000			03364nam a22004337a 4500
008			220221s20222022 xxu||||| |||| 00| 0 eng d
024			_a10.2147/COPD.S319511 [doi]
024			_a319511 [pii]
024			_aPMC8747625 [pmc]
040			_aOvid MEDLINE(R)
099			_a35023914
245			_aMeasuring Peak Inspiratory Flow in Patients with Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease. [Review]
251			_aInternational Journal of Copd. 17:79-92, 2022.
252			_aInt J Chron Obstruct Pulmon Dis. 17:79-92, 2022.
252			_zInt J Chron Obstruct Pulmon Dis. 17:79-92, 2022.
253			_aInternational journal of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease
260			_c2022
260			_fFY2022
265			_sepublish
266			_d2022-02-21
268			_aInternational Journal of Copd. 17:79-92, 2022.
520			_aDry powder inhalers (DPIs) are breath actuated, and patients using DPIs need to generate an optimal inspiratory flow during the inhalation maneuver for effective drug delivery to the lungs. However, practical and standardized recommendations for measuring peak inspiratory flow (PIF)-a potential indicator for effective DPI use in chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD)-are lacking. To evaluate recommended PIF assessment approaches, we reviewed the Instructions for Use of the In-Check TM DIAL and the prescribing information for eight DPIs approved for use in the treatment of COPD in the United States. To evaluate applied PIF assessment approaches, we conducted a PubMed search from inception to August 31, 2021, for reports of clinical and real-life studies where PIF was measured using the In-Check TM DIAL or through a DPI in patients with COPD. Evaluation of collective sources, including 47 applicable studies, showed that instructions related to the positioning of the patient with their DPI, instructions for exhalation before the inhalation maneuver, the inhalation maneuver itself, and post-inhalation breath-hold times varied, and in many instances, appeared vague and/or incomplete. We observed considerable variation in how PIF was measured in clinical and real-life studies, underscoring the need for a standardized method of PIF measurement. Standardization of technique will facilitate comparisons among studies. Based on these findings and our clinical and research experience, we propose specific recommendations for PIF measurement to standardize the process and better ensure accurate and reliable PIF values in clinical trials and in daily clinical practice. Copyright (c) 2022 Ohar et al.
546			_aEnglish
650			_a*Pulmonary Disease, Chronic Obstructive
650			_aAdministration, Inhalation
650			_aDry Powder Inhalers
650			_aHumans
650			_aLung
650			_aPulmonary Disease, Chronic Obstructive/di [Diagnosis]
650			_aPulmonary Disease, Chronic Obstructive/dt [Drug Therapy]
651			_aMedStar Washington Hospital Center
656			_aRespiratory Therapy
657			_aJournal Article
657			_aReview
700			_aDrescher, Gail S
790			_aAnzueto A, Dhand R, Drescher GS, Drummond MB, Ferguson GT, Halpin DMG, Haughney J, Hess MW, Hoy HM, Mahler DA, Ohar JA, Pleasants RA, Price DB, Usmani OS
856			_uhttps://dx.doi.org/10.2147/COPD.S319511 _zhttps://dx.doi.org/10.2147/COPD.S319511
942			_cART _dArticle
999			_c868 _d868