Many respiratory patients misuse their inhaler. Although training improves their inhaler technique, patients do forget the correct inhaler use with time. In the current work, three clinical studies investigated novel tools designed with feedback mechanisms to ensure patients use the correct inhalation method when using their inhaler. Research Ethics Committee approval was obtained and all the participants signed an informed consent form. In the first study, the recruited asthmatic children (n=17) and adults (n=39) had their metered dose inhaler (MDI) technique assessed. Those who attained the recommended inhalation flow rate (IFR) of < 90 l/min through their MDI formed the control group. Whilst those who had a poor MDI technique with an IFR ≥ 90 l/min were randomized into either the verbal counselling (VC) group; or the 2ToneTrainer (2TT) group that, in addition to the verbal training, received the 2ToneTrainer MDI technique training device equipped with an audible feedback mechanism of correct inhalation flow. All the participants were assessed on two occasions (6 weeks apart) for their inhalation flow rate, asthma control and quality of life. The study showed that the 2ToneTrainer tool was as efficient as verbal training in improving and maintaining the asthmatic patients' MDI technique, particularly using the recommended slow inhalation flow through the MDI. Although statistically insignificant, potential improvement in quality of life was demonstrated. The 2ToneTrainer tool has the advantage of being available to the patients all the time to use when they are in doubt of their MDI technique. In the second research study, the inhalation profiles of asthmatic children (n=58) and adults (n=63), and of COPD patients (n=63) were obtained when they inhaled through the novel Spiromax dry powder inhaler (DPI) which was connected to an electronic pressure change recorder. From these inspiratory profiles; the peak inhalation flow, inhalation volume and inhalation acceleration rate were determined. The variability (23%-58%) found in these inhalation profile parameters among various patient groups would be expected in all DPIs. The effect of the inhalation acceleration rates and volumes on dose emission characteristics from DPIs should be investigated. Attention, though, should be paid to the patients' realistic inhalation profile parameters, rather than the recommended Pharmacopoeial optimal inhalation standard condition, when evaluating the in-vitro performance of DPIs. Finally, in preschool asthmatic children, the routine use of the current AeroChamber Plus spacer (n=9) was compared with that of a novel version; the AeroChamber Plus with Flow-Vu spacer (n=10) over a 12-week period. The Flow-Vu spacer has a visual feedback indicator confirming inhalation and tight mask-face seal. The study showed that the new AeroChamber Plus with Flow-Vu spacer provided the same asthma control as the AeroChamber Plus in preschool children and maintained the same asthma-related quality of life of their parents. However, the parents preferred the new Flow-Vu spacer because its visual feedback indicator of inhalation reassured them that their asthmatic children did take their inhaled medication sufficiently.

Many respiratory patients misuse their inhaler. Although training improves their inhaler technique, patients do forget the correct inhaler use with time. In the current work, three clinical studies investigated novel tools designed with feedback mechanisms to ensure patients use the correct inhalation method when using their inhaler. Research Ethics Committee approval was obtained and all the participants signed an informed consent form. In the first study, the recruited asthmatic children (n=17) and adults (n=39) had their metered dose inhaler (MDI) technique assessed. Those who attained the recommended inhalation flow rate (IFR) of < 90 l/min through their MDI formed the control group. Whilst those who had a poor MDI technique with an IFR ¿ 90 l/min were randomized into either the verbal counselling (VC) group; or the 2ToneTrainer (2TT) group that, in addition to the verbal training, received the 2ToneTrainer MDI technique training device equipped with an audible feedback mechanism of correct inhalation flow. All the participants were assessed on two occasions (6 weeks apart) for their inhalation flow rate, asthma control and quality of life. The study showed that the 2ToneTrainer tool was as efficient as verbal training in improving and maintaining the asthmatic patients¿ MDI technique, particularly using the recommended slow inhalation flow through the MDI. Although statistically insignificant, potential improvement in quality of life was demonstrated. The 2ToneTrainer tool has the advantage of being available to the patients all the time to use when they are in doubt of their MDI technique. In the second research study, the inhalation profiles of asthmatic children (n=58) and adults (n=63), and of COPD patients (n=63) were obtained when they inhaled through the novel Spiromax dry powder inhaler (DPI) which was connected to an electronic pressure change recorder. From these inspiratory profiles; the peak inhalation flow, inhalation volume and inhalation acceleration rate were determined. The variability (23% - 58%) found in these inhalation profile parameters among various patient groups would be expected in all DPIs. The effect of the inhalation acceleration rates and volumes on dose emission characteristics from DPIs should be investigated. Attention, though, should be paid to the patients¿ realistic inhalation profile parameters, rather than the recommended Pharmacopoeial optimal inhalation standard condition, when evaluating the in-vitro performance of DPIs. Finally, in preschool asthmatic children, the routine use of the current AeroChamber Plus spacer (n=9) was compared with that of a novel version; the AeroChamber Plus with Flow-Vu spacer (n=10) over a 12-week period. The Flow-Vu spacer has a visual feedback indicator confirming inhalation and tight mask-face seal. The study showed that the new AeroChamber Plus with Flow-Vu spacer provided the same asthma control as the AeroChamber Plus in preschool children and maintained the same asthma-related quality of life of their parents. However, the parents preferred the new Flow-Vu spacer because its visual feedback indicator of inhalation reassured them that their asthmatic children did take their inhaled medication sufficiently.