et al. Comparison of the effectiveness of inhaler devices in asthma and chronic obstructive airways disease: a systematic review of the literature. Health Technol Assess 2001;5(26). Health Technology Assessment is indexed in Index Medicus/MEDLINE and Excerpta Medica/ EMBASE. Copies of the Executive Summaries are available from the NCCHTA website (see opposite). NHS R&D HTA Programme T he NHS R&D Health Technology Assessment (HTA) Programme was set up in 1993 to ensure that high-quality research information on the costs, effectiveness and broader impact of health technologies is produced in the most efficient way for those who use, manage and provide care in the NHS. Initially, six HTA panels (pharmaceuticals, acute sector, primary and community care, diagnostics and imaging, population screening, methodology) helped to set the research priorities for the HTA Programme. However, during the past few years there have been a number of changes in and around NHS R&D, such as the establishment of the National Institute for Clinical Excellence (NICE) and the creation of three new research programmes: Service Delivery and Organisation (SDO); New and Emerging Applications of Technology (NEAT); and the Methodology Programme. This has meant that the HTA panels can now focus more explicitly on health technologies ('health technologies' are broadly defined to include all interventions used to promote health, prevent and treat disease, and improve rehabilitation and long-term care) rather than settings of care. Therefore the panel structure has been redefined and replaced by three new panels: Pharmaceuticals; Therapeutic Procedures (including devices and operations); and Diagnostic Technologies and Screening. The HTA Programme will continue to commission both primary and secondary research. The HTA Commissioning Board, supported by the National Coordinating Centre for Health Technology Assessment (NCCHTA), will consider and advise the Programme Director on the best research projects to pursue in order to address the research priorities identified by the three HTA panels. The research reported in this monograph was funded as project number 97/23/02. The views expressed in this publication are those of the authors and not necessarily those of the HTA Programme or the Department of Health. The editors wish to emphasise that funding and publication of this research by the NHS should not be taken as implicit support for any recommendations made by the authors. Criteria for inclusion in the HTA monograph series Reports are published in the HTA monograph series if (1) they have resulted from work commissioned for the HTA Programme, and (2) they are of a sufficiently high scientific quality as assessed by the referees and editors. Reviews in Health Technology Assessment are termed 'systematic' when the account of the search, appraisal and synthesis methods (to minimise biases and random errors) would, in theory, permit the replication of the review by others.

A mixed methods research design was used to investigate the effects of a music therapy CD (MTCD) creation intervention on pediatric oncology patients' distress and coping during their first radiation therapy treatment. The music therapy method involved children creating a music CD using interactive computer-based music software, which was "remixed" by the music therapist-researcher to extend the musical material. Eleven pediatric radiation therapy outpatients aged 6 to 13 years were randomly assigned to either an experimental group, in which they could create a music CD prior to their initial treatment to listen to during radiation therapy, or to a standard care group. Quantitative and qualitative analyses generated multiple perceptions from the pediatric patients, parents, radiation therapy staff, and music therapist-researcher. Ratings of distress during initial radiation therapy treatment were low for all children. The comparison between the two groups found that 67% of the children in the standard care group used social withdrawal as a coping strategy, compared to 0% of the children in the music therapy group; this trend approached significance (p = 0.076). MTCD creation was a fun, engaging, and developmentally appropriate intervention for pediatric patients, which offered a positive experience and aided their use of effective coping strategies to meet the demands of their initial radiation therapy treatment.

A multistage liquid impinger was used to determine the amount of budesonide available from the Nebuhaler spacer device following alteration of spacer static charge, delay in sampling from the spacer, and multiple actuations of the metered dose inhaler into the spacer prior to sampling. The mean amount of budesonide (s.d.) recovered per 200 micrograms actuation in particles smaller than 5 microns increased from 30.5 micrograms (8.8) to 69.3 micrograms (17.9) with a low static spacer. A 20 s delay between actuation and inhalation reduced the amount recovered to 10.9 micrograms (3.2), but no reduction was seen when using a low static spacer after the same delay. Multiple actuations into the spacer before sampling also reduced the recovery to 24.8 micrograms (3.4) after two actuations, and 13.5 micrograms (7.6) after five actuations. When using a Nebuhaler with budesonide metered dose inhalers, more respirable drug will be obtained if the aerosol is inhaled immediately after actuation, and multiple actuations into the spacer device are avoided. Low static spacers may also improve drug delivery. Attention to the details of spacer use may reduce the incidence of therapeutic failure and the cost of inhaled medications.

No abstract

Results -In particles smaller than 5 ftm in diameter the dose of DSCG recovered from the Fisonair and Nebuhaler was 118% and 124%, respectively, of that recovered using the MDI alone. The dose recovered from the smaller volume spacers was 90% (Inspirease), 36% (Aerochamber), 33% (Aerosol Cloud Enhancer), and 21% (Dynahaler) of that from the MDI alone. The Volumatic increased the amount of salbutamol in particles smaller than 5 ZIm to 117% of that from the MDI, and the Inspirease and Aerochamber spacers decreased it by nearly 50%. The amount of budesonide in small particles recovered after use of the Nebuhaler, Inspirease, and the Aerochamber was 92%, 101%, and 78%, respectively, of that from the MDI alone. Conclusions -Under the test conditions used, large volume spacers such as the Fisonair, Nebuhaler, and Volumatic delivered significantly more DSCG and salbutamol than the smaller spacers tested. The differences between spacers were less for budesonide than the other medications studied. This study shows that there are significant differences in the amount of drug available for inhalation when different spacers are used as inhalational aids with different drugs. Spacer devices need to be fully evaluated for each drug prescribed for them. (Thorax 1996;51:835-840)