MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Aerosol Delivery Differences and Cost Analysis of Wasted Medication Under Clinically Relevant Test Methods Using a Valved Holding Chamber With Facemask and Fluticasone Propionate

2025· article· en· W4410268795 on OpenAlexaff
Mark Nagel, R. Ali, JUDY SCHLOSS, Jason Suggett

Bibliographic record

VenueAmerican Journal of Respiratory and Critical Care Medicine · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicSafe Handling of Antineoplastic Drugs
Canadian institutionsTrudell Medical International (Canada)
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineFluticasone propionateFluticasoneAerosolPropionateLaryngoscopesAnesthesiaInhalationIntubationLaryngoscopy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Rationale: Global asthma guidelines highlight the importance of using a valved holding chamber (VHC) with documented efficacy in young children, specifically noting the fact that the dose delivered may vary considerably between VHCs used. The recent transition of fluticasone propionate (FP) to an authorized generic has significant cost implications for patients who rely on this inhaler for disease management. The objective of this study was to evaluate the performance of four different VHCs available in the US market and to assess delivery differences to the carina and estimate potential cost impact. Methods: 4 different VHCs were evaluated by breathing simulator (tidal volume=155-mL, I:E ratio=1:2, rate=25 cycles/min). The facemask of each spacer (n=3) was attached to the ADAM III, an anatomically realistic oro-naso-pharynx model of a 4-year-old child and the airway coupled to a breathing simulator via a filter to capture drug particles that penetrated as far as the carina. 5-actuations of fluticasone propionate HFA (44μg, Prasco Laboratories) were delivered at 30-s intervals and recovered from specific locations in the aerosol pathway by HPLC. Comparisons were then made on drug delivery data looking at potential dose to the lungs for each pMDI/VHC. This potential delivery was then equated to an estimated savings using the most efficient VHC based upon published costs [1] that Prasco fluticasone propionate HFA 44 has a cost of $90.61 per inhaler. Results: Recovered FP from each type of VHC and associated implications are summarized in the table. Conclusion: The choice of pMDI/VHC system can significantly impact medication delivery, which in turn affects the overall cost efficiency of therapy. In this case, using the AeroChamber Plus® Flow-Vu® VHC may improve medication cost efficiency by up to five times compared to other VHC options. By enhancing the amount of medication that reaches the lungs with each puff, patients may experience better disease control and require less reliever medication. [1] Accessed 30th Oct,2024 https://www.goodrx.com/flovent?form=hfa-inhaler&dosage=44mcg&quantity=1&label_override=fluticasone-propionate-hfa

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.005
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.108
Threshold uncertainty score0.790

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.002
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.077
GPT teacher head0.471
Teacher spread0.394 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAmerican Journal of Respiratory and Critical Care MedicineSame topicSafe Handling of Antineoplastic DrugsFrench-language works237,207