PubMed Health⌕ Search

PubMed · 14525629

Nebulized bronchodilator formulations: unit-dose or multi-dose?

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Nosocomial infections linked to the use of multi-dose bronchodilator nebulizer formulations have been reported in the literature. OBJECTIVE: Survey American hospital respiratory therapy services to determine practice patterns, opinions, and awareness regarding unit-dose and multi-dose bronchodilator formulations. METHODS: A quota sample targeted 4 hospital size categories (0-100 beds, 101-200 beds, 201-400 beds, and > 400 beds) using a listing of general medical/surgical hospitals from the American Hospital Association. Hospitals were contacted via telephone to identify the director of respiratory therapy services, who was invited to complete a 29-item Web-based survey of their hospital practices and their opinions about and knowledge of issues with multi-dose and unit-dose bronchodilator formulations. RESULTS: One thousand forty-seven hospitals were recruited and 409 valid surveys were completed (completion rate 39%). The reported mean +/- SD percentage of unit-dose nebulizer treatments was 80.2 +/- 26.2%. Seventy-two percent (296) of respondents indicated having a policy and procedure manual that deals specifically with nebulized bronchodilator solutions, but only 107 reported having internal monitoring guidelines for compliance with those policies and procedures. Multi-dose bottles of bronchodilator concentrate were used with multiple patients in 77% of cases, and on average 9.7 +/- 8.5 patients were treated with the same multi-dose bottle. Eighty-one percent of respondents reported that treatments from multi-dose bottles are prepared at the bedside. The length of time a multi-dose bottle was kept (after being opened) ranged from 24 hours (8%) to 1 month (11%), and only 3% of respondents reported following manufacturers' recommendations. In the respondents' opinion the chief advantage of multi-dose was cost per dose (84%), and the chief advantage of unit-dose was less risk of contamination (92%). With other factors (therapist time, cost of saline diluent for multi-dose concentrate, dose-error, and contamination) considered, 73% thought that unit-dose vials were more cost-effective. Three hundred thirty-six respondents (82%) thought that a sterile, low-volume (0.5 mL) unit-dose vial of bronchodilator concentrate would be useful, and 249 (74%) of those 336 respondents indicated that such a formulation would replace multi-dose bottles. Only 56% of respondents knew about the evidence regarding the risk of contamination with multi-dose bottles. CONCLUSIONS: Multi-dose bottles of bronchodilator solution are used in approximately 20% of nebulizer treatments, and without strict adherence to infection control procedures they are a potential source of nosocomial infection. A sterile, low-volume unit-dose vial of bronchodilator concentrate would be a useful alternative to multi-dose concentrate for modifying doses or mixing drugs in nebulizer therapy.

Explore related subjects

Keep this discovery

Explore connections, maps & timelines

BibTeXRIS

Joseph L Rau, Ruben D Restrepo. 2003. Nebulized bronchodilator formulations: unit-dose or multi-dose?. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/14525629/

Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.

KEEP EXPLORING

Related citations

In the wake of hospital inquiries: impact on staff and safety.

Mishandled concerns about clinical standards resulted in whistleblowing in four Australian hospitals. Official inquiries followed with recommendations to improve patient safety. In the aftermath of the inquiries, common themes included loss of trust in management and among clinical colleagues, and loss of trust from patients and the community. Without first rebuilding trust, staff will not report mistakes or other concerns about safety. Successful implementation of patient safety procedures requires policies to stress the professional duty of staff to report concerns about colleagues when they believe there is a risk to patients.

Attitude of Health Personnel↗

Retrieving the ars moriendi tradition.

North Atlantic culture lacks a commonly shared view on dying well that helps the dying, their social environment and caregivers to determine their place and role, interpret death and deal with the process of ethical deliberation. What is lacking nowadays, however, has been part of Western culture in medieval times and was known as the ars moriendi (art of dying well) tradition. In this paper an updated version of this tradition is presented that meets the demands of present day secularized and multiform society. Five themes are central to the new art of dying: autonomy and the self, pain control and medical intervention, attachment and relations, life balance and guilt, death and afterlife. The importance of retrieving the ancient ars moriendi outreaches the boundaries of palliative medicine, since it deals with issues that play a central role in every context of medical intervention and treatment.

Attitude of Health Personnel↗