Efficacy of a home-made spacer with acute exacerbation of bronchial asthma: a randomized controlled trial. Home-made spacers for bronchodilator therapy in children with acute asthma: a randomised trial. Comparative efficiency of commercial and improvised spacer device in acute bronchial asthma. Randomised controlled trial of the efficacy of a metered dose inhaler with bottle spacer for bronchodilator treatment in acute lower airway obstruction. [Different inhaler devices in acute asthma attacks: a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled study].
Metered dose inhaler (MDI) with spacer is the preferred method for administration of aerosolized medications in pediatric asthma. The expense of commercial spacers limits their use and indigenous alternatives have therefore been developed. Information on the clinical efficacy of home-made spacers is limited. This study was conducted to compare the efficacy of a valve-less home-made spacer with a commercial spacer in delivering salbutamol via MDI in acute asthma. Asthmatic children aged 5-15 years who presented with an acute exacerbation to the pediatric chest clinic of a tertiary care hospital were enrolled in a single blinded randomized parallel group study. The study patients received 10 puffs of salbutamol (100 microg/puff) via MDI-home-made spacer or MDI-commercial spacer. Pre and post inhalation measurements of peak expiratory flow rate (PEFR), oxygen saturation (SaO2), respiratory rate (RR), pulse rate (PR) were made and compared. Sixty children were enrolled in the study, 31 were administered salbutamol via the home-made spacer and 29 via the commercial spacer. The median increase in PEFR was similar in both the groups (20.8% vs 22.2%, p=0.4), clinical improvement being satisfactory in all patients. The valve-less home-made spacer is equally efficacious and cheaper than the commercial spacer in administering bronchodilators in acute exacerbations of asthma. Further studies on the efficacy of home-made spacer in delivery of inhaled steroids are needed. A metered-dose inhaler (MDI) with spacer is the best way to deliver bronchodilator therapy for treatment of acute asthma. In developing countries, commercially produced spacers are generally unavailable or too costly. We tested the efficacy of home-made spacers (500 mL plastic bottle, polystyrene cup) compared with a conventional spacer for delivery of a beta2 agonist via MDI for children with acute asthma.
                We studied children aged 5 to 13 years with acute asthma, stratified into those with mild airways obstruction (peak expiratory flow [PEF] 60-79% of predicted value) or moderate to severe airways obstruction (PEF 20-59% of predicted value). A beta2 agonist (fenoterol hydrobromide) was given via MDI and one of four randomly assigned spacers (conventional spacer, sealed 500 mL plastic bottle, unsealed 500 mL bottle, 200 mL polystyrene cup). Clinical score, pulmonary function tests, and oximetry were recorded at baseline and 15 min after treatment. If a second bronchodilator treatment was needed, nebulised fenoterol was given and the assessment repeated 15 min later. Primary outcome measures were changes in clinical score and pulmonary function, and need for and response to nebulisation.
                88 children were eligible for study. In 44 children with moderate to severe airways obstruction, a cup gave significantly less bronchodilation (median increase in: forced expiratory volume in 1 s [FEV1] 0%; PEF 12%) compared with the conventional spacer (37%; 59%), sealed bottle (33%; 36%), or unsealed bottle (18%; 21%, p<0.05 for difference between groups). Nebulisation was required by ten of 11 who had used a cup, nine of 11 who had used an unsealed bottle, eight of 11 who had used a sealed bottle, and only four of 11 who had used a conventional spacer. After nebulisation, improvement in FEV1 (15.5%) and PEF (26%) was more marked in children who had used a cup than in those who had used a conventional spacer (5.5% FEV1; 4% PEF), sealed bottle (3%; 0%), or unsealed bottle (7%; 9%). For 44 children with mild airways obstruction, response to bronchodilator was similar for all spacers and need for nebulisation was not associated with use of a particular spacer.
                A conventional spacer and sealed 500 mL plastic bottle produced similar bronchodilation, an unsealed bottle gave intermediate improvement in lung function, and a polystyrene cup was least effective as a spacer for children with moderate to severe airways obstruction. Use of bottle spacers should be incorporated into guidelines for asthma management in developing countries. To compare the efficacy of a commercial spacer device versus an improvised spacer device in delivering aerosolized beta-2 agonist through metered dose inhaler in an acute exacerbation of bronchial asthma.
                Randomized controlled trial.
                Urban tertiary care teaching hospital.
                60 children between 1 to 12 years of age with acute asthma were prospectively enrolled and randomized into two groups. Detailed history, clinical evaluation and appropriate laboratory investigations were recorded on a pretested proforma. One group received inhaled salbutamol using metered dose inhaler via commercial spacer device (Group 1), while the other received it via improvised spacer device (Group II). The response was sequentially assessed after 20, 40 and 60 minutes of institution of therapy.
                The two groups were comparable with respect to various parameters at presentation (p > 0.05). All the outcome parameters showed a significant improvement with time in both groups (p < 0.05). There was no statistical difference between the response in the two groups (p< 0.05).
                Metered dose inhaler with improvised spacer device is equivalent in efficacy and a more cost effective alternative to metered dose inhaler with commercial spacer for administration of beta-2 agonist in acute asthma. Inhaled bronchodilator treatment given via a metered dose inhaler (MDI) and spacer is optimal for relief of bronchoconstriction. Conventional spacers are expensive or unavailable in developing countries, but there is little information on the efficacy of low-cost spacers in young children.
                To compare the response to bronchodilator treatment given via a conventional or a low-cost bottle spacer
                A randomised controlled trial of the efficacy of a conventional spacer compared with a bottle spacer for bronchodilator treatment in young children with acute lower airway obstruction. Bronchodilator treatment was given from an MDI via an Aerochamber or a bottle spacer. Clinical score and oximetry recording were carried out before and after 15 min of treatment. MDI-spacer treatment was repeated up to three times, depending on clinical response, after which nebulisation was used. The primary outcome was hospitalisation.
                400 children, aged (median (25th-75th centile)) 12 (6-25) months, were enrolled. The number of children hospitalised (n = 60, 15%) was identical in the conventional and bottle spacer groups (n = 30, 15% in each). Secondary outcomes including change in clinical score (-2 (-3 to -1)), oxygen saturation (0 (-1 to 1)) and number of bronchodilator treatments (2 (1 to 3)) were similar in both groups. Oral corticosteroids, prescribed for 78 (19.5%) children, were given to a similar number in the conventional (37 (18.5%)) and bottle spacer groups (41 (20.5%)).
                A low-cost bottle spacer is as effective as a conventional spacer for bronchodilator treatment in young children with acute obstruction of the lower airways. To verify the efficacy, side effects, and cost of treatment of acute asthma attacks, using different inhaler devices.
                This is a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled study. Salbutamol was administered via a nebulizer, a metered-dose inhaler (attached to a commercially available spacer device), a homemade non-valved spacer device, or a dry powder inhaler. Assessments were made at zero, 20, 40 and 60 minutes, followed by the application of salbutamol and placebo with another device. Forty children (mean age of 11+/-3.5 years) with acute asthma attacks, were evaluated. Clinical score, forced expiratory volume in one second and side effects were analyzed. The costs for medication and spacer devices were calculated.
                There is no difference between groups regarding clinical score and variation of forced expiratory volume in one second. There was a major variation in the heart rate response to the nebulizer (35%) compared to the commercially available spacer and dry powder inhaler (15 and 17%) and between the homemade spacer and the commercially available spacer (28 and 15%) (p = 0.004). The nebulizer and homemade spacer caused more tremor (p = 0.02). The cost of treatment was higher for the nebulizer and commercially available spacer (p = 0.0001).
                The nebulizer was more expensive and used more medicine, showing the same efficiency. The homemade spacer was cheaper, but presented more side effects. The commercially available spacer was as expensive as the nebulizer, although safer. The dry powder inhaler was cheaper, but, just as the homemade spacer, it also caused tachycardia.
Overall, this review did not identify a statistically significant difference between these two methods for delivering bronchodilator therapy to children with acute asthma or lower airways obstruction attacks. Care should be taken in the interpretation and applicability of our results because of the small number of RCTs along with few events available meeting the criteria for inclusion in the review, absence of the primary outcome of interest and other clinically important outcomes in the majority of included studies. The possible need for a face-mask in younger children using home-made spacers should also be considered in practice.