Aerosol Characterization of i-BAN <sup>™</sup> versus AeroEclipse <sup>™</sup> II Nebulizers in Continuous and Breath Actuated Modes by Anderson Cascade Impactor in the Adult Setting
Bibliographic record
Abstract
RATIONALE: i-BAN TM is a Breath Actuated Nebulizer (BAN) designed to deliver aerosol only during inhalation thus minimizing drug losses and exposure to the caregiver. The present study compares the aerosol delivery of i-BAN TM (i-BAN) and AeroEclipse II BAN (Monaghan Medical) (AEII) Nebulizer for three drugs using an Anderson Cascade Impactor in the Adult Setting. METHODS: Each nebulizer was driven using compressed air at 50 psig at 8L/min throughout the study. The aerosol generated was characterized using an Anderson Cascade Impactor (ACI). Both nebulizers were operated at 28.3 L/min (adult setting). Albuterol Sulfate Inhalation Solution (0.083%) (AS), Ipratropium Bromide Inhalation Solution (0.02%) (IB) and Cromolyn Sodium Inhalation Solution 20 mg/2mL (CS) were used as the drugs for this study. The drugs were analyzed using HPLC. The MMAD, GSD, Total Respirable Dose (0.5-5.0) and Total Dose Delivered were obtained and compared. Each nebulizer was run in a "continuous mode" (CM) as well as a "breath-actuated mode" (BA). The data obtained were compared using a two tailed Student t Test with a 95% confidence interval. RESULTS: The table shows the measured aerosol parameters for the i-BAN and AEII in the continuous mode and the breath-actuated mode using an adult setting air flow of 28.3 L/min. CONCLUSIONS: i-BAN TM showed a lower MMAD and GSD compared to the AeroEclipse II in both the continuous and breath-actuated modes. I-BAN TM also delivered a higher Total Dose and Respirable Dose of drug compared to AeroEclipse II in both the continuous and breath actuated modes. In many instances this difference was statistically significant.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".