Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Inhalation Devices and Patient Interface: Human Factors

  • Meeting Report
  • Theme: Current Scientific and Regulatory Approaches for Development of Orally Inhaled and Nasal Drug Products
  • Published:
The AAPS Journal Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

The development of any inhalation product that does not consider the patient needs will fail. The needs of the patients must be identified and aligned with engineering options and physical laws to achieve a robust and intuitive-to-use inhaler. A close interaction between development disciplines and real-use evaluations in clinical studies or in human factor studies is suggested. The same holds true when a marketed product needs to be changed. Caution is warranted if an inhaler change leads to a change in the way the patient handles the device. Finally, the article points out potential problems if many inhaler designs are available. Do they confuse the patients? Can patients recall the correct handling of each inhaler they use? How large is the risk that different inhaler designs pose to the public health? The presentations were given at the Orlando Inhalation Conference: Approaches in International Regulation co-organised by the University of Florida and the International Pharmaceutical Aerosol Consortium on Regulation & Science (IPAC-RS) in March 2014.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4

References

  1. ANSI/AAMI HE75, 2009/(R)2013 Human factors engineering—design of medical devices.

  2. Khassawneh BY, Al-Ali MK, Alzoubi KH, Batarseh MZ, Al-Safi SA, Sharara AM, et al. Handling of inhaler devices in actual pulmonary practice: metered-dose inhaler versus dry powder inhalers. Respir Care. 2008;53(3):324–8.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Melani AS, Zanchetta D, Barbato N, Sestini P, Cinti C, Aldo CP, et al. Inhalation technique and variables associated with misuse of conventional metered-dose inhalers and newer dry powder inhalers in experienced adults. Ann Allergy Asthma Immunol. 2004;93(4):439–46.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. Thomas M, Price D, Chrystyn H, Lloyd A, Williams AE, von Ziegenweidt J. Inhaled corticosteroids for asthma: impact of practice level device switching on asthma control. BMC Pulm Med. 2009;9:1. doi:10.1186/1471-2466-9-1.

    Article  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Seebri® Breezhaler®, EMA summary of product characteristics. http://www.ema.europa.eu/docs/en_GB/document_library/EPAR_-_Product_Information/human/002430/WC500133769.pdf. Accessed 28 Aug 2014.

  6. Serevent® Accuhaler®, patient information leaflet. http://www.medicines.org.uk/emc/PIL.3861.latest.pdf. Accessed 28 Aug 2014.

  7. Spiriva® HandiHaler®, patient information leaflet. http://www.medicines.org.uk/emc/PIL.16286.latest.pdf. Accessed 28 Aug 2014.

  8. Easyhaler®, patient information leaflet. http://www.medicines.org.uk/emc/PIL.21564.latest.pdf. Accessed 29 Aug 2014.

  9. Wieshammer S, Dreyhaupt J. Dry powder inhalers: which factors determine the frequency of handling errors? Respiration. 2008;75(1):18–25.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Schulte M, Osseiran K, Betz R, et al. Handling of and preferences for available dry powder inhaler systems by patients with asthma and COPD. J Aerosol Med Pulm Drug Deliv. 2008;21(4):321–8.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Lastow O, Svensson M. Orally inhaled drug performance testing for product development, registration, and quality control. J Aerosol Med Pulm Drug Deliv. 2014;27(6):401–7. doi:10.1089/jamp.2014.1147.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Finlay WH, Golshahi L, Noga M, et al. Choosing 3D mouth-throat dimensions: a rational merging of medical imaging and aerodynamics. In: Dalby RN, Byron PR, Peart J, et al. editors. Respiratory drug delivery 2010. River Grove: Davis Healthcare International; 2010. p. 185–93.

    Google Scholar 

  13. Burnell PKP, Small T, Doig S, Johal B, Jenkins R, Gibson GJ. Ex-vivo product performance of DiskusTM and TurbuhalerTM inhalers using inhalation profiles from patients with severe chronic obstructive pulmonary disease. Respir Med. 2001;95(5):324–30.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. Olsson BL, Borgström L, Lundbäck H, Svensson M. Validation of a general in vitro approach for prediction of total lung deposition in healthy adults for pharmaceutical inhalation products. J Aerosol Med Pulm Drug Deliv. 2013;26(6):355–69.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Gabrio BJ, Stein SW, Velasquez DJ. A new method to evaluate plume characteristics of hydrofluoroalkane and chlorofluorocarbon metered dose inhalers. Int J Pharm. 1999;186(1):3–12.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. Higham MA, Sharara AM, Magee RP, Ind PW. Determination of the minimum dose of lactose drug carrier that can be sensed during inhalation. Br J Clin Pharmacol. 1995;40(3):281–2.

    Article  CAS  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. Adams WP et al. Demonstrating bioequivalence of locally acting OIPs. Workshop summary report. J Aerosol Med Pulm Drug Deliv. 2010;23(1):1–29.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  18. International Conference on Harmonisation of Technical Requirements for Registration of Pharmaceuticals for Human use; quality risk management. http://www.ich.org/fileadmin/Public_Web_Site/ICH_Products/Guidelines/Quality/Q9/Step4/Q9_Guideline.pdf. Accessed 27 Aug 2014.

  19. Brouet G et al. Review of approaches to managing device changes within OINDPs. Poster presented at IPAC-RS conference 2010. http://ipacrs.org/assets/uploads/outputs/33-IPAC-RS.pdf. Accessed 23 Sept 2014.

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Boehringer Ingelheim Pharma GmbH & Co. KG, 55216, Ingelheim am Rhein, Germany

    Stefan Leiner

  2. David Jack Centre for R&D, GSK, Ware, Hertfordshire, UK

    David Parkins

  3. ICONOVO AB, Medicon Village, Lund, Sweden

    Orest Lastow

Authors
  1. Stefan Leiner
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. David Parkins
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Orest Lastow
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Stefan Leiner.

Additional information

Guest Editors: Lawrence Yu, Sau L. Lee, Guenther Hochhaus, Lana Lyapustina, Martin Oliver, and Craig Davies-Cutting

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Leiner, S., Parkins, D. & Lastow, O. Inhalation Devices and Patient Interface: Human Factors. AAPS J 17, 457–461 (2015). https://doi.org/10.1208/s12248-015-9717-9

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1208/s12248-015-9717-9

Keywords

Search

Navigation