Letters to the Editor
Asthma delivery devices
- Dan Ewald
- Aust Prescr 2003;26:75-7
- 1 August 2003
- DOI: 10.18773/austprescr.2003.056
The Editorial Executive Committee welcomes letters, which should be less than 250 words. Before a decision to publish is made, letters which refer to a published article may be sent to the author for a response. Any letter may be sent to an expert for comment. When letters are published, they are usually accompanied in the same issue by their responses or comments. The Committee screens out discourteous, inaccurate or libellous statements. The letters are sub-edited before publication. Authors are required to declare any conflicts of interest. The Committee's decision on publication is final.
Editor, – Thank you for the review of asthma therapy delivery devices (Aust Prescr 2003;26:5-7). This article covered important common sense issues in asthma treatment delivery. As suggested by the author, practical issues of use and patient acceptability dominate the decision between a number of otherwise acceptable drug delivery methods. An additional practical issue, in the experience of many Top End practitioners, is that dry powder devices often do not stay dry enough to function in tropical humid conditions, particularly if the users are not very careful to keep the cap screwed on tightly. For this reason dry powder inhalers are not recommended in the Central Australian Rural Practitioners Association Standard Treatment Manual1for use in the tropical Top End.
Lennox Head, NSW
Standard Treatment Manual for Health Workers, 4th edition.
General Practitioner , Lennox Head, NSW
Editor , Standard Treatment Manual for Health Workers, 4th edition.