College of Health Professions
Permanent URI for this collectionhttps://hdl.handle.net/10877/17051
Browse
Browsing College of Health Professions by Subject "aerosols"
Now showing 1 - 2 of 2
Results Per Page
Sort Options
Item How to optimize aerosol drug delivery during noninvasive ventilation: What to use, how to use it, and why?(Turkish Respiratory Society, 2019-04) Ari, ArzuMuch evidence supports the use of non-invasive ventilation (NIV) in patients who have acute and chronic respiratory failure and aerosolized medications are increasingly used in this patient population. Successful application of aerosol therapy during NIV depends on the effectiveness of the drug deposition in the lungs. Previous evidence showed that many factors impact aerosol delivery to patients receiving NIV. Those factors include mode of ventilation, ventilator parameters, type of ventilator circuit, the position of the aerosol device, the location of leak port, type of exhalation valve, humidity, enhanced condensational growth, type of aerosol device, and interface as well as delivery technique. The purpose of this paper is to review the available evidence related to aerosol therapy during NIV and provide recommendations to optimize aerosol drug delivery to patients receiving NIV.Item Quantifying Delivered Dose with Jet and Mesh Nebulizers during Spontaneous Breathing, Noninvasive Ventilation, and Mechanical Ventilation in a Simulated Pediatric Lung Model with Exhaled Humidity(Multidisciplinary Digital Publishing Institute, 2021-07) Ari, Arzu; Fink, James B.Acutely ill children may transition between spontaneous breathing (SB), noninvasive ventilation (NIV), and mechanical ventilation (MV), and commonly receive the same drug dosage with each type of ventilatory support and interface. This study aims to determine the aerosol deposition with jet (JN) and mesh nebulizers (MN) during SB, NIV, and MV using a pediatric lung model. Drug delivery with JN (Mistymax10) and MN (Aerogen Solo) was compared during SB, NIV, and MV using three different lung models set to simulate the same breathing parameters (Vt 250 mL, RR 20 bpm, I:E ratio 1:3). A heated humidifier was placed between the filter and test lung to simulate exhaled humidity (35 ± 2 °C, 100% RH) with all lung models. Albuterol sulfate (2.5 mg/3 mL) was delivered, and the drug deposited on an absolute filter was eluted and analyzed with spectrophotometry. Aerosol delivery with JN was not significantly different during MV, NIV, and SB (p = 0.075), while inhaled dose obtained with MN during MV was greater than NIV and SB (p = 0.001). The delivery efficiency of MN was up to 3-fold more than JN during MV (p = 0.008), NIV (p = 0.005), and SB (p = 0.009). Delivered dose with JN was similar during MV, NIV, and SB, although the delivery efficiency of MN differs with different modes of ventilation.