Idris A H, McDermott M F, Raucci J C, Morrabel A, McGorray S, Hendeles L
University of Florida College of Medicine, Gainesville.
Chest. 1993 Mar;103(3):665-72. doi: 10.1378/chest.103.3.665.
To compare the effectiveness of administration of albuterol by nebulizer or by a metered-dose inhaler having a holding chamber attachment (hereafter "inhaler") for treatment of acute asthma in an emergency department (ED).
A randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled intervention study conducted at two sites.
The EDs of a large municipal hospital and a university teaching hospital.
Thirty-five patients 10 to 45 years of age seeking treatment at an ED for acute asthma.
Patients were randomly assigned to receive either albuterol by nebulizer plus placebo by inhaler (n = 20) or albuterol by inhaler plus placebo by nebulizer (n = 15). The dose was repeated every 30 min until the FEV1 was at least 80 percent of predicted, the patient became asymptomatic, or 6 doses had been given.
All references in this article to spirometric measurements of forced expiratory volume in 1 s (FEV1), forced vital capacity (FVC), and peak expiratory flow rate (PEFR) represent percentages of the predicted normal value. No significant (p > 0.58) differences occurred in baseline mean FEV1, FVC, or PEFR for the two groups. For both groups, significant improvement occurred in mean FEV1 at 30 min (p < 0.02) and at 60 min (p < 0.02), and in maximum mean FEV1 (p < 0.001). However, no significant (p > 0.6) differences occurred between groups in mean FEV1, FVC, or PEFR at 30 and 60 min, or in maximum improvement attained. The sample size was sufficiently large to detect a 12 percent difference in improvement with a power of 90 percent. Thirty-three of 35 patients were treated successfully with the study protocol, became asymptomatic, and were discharged home. One patient from each group required further treatment.
There was no detectable difference in effectiveness of albuterol administered by nebulizer or the inhaler system for treatment of acute asthma. There was no detectable difference in effectiveness of albuterol administered by nebulizer or the inhaler system for the treatment of acute asthma when the dose was titrated to clinical response. When compared with nebulizer, the metered-dose inhaler with holding chamber delivers a full dose of albuterol more quickly and at no higher cost.
比较在急诊科(ED)使用雾化器或带有储雾罐的定量吸入器(以下简称“吸入器”)给予沙丁胺醇治疗急性哮喘的效果。
在两个地点进行的一项随机、双盲、安慰剂对照干预研究。
一家大型市立医院和一所大学教学医院的急诊科。
35名年龄在10至45岁之间因急性哮喘到急诊科就诊的患者。
患者被随机分配接受雾化器吸入沙丁胺醇加吸入器吸入安慰剂(n = 20)或吸入器吸入沙丁胺醇加雾化器吸入安慰剂(n = 15)。每30分钟重复给药一次,直至第1秒用力呼气量(FEV1)至少达到预测值的80%,患者无症状,或已给药6次。
本文中所有关于1秒用力呼气量(FEV1)、用力肺活量(FVC)和呼气峰值流速(PEFR)的肺量计测量值均表示为预测正常值的百分比。两组的基线平均FEV1、FVC或PEFR无显著差异(p > 0.58)。两组在30分钟(p < 0.02)和60分钟(p < 0.02)时平均FEV1以及最大平均FEV1均有显著改善(p < 0.001)。然而,两组在30分钟和60分钟时的平均FEV1、FVC或PEFR以及最大改善程度均无显著差异(p > 0.6)。样本量足够大,能够以90%的检验效能检测出12%的改善差异。35名患者中有33名按照研究方案成功接受治疗,无症状并出院回家。每组各有1名患者需要进一步治疗。
雾化器给药与吸入器系统给药治疗急性哮喘在疗效上无明显差异。当根据临床反应调整剂量时,雾化器给药与吸入器系统给药治疗急性哮喘在疗效上无明显差异。与雾化器相比,带有储雾罐的定量吸入器能更快地输送全剂量沙丁胺醇,且成本不更高。