MedPath

Comparison of Bronchodilator Treatment Practices in Group E COPD Patients

Not Applicable
Not yet recruiting
Conditions
COPD Exacerbation Acute
Interventions
Device: Comparison of bronchodilator effectiveness of nebulizer therapy devices
Registration Number
NCT06178068
Lead Sponsor
Ataturk University
Brief Summary

COPD is a heterogeneous condition caused by airway (bronchitis/bronchiolitis) or alveolar (emphysema) abnormality, changes with chronic respiratory changes (dyspnea, dyspnoea, phlegm). It is characterized by persistent and frequently progressive airway obstruction. In COPD, which progresses with high mortality, non-pharmacological treatments are applied, as well as pharmacological treatments. They have an essential place in slowing down the progressive course of this treatment. However, despite the treatment administered to COPD patients, outdoor weather conditions, improper use of inhaler treatments, or comorbidities may cause acute exacerbation of COPD.

Dry air nebulizer devices use dry air from the central system in hospitals. This system, which converts bronchodilator drugs into nebulizers by creating high currents, works like classical nebulizers without an electrical system and can have a higher flow rate than jet nebulizer devices. This procedure, which can be applied to COPD patients without giving high-flow oxygen, prevents carbon dioxide retention. There is no study in the literature comparing the bronchodilator effectiveness of dry air, classical nebulizer, and jet nebulizer, and the investigators aimed to compare the efficacy of these three treatment modalities in our study.

Detailed Description

Not available

Recruitment & Eligibility

Status
NOT_YET_RECRUITING
Sex
All
Target Recruitment
39
Inclusion Criteria
  • Group E COPD patients
Exclusion Criteria
  • Recent MI
  • Pulmonary embolism
  • Cerebral aneurysm
  • Active hemoptysis
  • Pneumothorax
  • Nausea, vomiting
  • Recent thorax, abdominal, and eye surgery were identified in the patients before the pulmonary function test and were not included in the study.
  • Mental retardation
  • Pneumonia with acute exacerbation of COPD
  • Patients with pulmonary edema due to congestive heart failure
  • Patients with interstitial lung disease along with COPD

Study & Design

Study Type
INTERVENTIONAL
Study Design
PARALLEL
Arm && Interventions
GroupInterventionDescription
Group 3; Classic nebülizer groupComparison of bronchodilator effectiveness of nebulizer therapy devicesFor classical nebulizer treatment in Group 3 patients, a nebulizer device compatible with our hospital's central oxygen system was used.
Group 1; jet nebulizer groupComparison of bronchodilator effectiveness of nebulizer therapy devicesThe Respirox® RNEB-18 device was used for the bronchodilator treatment given before the randomization of the patients and for the maintenance bronchodilator treatment given in Group 1 patients. After calibrating the device, it was determined that it performed nebulization with a flow of 6 lt/min.
Group 2; dry air nebulizer groupComparison of bronchodilator effectiveness of nebulizer therapy devicesIn Group 2 patients, a HAVELSAN® EHSİM brand nebulizer produced in our country, compatible with the central system of our hospital, was used as a dry air nebulizer.
Primary Outcome Measures
NameTimeMethod
Evaluation of the change in respiratory function test parameters after 5 days of nebulizer treatment applications.randomization on respiratory function tests5 days

Measurement of % change in FVC, FEV1, RV, TLC level

Evaluation of the change in arterial blood gas parameters after 5 days of nebulizer treatment applications.randomization on respiratory function tests5 days

Saturation %, measurement of change in partial oxygen and partial carbon dioxide levels in mm_Hg

Secondary Outcome Measures
NameTimeMethod
© Copyright 2025. All Rights Reserved by MedPath