MATERIALS AND METHODS: This is a prospective observational study to develop, validate and evaluate the ARSIA questionnaire based on ARIA guidelines. The sample will be obtained from the list of patients under follow-up in the ORL clinic HSAH and HUSM with ages of 18 to 60 years, patients clinically diagnosed with allergic rhinitis, and with positive skin prick test.
RESULTS: A total of 150 patients with a positive skin prick test participated in this study. In the 'nasal symptom' and 'impact on daily activities' domains, calculated Cronbach's alpha shows a value of 0.878 and 0.811 respectively. The inter-item correlation was calculated to analyse internal consistency reliability. Items B3 and B4 were dropped from the questionnaire as both showed a low correlation with other items. New Cronbach's alpha for the daily activities domain was 0.830, which showed better internal consistency reliability. All of the items were analysed for sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value (PPV), and negative predictive value (NPV). Clinician diagnosis from the proforma was used as a comparison to the participant's responses. In the analysis, a cut-off points of 12 was used to classify the patient's nasal symptoms into intermittent or persistent, with a sensitivity of 75%, specificity of 86%, PPV of 95%, and NPV of 51%. Whereas, a cut-off point of 15 was used to classify the rhinitis impact on daily activities into mild or moderate/severe, with a sensitivity of 58%, specificity of 100%, PPV of 100%, and NPV of 42%. The only item in the 'control' domain has been dropped out following a consensus of experts and judgement as it has not been used in the clinician diagnosis and thus, is unable to test for sensitivity, specificity, PPV, and NPV.
CONCLUSION: This newly developed, validated, and evaluated questionnaire is a good tool for the evaluation of allergic rhinitis symptoms and their impact on daily activities. It is important to understand that AR symptoms could have a significant impact on daily activities. Although further study and testing are needed, it provides an initial means for evaluating the patient condition and control level, as well as patients' perception of their rhinitis control.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: A cross-sectional study done in Baghdad on 112 patients who attended Al-Zahraa Allergic Center. Their demographic characteristics, total IgE, eosinophil counts and PCR result for COVID-19 were determined.
RESULTS: The means for IgE and eosinophils were 245.7±260.1IU/ml and 444.5±117.1cells/microliter sequentially. Around 32.1% had high IgE level (i.e., atopic) and 11.6% had COVID-19. Among the atopic patients, 33.3%, 30.5% and 36.2% had atopic dermatitis, allergic rhinitis and asthma respectively. More than half (58.3%) of them were male, 55.5% aged <45 years, 36.2% were retired or had no job, 69.5% were graduated from secondary school or more and 88.8% lived in urban areas. There is no significant association in IgE level between those with and without COVID-19, which means that exposure to SARS Cov2 virus could not be a trigger or exacerbation for atopic diseases. Also, there was no association between atopic patients with COVID-19 and those without it regarding type of atopy, age, sex, occupation, education, type of living area.
CONCLUSIONS: Atopy is not a risk factor for COVID-19.
METHODS: The participants were divided into control and allergic rhinitis groups based on the clinical symptoms and skin prick tests. The AR group was treated with intranasal corticosteroid after the diagnosis. The nasal fractional exhaled nitric oxide (FENO) levels were compared between control and AR groups. In the AR group, the visual analogue scale (VAS), Nasal Obstruction Symptoms Evaluation (NOSE) questionnaire, and nasal fractional exhaled nitric oxide (FeNO) were assessed pre- and post-treatment.
RESULTS: One hundred ten adults were enrolled. The nasal FeNO level was significantly higher in AR compared to control (p
METHODS: A cross-sectional study was conducted on consecutive adults with non-allergic rhinitis. The reflux symptom index (score of more than 13 = laryngopharyngeal reflux) and nasal symptoms (categorised as mild (total score of 0-3), moderate (4-7) or severe (8-12)) were assessed.
RESULTS: The study included 227 participants (aged 58.64 ± 12.39 years, 59.5 per cent female). The reflux symptom index scores increased with total nasal symptom scores (mild vs moderate vs severe, 8.61 ± 6.27 vs 12.94 ± 7.4 vs 16.40 ± 8.10; p < 0.01). Logistic regression indicated that laryngopharyngeal reflux is more likely in patients with severe nose block (odds ratio 5.47 (95 per cent confidence interval = 2.16-13.87); p < 0.01).
CONCLUSION: Laryngopharyngeal reflux symptoms are associated with nasal symptom severity, and nasal symptoms should be primarily treated. Those with predominant nose block and laryngopharyngeal reflux symptoms are more likely to have laryngopharyngeal reflux.
METHODS: A prospective, randomized, controlled trial was carried out at two tertiary hospitals. 32 patients diagnosed with chronic rhinosinusitis and had underwent endoscopic sinus surgery were enrolled. The study group received 2 mL of Tualang honey nasal dressing and the control group received nasal dressing with 2 mL of triamcinolone 20 mg/mL as positive control. A 2 cm nasal dressing was placed longitudinally into the middle meatuses of both nasal cavities. Postoperative healing assessments of edema, crusting, secretions, scarring and symptoms were performed at postoperative day 7, 14, 28 and at 3 months using Sinonasal Outcome Test 22 questionnaire and modified Lund-Kennedy scoring system.
RESULTS: There were no significant differences noted in the scores of Sinonasal Outcome Test 22 and modified Lund-Kennedy at Day 7, 14 and 28 (p>0.05) for both groups. At 3rd month, patients in the triamcinolone group had lesser symptoms and better endoscopic findings (p<0.05).
CONCLUSION: Tualang honey is not as effective as steroid in achieving good wound healing and surgical outcomes in post endoscopic sinus surgery patients. Thus, it is not suitable as a substitute for steroid to reduce symptoms and prevent recurrence of disease.
OBJECTIVE: We aimed to compare the efficacy and safety of 1.8% SPHNSI and 0.9% commercial isotonic nasal saline irrigation (0.9% CINSI) in patients with AR.
METHODS: A randomised, single-blinded, placebo-controlled trial was performed as a pilot study. Seventy-eight patients with AR were included. Each patient was randomised to nasal irrigation with 80 mL of either 1.8% SPHNSI or 0.9% CINSI twice-daily for 4 weeks. Randomised codes were generated using a computer and a block of 4 procedure. The primary outcome was improvement of quality of life scores in Thai patients with allergic rhinoconjunctivitis (Rcq-36). Secondary outcomes were clinical symptoms using total nasal symptom scores (TNSS) and adverse events. All outcomes were assessed by blinded assessors at baseline, week 2, and week 4.
RESULTS: At week 4, nasal irrigation with 1.8% SPHNSI had significantly improved the Rcq-36 score (54% versus 50%; p < 0.032) and congestion symptom score (96% versus 84%; p < 0.018) compared to nasal irrigation with 0.9% CINSI. Adverse events were comparable for both groups at week 4.
CONCLUSIONS: This pilot study indicates that regular use of 1.8% SPHNSI in AR patients for 4 weeks is safe and has superior efficacy to 0.9% CINSI for alleviating congestion and improving quality of life scores.
DESIGN: A scoping review.
DATA SOURCES: PubMed, Scopus, Direct Open Access Journal, Medline, Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature, ScienceDirect and SpringerLink were searched from October 2017 until May 2018.
ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA FOR SELECTING STUDIES: We selected all types of studies including case-control studies, prospective or retrospective cohort studies, cross-sectional studies and experimental studies, and we included reviews such as literature reviews, systematic reviews with or without meta-analysis and scoping reviews that were published in English and associated the ABO blood group with the three allergic diseases (asthma, AR and AD) in humans of all age groups.
DATA EXTRACTION AND SYNTHESIS: Two reviewers independently screened the titles and abstracts and assessed the full-text articles of the abstracts that met the eligibility requirements. Data from the included studies were extracted, evaluated and reported in the form of narrative synthesis.
RESULTS: Of the 10 246 retrieved titles, only 14 articles were selected for a scoping review based on the eligibility criteria. The majority of the studies demonstrated a significant association between ABO blood groups and allergic diseases. We found that blood group O is prominent in patients with AR and asthma, while a non-O blood group is common in patients with AD.
CONCLUSION: This scoping review serves as preliminary evidence for the association of ABO blood groups with allergic diseases. Further studies need to be conducted so that the relationship between ABO blood groups and allergic diseases can be fully established. This could be helpful for clinicians and health professionals in consulting and managing patients who suffer from allergic diseases in the future.
Methods: A cross-sectional survey of 329 GPs and 548 pharmacists was conducted from May to November 2019. Participants answered a questionnaire focused on their i) current practice in the management of AR, ii) views on patient compliance, iii) understanding and usage of guidelines.
Results: Clinical history was the most preferred method to diagnose AR by 95.4% of GPs and 58.8% of pharmacists. Second-generation antihistamines were the most widely available treatment option in GP clinics and pharmacies (94.8% and 97.2%) and correspondingly the most preferred treatment for both mild (90.3%, 76.8%) to moderatesevere rhinitis (90.3%, 78.6%) by GPs and pharmacists, respectively. Loratadine was ranked as the most preferred 2nd generation antihistamines (GP vs pharmacists: 55.3% vs 58.9%). More than 90% of GPs and pharmacists ranked length and efficacy of treatment as important factors that increase patient compliance. Awareness of the ARIA guidelines was high among GPs (80%) and lower among pharmacists (48.4%). However, only 63.3% of GPs and 48.2% of pharmacists knew how to identify AR patients.
Conclusions: The survey in the 4 ASEAN countries has identified a need to strengthen the awareness and use of ARIA guidelines among the primary care practitioners. Adherence to ARIA guidelines, choosing the appropriate treatment option and prioritizing factors that increases patient compliance may contribute to better management outcomes of AR at the primary care practice.
Patients and Methods: A cross-sectional study at a tertiary hospital was performed. Adult patients diagnosed with CRSwNP who had both allergology and radiological assessments were enrolled. The symptoms of allergic rhinitis, Lund-Kennedy (LK) endoscopic scoring, Lund-Mackay (LM) computed tomography scan of paranasal sinuses (CTPNS) scoring, CCAD features, skin prick test (SPT) and level of specific IgE were assessed. All the patients underwent SPT for house dust mites.
Results: A total of 38 patients were enrolled. Symptoms, endoscopic and CTPNS scores were higher in the allergy and CCAD groups compared to the nonallergy and nonCCAD groups. The symptom of "need to blow nose" was statistically significant in allergy vs nonallergy (p=0.01) and CCAD vs nonCCAD (p=0.02). There were significant differences in the endoscopic scores in both allergy and CCAD (allergy vs nonallergy, p=0.01; CCAD vs nonCCAD, p=0.03), and CT scores in both allergy and CCAD (allergy vs nonallergy, p=0.02; CCAD vs nonCCAD, p=0.02). All patients with CCAD have worse scoring than nonCCAD (LK score, p=0.03; LM score, p=0.02). Patients with allergy have more polypoidal involvement of the middle turbinates (left middle turbinate, p=0.141; right middle turbinate, p=0.074) and CCAD (left middle turbinate, p=0.017; right middle turbinate, p=0.009) than nonallergy and nonCCAD patients.
Conclusion: Allergic phenotype of CRSwNP has a worse clinical and radiological disease burden. Optimal treatment of allergy is essential for a better outcome.
Methods: Participants (GP-allergic with AR, 330; non-atopic, 29; other allergies, 54) were recruited in subtropical: Queensland, and temperate: New South Wales, Western and South Australia, regions. Clinical history, skin prick test (SPT), total and specific IgE to GP and purified allergens (ImmunoCAP) were evaluated. Cross-inhibition of sIgE with Pas n 1, Cyn d 1 and Lol p 1 by GP extracts was investigated.
Results: Queensland participants showed higher sensitisation to P. notatum and C. dactylon than L. perenne GP. sIgE was higher to Pas n 1 and Cyn d 1, and sIgE to Pas n 1 and Cyn d 1 was inhibited more by Panicoideae and Chloridoideae, respectively, than Pooideae GP. Conversely, participants from temperate regions showed highest sensitisation levels to L. perenne GP and Lol p 1, and sIgE to Lol p 1 was inhibited more by Pooideae than other GP.
Conclusion: Levels and patterns of sensitisation to subtropical and temperate GP in AR patients depended on biogeography. Knowledge of the specificity of sensitisation to local allergens is important for optimal diagnosis and choice of allergen-specific immunotherapy to maximise benefit.
Methods: An online questionnaire survey method was used. Based on sample size calculation, a total of 1,508 UiTM staff and students from ten selected campuses of Universiti Teknologi MARA (UiTM) were invited to participate in this survey. An up-to-date e-mail list of staff in the selected campuses was used as the sampling frame for the study, whereas the students were recruited from the official university student Facebook portal.
Results: A total of 788 respondents participated in this survey, 72.2% of them knew about facial candling, though only 35.4% had tried the treatment. Approximately one-fifth of respondents agreed that facial candling might treat AR. It was found that a higher number of users than nonusers agreed that facial candling was a traditional medicine (78.9% vs 55.0%); could be used on the face and ears (83.5% vs 45.4%); and could be self-administered at home (83.5 vs 45.4%). Interestingly, more than half of them were uncertain about its long-term effects and adverse reactions.
Conclusion: This study confirms the facial candling use among patients with AR although the percentage is low. The patients and general public need to be better informed about the use of facial candling in AR and its associated risks.
DESIGN: A comparative cross sectional study.
PARTICIPANTS: Patients were divided into Group 1 (allergic rhinitis without conjunctivitis), Group 2 (allergic rhinoconjunctivitis), and Group 3 (normal population).
METHODS: A comparative cross-sectional study was conducted. Patients were divided into; Group 1 (allergic rhinitis without conjunctivitis), Group 2 (allergic rhinoconjunctivitis), and Group 3 (normal controls). Tears were collected using Schirmer strips and cytokine analysis performed using enzyme linked immunosorbent assay.
RESULTS: There were a total of 68 subjects. Median values of cytokines in the allergic rhinitis group were as follows; TNFa (45.34 pg/ml), IL-4 (61.91 pg/ml), IL-5 (8.92 pg/ml), IL-6 (538.37 pg/ml) and IL-8 (1438.72 pg/ml). Cytokine levels in the group with allergic rhinoconjunctivitis were approximately two-fold higher than in the group with allergic rhinitis only. The median cytokine level in the control group was lowest. A significant inter-group difference was observed for TNF-alpha, IL-4, IL-6 and IL-8 levels, with allergic rhinoconjunctivitis patients demonstrating significantly elevated cytokines compared to those with allergic rhinitis only (p<0.001). These four cytokines were also significantly higher in those with allergic rhinitis than in controls (p<0.005). Although the group with allergic rhinoconjunctivitis had the highest levels of IL-5, no statistically significant inter-group difference was noted (p=0.479).
CONCLUSION: This study demonstrated the presence of raised tear film inflammatory cytokines even in allergic rhinitis patients without ocular symptoms. These patients may be at increased risk of developing allergic conjunctivitis. These findings not only substantiate the immunological theory of the naso-ocular reflex, but have clinical and therapeutic implications for the holistic management of allergic rhinitis and conjunctivitis.