific delivery method at this time must be determined on an individual basis, taking into account the issues of cost, timeliness of administration, and personnel availability.
本文评估了目前比较定量吸入器(MDIs)与雾化器装置在成人和儿童患者中使用β-肾上腺素能激动剂的文献。这些研究聚焦于急诊科及其他急性护理环境中哮喘或慢性阻塞性肺疾病的急性治疗。
1980年至1991年间发表的英文期刊文章。
确定了八项比较通过MDI或带储雾罐的MDI与雾化器使用β-肾上腺素能激动剂的研究。所有研究设计均不佳或受试者较少。经作者一致同意,所有研究均纳入综述。
根据方法学强度(如前瞻性、对比性)对研究进行评估。
五项研究发现给药方法之间无差异,一项研究发现定量吸入给药更优,另一项研究基于肺功能测试观察到的改善发现雾化给药更优。不良反应发生率无显著差异。调查时,受试者更喜欢MDIs而非雾化器。研究内部和研究之间给药剂量存在显著差异。未考虑潜在输送至肺部的剂量。
在急性哮喘治疗中,雾化器与带储雾罐的MDIs在使用β-激动剂给药方面无显著差异。尚无足够数据确凿支持储雾罐在此情况下的作用。此时特定给药方法的选择必须根据个体情况确定,同时考虑成本、给药及时性和人员可用性等问题。