Janssens, H.M. (Hettie)Heijnen, E.M.Jong, de V.M.Hop, W.C.J. (Wim)Holland, W.P. (Wim)Jongste, de J.C. (Johan)Tiddens, H.A.W.M. (Harm)Comparative StudyHumansResearch Support, Non-U.S. Gov'tChild, PreschoolPatient ComplianceInfantEquipment DesignBronchodilator Agents/*administration & dosage/therapeutic useBudesonide/*administration & dosage/therapeutic useCross-Over StudiesCoated Materials, BiocompatibleAnti-Asthmatic Agents/*administration & dosage/therapeutic useAerosolsAndrostadienes/*administration & dosage/therapeutic useDetergentsElectricityRespiratory Sounds/*drug effectshttp://hdl.handle.net/1765/9563enjournalArticle0903-1936The aims of this study were to assess and compare dose delivery and dose variability of pressurized metered dose inhalers (pMDI)/spacers in wheezy infants in daily life and to investigate factors influencing aerosol delivery. In an open randomized crossover study in 25 wheezy infants aged 5-26 months, a metal spacer (Nebuchamber), a detergent coated (DC) and a non-detergent coated (nonDC) plastic spacer (Babyhaler) were tested at home for 7 days each. Budesonide (200 microg b.i.d) was administered via a Nebuchamber or fluticasone (125 microg b.i.d) via a Babyhaler. Aerosol was trapped in filters, positioned between the spacer and face mask. Cooperation was scored on diary cards. Electrostatic charge (ESC) of the spacers was measured. Evaluations of the administration technique were made from video recordings. Median (range) dose delivery of the filters expressed as per cent (%) of nominal dose, was 34% (3-59), 23% (1-49), and 41% (12-55) for the Nebuchamber, nonDC-Babyhaler, and DC-Babyhaler respectively. Considerable dose variability was found, median (range) within-subject dose variability, expressed as coefficient of variation, for the Nebuchamber (49% (15-249)) was significantly higher when compared with both nonDC- (36% (12-325)) and DC-Babyhalers (27% (10-122)), for which dose variabilities were similar. Detergent coating was effective to reduce electrostatic charge, and to increase dose delivery, but had no effect on dose variability. Bad cooperation was an important cause for high dose variability for all spacers (r=0.5-0.6, p<0.02). Many mistakes were made during the administration procedure.2000-01-01 0903-1936 urn:NBN:nl:ui:15-1765/9563