Allergic Rhinitis In Primary Care Research Articles

Reshaping the Management of Allergic Rhinitis in Primary Care: Lessons from the COVID-19 Pandemic.

The COVID-19 pandemic presented unique challenges to the delivery of healthcare for patients with allergic rhinitis (AR) following its disruption and impact on the healthcare system with profound implications. Reliance on self-care for AR symptom management was substantial during the pandemic with many patients encouraged to only seek in-person medical care when necessary. The advantage of digital technology becomes apparent when patients and healthcare providers had to change and adapt their method of interaction from the regular physical face-to-face consultation to telehealth and mobile health in the provision of care. Despite the pandemic and the ever-evolving post pandemic situation, optimal management of AR remains paramount for both patients and healthcare professionals. A reshaping of the delivery of care is essential to accomplish this goal. In this paper, we present what we have learned about AR management during the COVID-19 pandemic, the role of digital technology in revolutionizing AR healthcare, screening assessment in the identification and differentiation of common upper respiratory conditions, and a framework to facilitate the management of AR in primary care.

Closing the knowledge gap in Malaysian pharmacists: a virtual Allergic Rhinitis Boot Camp initiative.

BackgroundIn primary care, general practitioners (GPs) and pharmacists are at the frontline to identify, classify and manage patients suffering from allergic rhinitis (AR). The Allergic Rhinitis and its impact on Asthma (ARIA) guidelines aid clinicians in disease management by providing evidence-based recommendations. A recently published ASEAN primary care survey demonstrated that the awareness of ARIA guidelines was high among GPs but notably lower in pharmacists. Hence, this study seeks to evaluate the effectiveness of a Boot Camp education initiative in bridging the unmet needs in pharmacist awareness and education.MethodsThe boot camp was organised as a virtual event. The participants answered the same questionnaire before (pre-assessment) and immediately after (post-assessment) the boot camp session. Statistical analysis was performed on the data paired between the pre- and post- assessments using SPSS v. 25.0 software.ResultsThe boot camp survey results showed that second-generation oral antihistamines and allergen avoidance are the most preferred options for AR treatment in pharmacy practice, irrespective of the disease severity. In both pre- and post-assessments, efficacy was ranked as the most important factor considered for choosing an antihistamine and which affects patient adherence. With the boot camp initiative, there was a statistically significant increase in awareness about the patient profiling tool (from 31.6% to 88.2%) and ARIA guidelines (from 40.4% to 91.2%) among the pharmacists (p<0.05). The proportion of pharmacists who were able to identify, classify and refer AR patients was significantly increased in post-assessment (p<0.05). Post the boot camp, among the proportion of pharmacists (91.2%) who were already aware of ARIA, a high percentage of them further agreed that ARIA guidelines were useful in identifying and treating patients with AR, as well as classifying AR, respectively (97.6%, 95.2%, and 93.5%).ConclusionsBased on improvements in knowledge and understanding of disease management post assessment, the Allergic Rhinitis Boot Camp initiative is effective and relevant to pharmacy practice. Outreach programs like this reiterate the emphasis on patient compliance and importance of utilizing ARIA guidelines in pharmacy practice that facilitates better management of AR in primary care.

Perception and control of allergic rhinitis in primary care

Perception of a chronic illness is a driver of patient behaviour that may impact treatment outcomes. The cross-sectional PETRA study was designed to describe the links between disease perception, patient behaviour and treatment outcomes in adults with allergic rhinitis (AR). Overall, 687 French general practitioners (GPs) included 1929 analysable patients (mean age: 39 years; intermittent/persistent symptoms: 46.2/52.3%). Of the patients, 14.1% had also been diagnosed with asthma; 71.7% had uncontrolled AR (ARCT score < 20), and 53.6% had a good perception of their illness (BIPQ score < 5). Factors significantly associated with poor perception of AR were ENT (ear/nose/throat) complications, nasal pruritus, uncontrolled AR and asthma. A strong negative correlation was observed between the BIPQ and ARCT scores: the poorer the patient’s perception, the less the AR was controlled. Although no causal relationship could be drawn, GP-driven improvement of AR perception could lead to better control of symptoms.

Visual analogue scale in patients treated for allergic rhinitis: an observational prospective study in primary care

Allergic rhinitis (AR) severity is evaluated using scores such as Rhinoconjunctivitis Quality-of-Life Questionnaire (RQLQ) and total symptom score (TSS). However, a simple assessment is needed to enable physicians to evaluate the severity of the AR and the efficacy of the treatment. The main objective was to validate visual analogue scale (VAS) as a simple quantitative tool to assess the burden of AR in primary care. The study was multi-centre prospective observational conducted in patients consulting general practitioners for symptomatic rhinitis. VAS, RQLQ and TSS6 were assessed at the consultation day and 14 days later, and changes were analysed using paired test. Correlations between VAS, RQLQ and TSS6 were assessed. Cut-off levels for VAS, which discriminate significant from insignificant changes, were established using Receiver Operating Characteristic curves. A total of 990 patients were included in the study. According to allergic rhinitis and its impact on asthma classification, mild intermittent rhinitis was diagnosed in 20% patients, mild persistent in 17%, moderate/severe intermittent in 15% and moderate/severe persistent in 48%, at the consultation day. At day-14, rhinitis symptoms and QoL improved significantly in almost all patients. Impairment incurred by AR and assessed with VAS improved also. The established cut-off variation of 23 mm for VAS was associated with a cut-off variation of 0.5 for RQLQ. Sensitivity analysis with RQLQ and TSS6 scales confirmed the aptitude of the cut-off value (23 mm) to discriminate changes in symptoms and QoL. The VAS can detect with high sensitivity the variations of symptoms and QoL in patients with AR.

‘Help for Hay Fever’, a goal-focused intervention for people with intermittent allergic rhinitis, delivered in Scottish community pharmacies: study protocol for a pilot cluster randomized controlled trial

BackgroundDespite the availability of evidence-based guidelines for managing allergic rhinitis in primary care, management of the condition in the United Kingdom (UK) remains sub-optimal. Its high prevalence and negative effects on quality of life, school performance, productivity and co-morbid respiratory conditions (in particular, asthma), and high health and societal costs, make this a priority for developing novel models of care. Recent Australian research demonstrated the potential of a community pharmacy-based ‘goal-focused’ intervention to help people with intermittent allergic rhinitis to self-manage their condition better, reduce symptom severity and improve quality of life. In this pilot study we will assess the transferability of the goal-focused intervention to a UK context, the suitability of the intervention materials, procedures and outcome measures and collect data to inform a future definitive UK randomized controlled trial (RCT).Methods/DesignA pilot cluster RCT with associated preliminary economic analysis and embedded qualitative evaluation. The pilot trial will take place in two Scottish Health Board areas: Grampian and Greater Glasgow & Clyde. Twelve community pharmacies will be randomly assigned to intervention or usual care group. Each will recruit 12 customers seeking advice or treatment for intermittent allergic rhinitis. Pharmacy staff in intervention pharmacies will support recruited customers in developing strategies for setting and achieving goals that aim to avoid/minimize triggers for, and eliminate/minimize symptoms of allergic rhinitis. Customers recruited in non-intervention pharmacies will receive usual care. The co-primary outcome measures, selected to inform a sample size calculation for a future RCT, are: community pharmacy and customer recruitment and completion rates; and effect size of change in the validated mini-Rhinoconjunctivitis Quality of Life Questionnaire between baseline, one-week and six-weeks post-intervention. Secondary outcome measures relate to changes in symptom severity, productivity, medication adherence and self-efficacy. Quantitative data about accrual, retention and economic measures, and qualitative data about participants’ experiences during the trial will be collected to inform the future RCT.DiscussionThis work will lay the foundations for a definitive RCT of a community pharmacy-based ‘goal-focused’ self-management intervention for people with intermittent allergic rhinitis. Results of the pilot trial are expected to be available in April 2013.Trial registrationCurrent Controlled Trials ISRCTN43606442

Sensitisation patterns and association with age, gender, and clinical symptoms in children with allergic rhinitis in primary care: a cross-sectional study

Background:Polysensitisation is a frequent phenomenon in patients with allergic rhinitis. However, few studies have investigated the characteristics of polysensitised children, especially in primary care.Objectives:This analysis describes the patterns of sensitisation to common allergens and the association with age, gender, and clinical symptoms in children in primary care diagnosed with allergic rhinitis.Methods:Cross-sectional data from two randomised double-blind placebo-controlled studies were used to select children aged 6–18 years (n=784) with a doctor's diagnosis of allergic rhinitis or use of relevant medication for allergic rhinitis in primary care. They were assessed for age, gender, specific IgE (type and number of sensitisations), nasal and eye symptom scores.Results:In 699 of the 784 children (89%) with a doctor's diagnosis or relevant medication use, a positive IgE test for one or more allergens was found. Polysensitisation (≥2 sensitisations) was found in 69% of all children. Sensitisation was more common in children aged 9–13 than in younger children aged 5–8 years (p=0.03). Monosensitisation and polysensitisation were not significantly different in girls and boys. The severity of clinical symptoms did not differ between polysensitised and monosensitised children, but symptoms were significantly lower in non-sensitised children.Conclusions:Polysensitisation to multiple allergens occurs frequently in children with allergic rhinitis in general practice. Overall, clinical symptoms are equally severe in polysensitised and monosensitised children. Treatment decisions for allergic rhinitis should be made on the basis of a clinical history and allergy testing.

Exhaled nitric oxide measures allergy not symptoms in children with allergic rhinitis in primary care: a prospective cross-sectional and longitudinal cohort study

Background:Allergic rhinitis (AR) and asthma are both inflammatory diseases and are often associated. Relationships between fractional exhaled nitric oxide (FeNO) and asthma, atopy, and quality of life have been shown.Aims:This study aimed to determine whether FeNO in children with AR (n=158) or combined AR and asthma (n=93) was associated with clinical symptoms, house dust mite (HDM)-specific IgE, and rhinitis-specific quality of life, both cross-sectionally and longitudinally.Methods:Children with AR aged 6–18 years (n=251) in primary care were assessed for FeNO, nasal symptom scores, asthma symptom scores, quality of life, and HDM-specific IgE at baseline and 2 years later.Results:We found similarly elevated FeNO in children with only AR and in those with combined AR and asthma. No correlations were found between FeNO and nasal or asthma symptoms and rhinitis-related quality of life. Longitudinal correlations were strongest for HDM-specific IgE (r=0.91, p<0.0001).Conclusions:FeNO was similar in a selected group of children with AR with and without asthma in primary care and was unrelated to symptoms or quality of life in both groups. FeNO is unlikely to be a useful biomarker of the clinical severity of upper or lower airway disease in primary care.

Advances in upper airway diseases and allergen immunotherapy in 2011

The purpose of this review is to highlight recently published important articles on upper airway diseases and allergen immunotherapy. We review articles on rhinitis, sinusitis, conjunctivitis, and immunotherapy. New insights into epidemiology, pathophysiology, diagnosis, and therapy are described for each of the above diseases.

How representative are clinical study patients with allergic rhinitis in primary care?

Guidelines are the cornerstone of health care decision making and are based on the best available evidence, ideally large randomized controlled trials (RCTs). Although guidelines target typical patients, RCTs are often based on narrow inclusion and exclusion criteria. We explored to what extent typical patients, such as those consulting general practitioners for allergic rhinitis, differ from patients enrolled in RCTs. We conducted a prospective cohort study including all the consecutive patients with allergic rhinitis cared for by general practitioners in the Languedoc-Roussillon region of France within 2 weeks during the grass pollen season. We evaluated how the characteristics of these patients differed from those of patients included in the 4 largest placebo-controlled RCTs of persistent and intermittent allergic rhinitis. Three hundred eleven patients seen by 48 general practitioners were enrolled in this study. Only 7.4% (95% CI, 4.5% to 10.3%) of the patients would have been enrolled in the RCTs. The primary reasons for this difference were as follows: diagnosis of allergy based on skin test results, serum specific IgE levels, or both (20.4%); severity of allergic rhinitis (11.5%); other chronic diseases (11.4%); history of sinusitis (10.4%); and asthma comorbidity (10.1%). A sensitivity analysis excluding contraception and the diagnosis of allergy showed that the percentage of representative patients increased to 20.2% (95% CI, 15.8% to 24.7%). Only a small proportion of patients with allergic rhinitis seen in the primary care setting for allergic rhinitis would be eligible for RCTs. Thus guideline developers and health decision makers need to make careful judgments about the directness of the evidence from RCTs conducted in highly controlled settings.

Good practice in the management of allergic rhinitis in primary care

Good practice in the management of allergic rhinitis in primary care

¿Podemos mejorar el manejo terapéutico de la rinitis alérgica en atención primaria?

To evaluate improvement in therapeutic management of allergic rhinitis. Study of level of quality (longitudinal, prospective, intervention). Primary care. First evaluation (second quarter of 1995): 73 out of 305 patients were sampled (confidence 5%, accuracy 10%). Second evaluation (second quarter of 1996). Sample of 51 patients from a total of 210. Explicit criteria and standard procedure, based on consensus, for rhinitis treatment and an overall indicator of the general quality of rhinitis management were analysed. Criterion 1 (C1): correctly scaled treatment; criterion 2 (C2): initial treatment of choice with inhaled corticoids; criterion 3 (C3): correct use of oral corticoids or immunotherapy; criterion 4 (C4): coadjutant therapy according to predominant symptoms. Corrective measures: ongoing training and routine use of guide to practice. index of compliance with criteria, Chi squared and Fisher's Z tests of a tail to compare both evaluations. First evaluation: index of compliance with C1 = 59% (CI +/- 11), C2 = 41% (CI +/- 11), C3 = 90% (CI +/- 6) and C4 = 83% (CI +/- 8). Criteria and summary indicator obtained better results in patients attended by allergists. Second evaluation with overall improvement: C1 = 68.6% (CI +/- 13), C2 = 57% (CI +/- 13), C3 = 94% (CI +/- 6), C4 = 98% (CI +/- 3). Significant differences for C4 and C2 (p < 0.05). Overall quality and quality of criteria improved for patients attended in our environment. The summary indicator went up from 35.6% to 57% (p = 0.019), with the quality levels (C1-C4) becoming the same as those of the patients with allergy attended and with significant differences in the first evaluation disappearing. Ongoing training and routine use of guides to practice enables the therapeutic management of allergic rhinitis in primary care to be improved.