mouth-throat models and inspiratory flow profiles in in vitro analytics
Order ID 53563633773 Type Essay Writer Level Masters Style APA Sources/References 4 Perfect Number of Pages to Order 5-10 Pages Description/Paper Instructions
INSTRUCTIONS : please check this: should be written in the form of a research publication., need to introduce the main scientific publications on which work is based, if needed citing a couple of original and important works, including recent review articles.
INTRODUCTION
Think of the introduction as a mental road map that must answer for the reader these four questions:
- What was I studying?
- Why was this topic important to investigate?
- What did we know about this topic before I did this study?
- How will this study advance our knowledge?
A well-written introduction is important because, quite simply, you never get a second chance to make a good first impression. The opening paragraph of your paper will provide your readers with their initial impressions about the logic of your argument, your writing style, the overall quality of your research, and, ultimately, the validity of your findings and conclusions. A vague, disorganized, or error-filled introduction will create a negative impression, whereas, a concise, engaging, and well-written introduction will start your readers off thinking highly of your analytical skills, your writing style, and your research approach.
-update text and add new information where needed, add references correctly
Add General introduction: The mouth-throat models and inspiratory flow profiles in in vitro analytics of dry powder inhalers
- shortly tell why topic in important about add 2-3 clauses
- shortly refer to the theory of the topic, previous research, the societal situation why research is relevant. add couple of clauses
- then describe how approach the topic in this study and what objectives of the study are. Goal is the investigate how the effects of the use anatomical mouth throat and realistic flow profiles on aerodynamic particle size distribution, respectively when examining the aerodynamic particle size distribution in the USP throat I do this
The mouth-throat models and inspiratory flow profiles in in vitro analytics of dry powder inhalers
1.1. Respiratory system
1.2 Aerodynamic particle size distribution
Need to rewrite the text below (section 1.2) and add more new referencies (is it good that only one reference per idea, add more argumentation, academically written paragraphs, no repeation as now these is many times in many different paragraph information about diameter of particle size , so please collect all information together and write the information in a nutshell. OR MAYBE BETTER DELETE ALL INFORMATION AND START WRITING in BLANK PAPER. After this write section 1.3.
These information need to be in 1.2:
Give a brief example of the importance of research, because the
effectiveness of an inhaled medicine depends on how much of the medicine travels to the lungs and
how much of the lungs the medicine is absorbed and distributed.
– briefly describe the transport of particles by different mechanisms and which particle size is best
determined by effective deposition, ie particle size is determined by a high and divided lung dose
(which is the optimal particle size according to studies, etc.).
– all other relevant information on the APSD
——————————————————————————————-
1.2 Aerodynamic particle size distribution
The deposition of particles into the mouth and throat of human beings has a significant challenge to delivering doses of inhaled medications. It could be attributed to the complexity and variability of the human airways´ geometry (DeHaan & Finlay, 2001). The physiological differences influence the deposition of the drug substance in size and the changes associated with the patient´s breathing maneuver, which are time dependent. Factors related to the inhaler like the flow resistance, the position, and the mouthpiece´s geometry also influence the medication´s deposition (McRobbie & Pritchard, 2005). Other factors could also impact the delivery of inhaled medications is of great significance to the product´s designers and developers. In the past decade, this topic has attracted much attention, as seen by a literature review (Mohammed et al., 2012).
Oral deposition of inhaled aerosols has for the last decade or so been studied by many researchers in the field (Longest et al., 2008). These researchers amassed multiple studies and showed that oropharyngeal deposition increases with the increasing values of d2Q: the aerodynamic particle is the d while the volumetric flowrate is the Q. This association between d and q shows that inertial impaction should be considered the leading factor in determining oropharyngeal deposition. Finlay and DeHaan (2001) later showed that an improved relationship of the oropharyngeal losses could be attained for these pharmaceutical aerosols when both the mouth throat geometry and the characteristic length scales of the inhaler mouthpiece are considered (Mohan et al., 2017). Such studies gave justification that prognostic numerical models of oropharyngeal losses should be used grounded on semi-empirical connections. In these studies, the models´ input comprised of inhalation airflow, airway geometry, inhaler mouthpiece geometry, and the aerodynamic particle distribution of the aerosol (Mohammed et al., 2012).
To ensure that pharmacological effect is achievement, a drug particle designed for inhalation must deposit at the action areasite of action. This is only possible if the therapeutic response is obtained from a pulmonary dose and the drug distributed above the alveolar level can be transported with the mucus in the airways. The fate of the inhaled particles depends mostly on the properties of the particle and the lung physiology. Most of the particles with an aerodynamic diameter that is larger than 10 µm deposit into the oropharynx. The critical aerodynamic diameter required to reach the lungs is less than 5µm. Several studies have looked extensively into the aerodynamic and deposition relationships (Longest et al., 2012).only one reference
Most studies confirm that the calculations predict that the most effective inhaled particle is between 1-5 µm (Longest et al., 2012). Particles with a larger geometric diameter can be useful in inhalation only if they have low densities, which could be due to porous structures or any other reason (Longest et al., 2012). There are three most crucial particle deposition mechanisms into the respiratory tract; they include impaction due to inertia, Brownian diffusion, and sedimentation due to gravitational forces. Inertial impaction mostly affects the deposition of bigger particles that typically collide with the upper airway areas. This collision results from particle inertia, which is a result of particles remaining on their original progression and becoming incapable of following the airstream with a change in direction-more excellent impaction results from particles that have a larger diameter, a higher density, and have high velocity (Chapman et al., 2011). These deposition mechanisms explain using the fluid and particle dynamics in the respiratory tract. Due that many branching in the respiratory tract, the airflow cross-section increases exponentially from the trachea to the alveolar sacs leading to a decrease in velocity to less than 1 mm/s. The incident is because airflow is turbulent in the upper part of the tract and laminar further downwards. references ?
Filtering of airborne particles in the upper tract by inertia deposition depends on the particle´s aerodynamic width and velocity. At faster flow rates, utmost particles in the range of 3-5 µm cannot go through the oropharynx. In the upper side of the respiratory tract, where the rate is still moderately high, particles may hit with the larger airways’ inner wall employing inertial impaction. Particles with an increased diameter and high density cannot follow the airflow in divergences and curves and then deposit on the mucosa covering the internal airway walls. The larger particles in the upper region of the tract combine with the condensed velocity and cut the deposition likelihood utilizing inertial impaction further downstream- the influence of sedimentation on to entire deposition increases. references ?
When the flow rate decreases, particles in a size range of up to 3-5 µm can go through the central or through the deep lung. If these particles cannot enter the lung´s margin, their deposition efficacy becomes moderately high due to high sedimentation velocity. Because of the sedimentation velocity, which decreases with the particle´s size, particles with less than 1 µm are often measured not to be suitable for inhalation. Deposition effectiveness under usual breathing conditions usually grabs a minimum of about 20 % for particles of 0.5 µm; this means that 80 % of the particles inhale again. references ?
Several factors influence how inhaled products are deposited in the lungs. They include the physical characteristics of the aerosol inhaled products, the patient´s features such asage, the breathing pattern and the inhalation technique. The particle size plays a significant role in the deposition of the inhaled product as it affects both the extent and site for the particle´s deposition. Several studies have been conducted to investigate the effect of holding the inhalation to make the particle deposition higher with a small mass median aerodynamic diameter (MMAD) (Hamilton et al., 2015). references ?
The exhalation of these particles is significantly decreased when a patient holds their breath after the inhalation maneuver. The deposition into the lungs is enhanced when the particles being inhaled are within 2and 5 µm aerodynamic diameter; this is true for patients with obstructive lung diseases because their airways are narrower, which means aerosol is very unlikely to penetrate deeper. Studies show that airways geometry affects how particles are deposited into the lungs. The airstream is diverted from an obstructed airway to an unobstructed airway using the high impactor force; this means fewer particles in the obstructed airway. Age and gender also influence the deposition of particles. As one age, the lung volume decreases, and the anatomical change to the respiratory airways leads to an overall reduction in deposition and more central deposition. A study also showed that women have a higher quantity of inhaled particles deposited in the upper airway because of changes in the respiratory tract´s geometry (Hamilton et al., 2015). references ?
Another study showed that total deposition for woman and men was comparable for the fine particles, but drug deposition was consistently more significant in women than in men (Longest et al., 2012). In the future, perhaps we may see the advent of personalized medication for patients with lung diseases. In recent years, for example, the need for a personalized drug delivery device for COPD patients to provide optimal benefit from the drug has been discussed (Dolovichet al., 2005; Depietro et al., 2018.)
1.3 Lung deposition studies
1.3.1 Analysis of FDP (fine particle dose ) by Pharmacopoeia method
1.3.1 describe of studies of the aerodynamic particle size distribution with cascade impactors by Ph Eur method, a Ph. Eur throat in next generation impactor by couple of clauses and then write the weaknesses of the Ph.Eur method (weakness example only one flow 4 kPA, mouth model 90 degree angle etc.) and what else weakness you find by couple of clauses.
1.3.2. Analysis of FDP with more biorelevant Method
1.3.2.1 Anatomically realistic mouth throat models
-write about studies which have been made by using different realistic mouth-throat models, example OPC models , that have used in earlier studies by replacing the USP throat to some anatomical mouth-throat models, strengths and weaknesses of different anatomical mouth-throats, differences of anatomical mouth throat models compared to USP(United State Pharmacopoeia) throat, etc.
1.3.2.2 Use of realistic flow profiles with anatomical mouth throat models
-tell about why is better for use of realistic flow profiles by breathing simulator than flow by cascade impactors by vacuum 4 kPa.
-what challenges are posed to obtain in vitro in vivo correlation , tell if in earlier researcher have been successfully used in vitro data in vivo studies.
RUBRIC
QUALITY OF RESPONSE NO RESPONSE POOR / UNSATISFACTORY SATISFACTORY GOOD EXCELLENT Content (worth a maximum of 50% of the total points) Zero points: Student failed to submit the final paper. 20 points out of 50: The essay illustrates poor understanding of the relevant material by failing to address or incorrectly addressing the relevant content; failing to identify or inaccurately explaining/defining key concepts/ideas; ignoring or incorrectly explaining key points/claims and the reasoning behind them; and/or incorrectly or inappropriately using terminology; and elements of the response are lacking. 30 points out of 50: The essay illustrates a rudimentary understanding of the relevant material by mentioning but not full explaining the relevant content; identifying some of the key concepts/ideas though failing to fully or accurately explain many of them; using terminology, though sometimes inaccurately or inappropriately; and/or incorporating some key claims/points but failing to explain the reasoning behind them or doing so inaccurately. Elements of the required response may also be lacking. 40 points out of 50: The essay illustrates solid understanding of the relevant material by correctly addressing most of the relevant content; identifying and explaining most of the key concepts/ideas; using correct terminology; explaining the reasoning behind most of the key points/claims; and/or where necessary or useful, substantiating some points with accurate examples. The answer is complete. 50 points: The essay illustrates exemplary understanding of the relevant material by thoroughly and correctly addressing the relevant content; identifying and explaining all of the key concepts/ideas; using correct terminology explaining the reasoning behind key points/claims and substantiating, as necessary/useful, points with several accurate and illuminating examples. No aspects of the required answer are missing. Use of Sources (worth a maximum of 20% of the total points). Zero points: Student failed to include citations and/or references. Or the student failed to submit a final paper. 5 out 20 points: Sources are seldom cited to support statements and/or format of citations are not recognizable as APA 6th Edition format. There are major errors in the formation of the references and citations. And/or there is a major reliance on highly questionable. The Student fails to provide an adequate synthesis of research collected for the paper. 10 out 20 points: References to scholarly sources are occasionally given; many statements seem unsubstantiated. Frequent errors in APA 6th Edition format, leaving the reader confused about the source of the information. There are significant errors of the formation in the references and citations. And/or there is a significant use of highly questionable sources. 15 out 20 points: Credible Scholarly sources are used effectively support claims and are, for the most part, clear and fairly represented. APA 6th Edition is used with only a few minor errors. There are minor errors in reference and/or citations. And/or there is some use of questionable sources. 20 points: Credible scholarly sources are used to give compelling evidence to support claims and are clearly and fairly represented. APA 6th Edition format is used accurately and consistently. The student uses above the maximum required references in the development of the assignment. Grammar (worth maximum of 20% of total points) Zero points: Student failed to submit the final paper. 5 points out of 20: The paper does not communicate ideas/points clearly due to inappropriate use of terminology and vague language; thoughts and sentences are disjointed or incomprehensible; organization lacking; and/or numerous grammatical, spelling/punctuation errors 10 points out 20: The paper is often unclear and difficult to follow due to some inappropriate terminology and/or vague language; ideas may be fragmented, wandering and/or repetitive; poor organization; and/or some grammatical, spelling, punctuation errors 15 points out of 20: The paper is mostly clear as a result of appropriate use of terminology and minimal vagueness; no tangents and no repetition; fairly good organization; almost perfect grammar, spelling, punctuation, and word usage. 20 points: The paper is clear, concise, and a pleasure to read as a result of appropriate and precise use of terminology; total coherence of thoughts and presentation and logical organization; and the essay is error free. Structure of the Paper (worth 10% of total points) Zero points: Student failed to submit the final paper. 3 points out of 10: Student needs to develop better formatting skills. The paper omits significant structural elements required for and APA 6th edition paper. Formatting of the paper has major flaws. The paper does not conform to APA 6th edition requirements whatsoever. 5 points out of 10: Appearance of final paper demonstrates the student’s limited ability to format the paper. There are significant errors in formatting and/or the total omission of major components of an APA 6th edition paper. They can include the omission of the cover page, abstract, and page numbers. Additionally the page has major formatting issues with spacing or paragraph formation. Font size might not conform to size requirements. The student also significantly writes too large or too short of and paper 7 points out of 10: Research paper presents an above-average use of formatting skills. The paper has slight errors within the paper. This can include small errors or omissions with the cover page, abstract, page number, and headers. There could be also slight formatting issues with the document spacing or the font Additionally the paper might slightly exceed or undershoot the specific number of required written pages for the assignment. 10 points: Student provides a high-caliber, formatted paper. This includes an APA 6th edition cover page, abstract, page number, headers and is double spaced in 12’ Times Roman Font. Additionally, the paper conforms to the specific number of required written pages and neither goes over or under the specified length of the paper. GET THIS PROJECT NOW BY CLICKING ON THIS LINK TO PLACE THE ORDER
CLICK ON THE LINK HERE: https://www.perfectacademic.com/orders/ordernow
Do You Have Any Other Essay/Assignment/Class Project/Homework Related to this? Click Here Now [CLICK ME] and Have It Done by Our PhD Qualified Writers!!