Pharmaceutical Research

, Volume 27, Issue 7, pp 1325–1336 | Cite as

The Contribution of Different Formulation Components on the Aerosol Charge in Carrier-Based Dry Powder Inhaler Systems

  • Susan Hoe
  • Daniela Traini
  • Hak-Kim Chan
  • Paul M. YoungEmail author
Research Paper



To measure aerosol performance of a lactose carrier/salbutamol sulphate powder blend and identify contributions of non-formulation and formulation components on the resulting aerosol charge.


A 67.5:1 (%w/w) blend of 63–90 μm lactose with salbutamol sulphate, and lactose alone (with and without the blending process), was dispersed from a Cyclohaler™ into the electrical Next Generation Impactor at 30, 60 and 90 L/min. Mass and charge profiles were measured from each dispersion, as a function of impactor stage. The charge profile from an empty capsule in the Cyclohaler™ was also studied.


Lactose deposition from the blend was significantly greater, and net charge/mass ratios were smaller, in the pre-separator compared to formulations without drug. Fine particle fraction of salbutamol sulphate increased with flow rate (9.2 ± 2.5% to 14.7 ± 2.7%), but there was no change in net charge/mass ratio. The empty capsule produced a cycle of alternating net positive and negative discharges (∼200 pC to 4 nC).


Capsule charge can ionize surrounding air and influence net charge measurements. Detachment of fine drug during aerosolisation may reduce net specific charge and lead to increased lactose deposition in the pre-separator. Increase in FPF may be due to increased force of detachment rather than electrostatic forces.


Cyclohaler™ electrical next generation impactor (eNGI) electrostatic lactose salbutamol sulphate 



The authors would like to thank GlaxoSmithKline Australia for the provision of a postgraduate support grant, and Dr. Handoko Adi for assistance with SEM imaging.


  1. 1.
    Islam N, Stewart P, Larson I, Hartley P. Surface roughness contribution to the adhesion force distribution of salmeterol xinafoate on lactose carriers by atomic force microscopy. J Pharm Sci. 2005;94:1500–11.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Young PM, Kwok P, Adi H, Chan H-K, Traini D. Lactose composite carriers for repiratory delivery. Pharm Res. 2009;26:802–10.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Harjunen P, Lankinen T, Salonen H, Lehto V-P, Järvinen K. Effects of carriers and storage of formulation on the lung deposition of a hydrophobic and hydrophilic drug from a DPI. Int J Pharm. 2003;263:151–63.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Young PM, Sung A, Traini D, Kwok P, Chiou H, Chan H-K. Influence of humidity on the electrostatic charge and aerosol performance of dry powder inhalers carrier-based systems. Pharm Res. 2007;24:963–70.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Lohrmann M, Kappl M, Butt H-J, Urbanetz NA, Lippold BC. Adhesion forces in interactive mixtures for dry powder inhalers—evaluation of a new measuring method. Eur J Pharm Biopharm. 2007;67:579–86.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Zeng XM, Martin GP, Marriott C, Pritchard J. Lactose as a carrier in dry powder formulations: the influence of surface characteristics on drug delivery. J Pharm Sci. 2001;90:1424–34.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Islam N, Stewart P, Larson I, Hartley P. Effect of carrier size on the dispersion of salmeterol xinafoate from interactive mixtures. J Pharm Sci. 2004;93:1030–8.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Tee SK, Marriott C, Zeng XM, Martin GP. The use of different sugars as fine and coarse carriers for aerosolised salbutamol sulphate. Int J Pharm. 2000;208:111–23.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Adi H, Larson I, Chiou H, Young P, Traini D, Stewart P. Role of agglomeration in the dispersion of salmeterol xinafoate from mixtures for inhalation with differing drug to fine lactose ratios. J Pharm Sci. 2007;97:3140–52.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Zeng XM, Martin GP, Marriott C, Pritchard J. The effects of carrier size and morphology on the dispersion of salbutamol sulphate after aerosolization at different flow rates. J Pharm Pharmacol. 2000;52:1211–21.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Zeng XM, Martin GP, Marriott C, Pritchard J. The influence of carrier morphology on drug delivery by dry powder inhalers. Int J Pharm. 2000;200:93–106.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Adi H, Traini D, Chan H-K, Young PM. The influence of drug morphology on aerosolisation efficiency of dry powder inhaler formulations. J Pharm Sci. 2007;97:2780–8.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Melandri C, Tarroni G, Prodi V, de Zaiacomo T, Formignani M, Lombardi CC. Deposition of charged particles in the human airways. J Aerosol Sci. 1983;14:657–69.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Prodi V, Mularoni A. Electrostatic lung deposition experiments with humans and animals. Ann Occup Hyg. 1985;29:229–40.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Bailey AG, Hashish AH, Williams TJ. Drug delivery by inhalation of charged particles. J Electrostat. 1998;44:3–10.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Balachandran W, Machowski W, Gaura E, Hudson C. Control of drug aerosol in human airways using electrostatic forces. J Electrostat. 1997;40 & 41:579–84.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Byron PR, Peart J, Staniforth J. Aerosol electrostatics I: properties of fine powders before and after aerosolisation by dry powder inhalers. Pharm Res. 1997;14:698–705.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Chow KT, Zhu K, Tan RBH, Heng PWS. Investigation of electrostatic behavior of a lactose carrier for dry powder inhalers. Pharm Res. 2008;25:2822–34.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Kwok PCL, Chan H-K. Effect of relative humidity on the electrostatic charge properties of dry powder inhaler aerosols. Pharm Res. 2008;25:277–88.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Telko MJ, Kujanpää J, Hickey AJ. Investigation of triboelectric charging in dry powder inhalers using electrical low pressure impactor (ELPI). Int J Pharm. 2007;336:352–60.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Crampton M, Kinnersley R, Ayres J. Sub-micrometer particle production by pressurised metered dose inhalers. J Aerosol Med. 2004;17:33–42.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Glover W, Chan H-K. Electrostatic charge characterization of pharmaceutical aerosols using electrical low-pressure impactor (ELPI). J Aerosol Sci. 2004;35:755–64.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Keskinen J, Pietarinen K, Lehtimäki M. Electrical low pressure impactor. J Aerosol Sci. 1992;23:353–60.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Chapter <601>. United States Pharmacopoeia 31—National Formulary 26, United States Pharmacopoeial Convention Inc., 2008.Google Scholar
  25. 25.
    Section 2.9.18—Appendix XII C. Consistency of formulated preparations for inhalation., British Pharmacopoeia, Vol. IV, 2009.Google Scholar
  26. 26.
    Hoe S, Traini D, Chan H-K, Young P. The influence of flow rate on the aerosol deposition profile and electrostatic charge of single and combination metered dose inhalers. Pharm Res. 2009;26:2639–46.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Hoe S, Traini D, Chan H-K, Young PM. Measuring charge and mass distributions in dry powder inhalers using the electrical Next Generation Impactor (eNGI). Eur J Pharm Sci. 2009;38:88–94.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Hoe S, Young PM, Chan H-K, Traini D. Introduction of the electrical Next Generation Impactor (eNGI) and investigation of its capabilities for the study of pressurized metered dose inhalers. Pharm Res. 2009;26:431–7.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Marple VA, Roberts DL, Romay FJ, Miller NC, Truman KG, van Oort M et al. Next generation pharmaceutical impactor (a new impactor for pharmaceutical inhaler testing). Part I: design. J Aerosol Med. 2003;16:283–99.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Lowell J, Rose-Innes AC. Contact electrification. Adv Phys. 1980;29:947–1023.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    Zeng XM, Martin GP, Tee S-K, Marriott C. The role of fine particle lactose on the dispersion and deaggregation of salbutamol sulphate in an air stream in vitro. Int J Pharm. 1998;176:99–110.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. 32.
    Young PA, Edge S, Traini D, Jones MD, Price R, El-Sabawi D et al. The influence of dose on the performance of dry powder inhalation systems. Int J Pharm. 2005;296:26–33.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  33. 33.
    Traini D, Young PM, Thielmann F, Acharya M. The influence of lactose pseudopolymorphic form on salbutamol sulfate-lactose interactions in DPI formulations. Drug Dev Ind Pharm. 2008;34:992–1001.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media, LLC 2010

Authors and Affiliations

  • Susan Hoe
    • 1
  • Daniela Traini
    • 1
  • Hak-Kim Chan
    • 1
  • Paul M. Young
    • 1
    Email author
  1. 1.Advanced Drug Delivery Group, Faculty of PharmacyThe University of SydneySydneyAustralia

Personalised recommendations