Abstract

BackgroundSecond 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.ObjectiveThe aim of the study was to identify the main criteria determining the choice of a second generation H1A by allergy specialists in mainland France.MethodsConsecutive 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.Results1,080 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 relevanceThe 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.

Highlights

  • Allergic rhinitis remains one of the most prevalent diseases in Europe and constitutes an important health issue

  • Because of the bothersome side effects of the first marketed medications, second generation H1 antihistamines (H1A) have been developed and approved over the last 25 years. They exhibit a low sedating potential related to their poor ability to cross the blood–brain barrier. They are recommended as first choice medications for allergic rhinitis and conjunctivitis [4,5]

  • As shown by univariate analyses (Table 2), persistent rhinitis was more frequently associated with familial history of allergy, moderate to severe symptoms and asthma, whereas intermittent rhinitis was more frequently associated with conjunctivitis

Read more

Summary

Introduction

Allergic rhinitis remains one of the most prevalent diseases in Europe and constitutes an important health issue. Symptoms greatly impact general well-being and quality of life of a significant proportion of patients, among those with persistent disease [2]. Not enough data are available from studies in real-life conditions. Most patients report being relieved by medication, one out of five remains unsatisfied, as shown by a self-completion survey conducted among European patients [6]. Second generation H1 antihistamines (H1A) are currently recommended as first choice medications for allergic rhinitis and rhinoconjunctivitis. Little is known about what influences the choice of prescription of one second generation (H1A) as opposed to another in real-life conditions

Objectives
Methods
Results
Conclusion
Full Text
Published version (Free)

Talk to us

Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have

Schedule a call