Cargando…
Reasons for prescribing second generation antihistamines to treat allergic rhinitis in real-life conditions and patient response
BACKGROUND: Second generation H1 antihistamines (H1A) are currently recommended as first choice medications for allergic rhinitis and rhinoconjunctivitis. However, little is known about what influences the choice of prescription of one second generation (H1A) as opposed to another in real-life condi...
Autores principales: | , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
BioMed Central
2014
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4062518/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/24944561 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/1710-1492-10-29 |
_version_ | 1782321666817261568 |
---|---|
author | Demoly, Pascal Chiriac, Anca Mirela Berge, Benoît Rostin, Michel |
author_facet | Demoly, Pascal Chiriac, Anca Mirela Berge, Benoît Rostin, Michel |
author_sort | Demoly, Pascal |
collection | PubMed |
description | BACKGROUND: Second generation H1 antihistamines (H1A) are currently recommended as first choice medications for allergic rhinitis and rhinoconjunctivitis. However, little is known about what influences the choice of prescription of one second generation (H1A) as opposed to another in real-life conditions. OBJECTIVE: The aim of the study was to identify the main criteria determining the choice of a second generation H1A by allergy specialists in mainland France. METHODS: Consecutive patients suffering from allergic rhinitis or rhinoconjunctivitis were included and followed prospectively for 30 days from the prescription of a second generation H1A in monotherapy. Patients were asked to fill in auto-questionnaires at baseline, daily during the first 10 days of the new treatment, and at the end of follow-up. Data on efficacy, tolerance, safety, rate and type of response to treatment, as well as patient satisfaction were recorded and analyzed. RESULTS: 1,080 patients were included between March 2011 and October 2012, mostly suffering from moderate to severe rhinitis (82.0%). The most frequently cited reason for choosing a specific H1A was the expected efficacy (85.3%). The mean time to nasal and ocular recovery was 6 days and 78.2% of patients responded to treatment within this interval. The presence of conjunctivitis was significantly associated with a more rapid response. At the end of follow-up, the satisfaction rate was higher for patients who were switched from a previous treatment (87.5%), compared to those receiving their first treatment (78.8%). CONCLUSION AND CLINICAL RELEVANCE: The main reason for choosing a specific second generation H1A was its expected efficacy. Concomitant conjunctivitis is associated with a more rapid response to treatment. Symptom recovery necessitates a mean of 6 days. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-4062518 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2014 |
publisher | BioMed Central |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-40625182014-06-19 Reasons for prescribing second generation antihistamines to treat allergic rhinitis in real-life conditions and patient response Demoly, Pascal Chiriac, Anca Mirela Berge, Benoît Rostin, Michel Allergy Asthma Clin Immunol Research BACKGROUND: Second generation H1 antihistamines (H1A) are currently recommended as first choice medications for allergic rhinitis and rhinoconjunctivitis. However, little is known about what influences the choice of prescription of one second generation (H1A) as opposed to another in real-life conditions. OBJECTIVE: The aim of the study was to identify the main criteria determining the choice of a second generation H1A by allergy specialists in mainland France. METHODS: Consecutive patients suffering from allergic rhinitis or rhinoconjunctivitis were included and followed prospectively for 30 days from the prescription of a second generation H1A in monotherapy. Patients were asked to fill in auto-questionnaires at baseline, daily during the first 10 days of the new treatment, and at the end of follow-up. Data on efficacy, tolerance, safety, rate and type of response to treatment, as well as patient satisfaction were recorded and analyzed. RESULTS: 1,080 patients were included between March 2011 and October 2012, mostly suffering from moderate to severe rhinitis (82.0%). The most frequently cited reason for choosing a specific H1A was the expected efficacy (85.3%). The mean time to nasal and ocular recovery was 6 days and 78.2% of patients responded to treatment within this interval. The presence of conjunctivitis was significantly associated with a more rapid response. At the end of follow-up, the satisfaction rate was higher for patients who were switched from a previous treatment (87.5%), compared to those receiving their first treatment (78.8%). CONCLUSION AND CLINICAL RELEVANCE: The main reason for choosing a specific second generation H1A was its expected efficacy. Concomitant conjunctivitis is associated with a more rapid response to treatment. Symptom recovery necessitates a mean of 6 days. BioMed Central 2014-06-06 /pmc/articles/PMC4062518/ /pubmed/24944561 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/1710-1492-10-29 Text en Copyright © 2014 Demoly et al.; licensee BioMed Central Ltd. http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0 This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly credited. The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver (http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated. |
spellingShingle | Research Demoly, Pascal Chiriac, Anca Mirela Berge, Benoît Rostin, Michel Reasons for prescribing second generation antihistamines to treat allergic rhinitis in real-life conditions and patient response |
title | Reasons for prescribing second generation antihistamines to treat allergic rhinitis in real-life conditions and patient response |
title_full | Reasons for prescribing second generation antihistamines to treat allergic rhinitis in real-life conditions and patient response |
title_fullStr | Reasons for prescribing second generation antihistamines to treat allergic rhinitis in real-life conditions and patient response |
title_full_unstemmed | Reasons for prescribing second generation antihistamines to treat allergic rhinitis in real-life conditions and patient response |
title_short | Reasons for prescribing second generation antihistamines to treat allergic rhinitis in real-life conditions and patient response |
title_sort | reasons for prescribing second generation antihistamines to treat allergic rhinitis in real-life conditions and patient response |
topic | Research |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4062518/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/24944561 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/1710-1492-10-29 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT demolypascal reasonsforprescribingsecondgenerationantihistaminestotreatallergicrhinitisinreallifeconditionsandpatientresponse AT chiriacancamirela reasonsforprescribingsecondgenerationantihistaminestotreatallergicrhinitisinreallifeconditionsandpatientresponse AT bergebenoit reasonsforprescribingsecondgenerationantihistaminestotreatallergicrhinitisinreallifeconditionsandpatientresponse AT rostinmichel reasonsforprescribingsecondgenerationantihistaminestotreatallergicrhinitisinreallifeconditionsandpatientresponse |