Clinical indications for and effects of bland, mucolytic, and antimicrobial aerosols

Adam Wanner, A. Rao

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

26 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

The clinical usefulness of bland, mucolytic, and antimicrobial aerosols in the management of obstructive airway disease or bronchopulmonary infections was critically reviewed at the last Conference on the Scientific Basis of Respiratory Therapy in 1974. From the information available at that time, it was concluded that there was little scientific basis for these therapeutic modalities. It was also suggested that the value of aerosol therapy should be evaluated by objective tests. The relatively few studies reported during the last 5 years have not generated new data in support of such aerosol therapy. Three criteria have been used to assess the efficacy of bland and mucolytic aerosols: respiratory function, mucociliary function, and subjective symptoms. Although respiratory and mucociliary function have generally been found to remain unaltered or to deteriorate after administration of bland or mucolytic aerosols, some investigators have observed facilitated expectoration or improved cough efficiency. The effectiveness of antimicrobial aerosols is more difficult to evaluate, and their value in patients with bacterial or fungal pulmonary infections remains to be demonstrated. Considering the cost and potential hazards of aerosol therapy, its use should be restricted to forms of aerosols whose clinical value has been objectively demonstrated; a reassessment of the literature suggests that bland and currently used mucolytic and antimicrobial aerosols do not meet this requirement.

Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)79-87
Number of pages9
JournalAmerican Review of Respiratory Disease
Volume122
Issue number5 II
StatePublished - Dec 1 1980

Fingerprint

Expectorants
Aerosols
Fungal Lung Diseases
Respiratory Therapy
Airway Management
Therapeutics
Cough
Research Personnel
Costs and Cost Analysis

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Pulmonary and Respiratory Medicine

Cite this

Clinical indications for and effects of bland, mucolytic, and antimicrobial aerosols. / Wanner, Adam; Rao, A.

In: American Review of Respiratory Disease, Vol. 122, No. 5 II, 01.12.1980, p. 79-87.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

@article{07b53e442c434d4398674a9573323a0a,
title = "Clinical indications for and effects of bland, mucolytic, and antimicrobial aerosols",
abstract = "The clinical usefulness of bland, mucolytic, and antimicrobial aerosols in the management of obstructive airway disease or bronchopulmonary infections was critically reviewed at the last Conference on the Scientific Basis of Respiratory Therapy in 1974. From the information available at that time, it was concluded that there was little scientific basis for these therapeutic modalities. It was also suggested that the value of aerosol therapy should be evaluated by objective tests. The relatively few studies reported during the last 5 years have not generated new data in support of such aerosol therapy. Three criteria have been used to assess the efficacy of bland and mucolytic aerosols: respiratory function, mucociliary function, and subjective symptoms. Although respiratory and mucociliary function have generally been found to remain unaltered or to deteriorate after administration of bland or mucolytic aerosols, some investigators have observed facilitated expectoration or improved cough efficiency. The effectiveness of antimicrobial aerosols is more difficult to evaluate, and their value in patients with bacterial or fungal pulmonary infections remains to be demonstrated. Considering the cost and potential hazards of aerosol therapy, its use should be restricted to forms of aerosols whose clinical value has been objectively demonstrated; a reassessment of the literature suggests that bland and currently used mucolytic and antimicrobial aerosols do not meet this requirement.",
author = "Adam Wanner and A. Rao",
year = "1980",
month = "12",
day = "1",
language = "English",
volume = "122",
pages = "79--87",
journal = "American Journal of Respiratory and Critical Care Medicine",
issn = "1073-449X",
publisher = "American Thoracic Society",
number = "5 II",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Clinical indications for and effects of bland, mucolytic, and antimicrobial aerosols

AU - Wanner, Adam

AU - Rao, A.

PY - 1980/12/1

Y1 - 1980/12/1

N2 - The clinical usefulness of bland, mucolytic, and antimicrobial aerosols in the management of obstructive airway disease or bronchopulmonary infections was critically reviewed at the last Conference on the Scientific Basis of Respiratory Therapy in 1974. From the information available at that time, it was concluded that there was little scientific basis for these therapeutic modalities. It was also suggested that the value of aerosol therapy should be evaluated by objective tests. The relatively few studies reported during the last 5 years have not generated new data in support of such aerosol therapy. Three criteria have been used to assess the efficacy of bland and mucolytic aerosols: respiratory function, mucociliary function, and subjective symptoms. Although respiratory and mucociliary function have generally been found to remain unaltered or to deteriorate after administration of bland or mucolytic aerosols, some investigators have observed facilitated expectoration or improved cough efficiency. The effectiveness of antimicrobial aerosols is more difficult to evaluate, and their value in patients with bacterial or fungal pulmonary infections remains to be demonstrated. Considering the cost and potential hazards of aerosol therapy, its use should be restricted to forms of aerosols whose clinical value has been objectively demonstrated; a reassessment of the literature suggests that bland and currently used mucolytic and antimicrobial aerosols do not meet this requirement.

AB - The clinical usefulness of bland, mucolytic, and antimicrobial aerosols in the management of obstructive airway disease or bronchopulmonary infections was critically reviewed at the last Conference on the Scientific Basis of Respiratory Therapy in 1974. From the information available at that time, it was concluded that there was little scientific basis for these therapeutic modalities. It was also suggested that the value of aerosol therapy should be evaluated by objective tests. The relatively few studies reported during the last 5 years have not generated new data in support of such aerosol therapy. Three criteria have been used to assess the efficacy of bland and mucolytic aerosols: respiratory function, mucociliary function, and subjective symptoms. Although respiratory and mucociliary function have generally been found to remain unaltered or to deteriorate after administration of bland or mucolytic aerosols, some investigators have observed facilitated expectoration or improved cough efficiency. The effectiveness of antimicrobial aerosols is more difficult to evaluate, and their value in patients with bacterial or fungal pulmonary infections remains to be demonstrated. Considering the cost and potential hazards of aerosol therapy, its use should be restricted to forms of aerosols whose clinical value has been objectively demonstrated; a reassessment of the literature suggests that bland and currently used mucolytic and antimicrobial aerosols do not meet this requirement.

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=0019128894&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=0019128894&partnerID=8YFLogxK

M3 - Article

C2 - 7458053

AN - SCOPUS:0019128894

VL - 122

SP - 79

EP - 87

JO - American Journal of Respiratory and Critical Care Medicine

JF - American Journal of Respiratory and Critical Care Medicine

SN - 1073-449X

IS - 5 II

ER -