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.
METHODS: A prospective observational study was conducted of children and adults diagnosed with house dust mite allergic rhinitis who were treated with sublingual immunotherapy from 2008 to 2012. Total Nasal Symptom Scores, Mini Rhinoconjunctivitis Quality of Life scores and medication usage scores were assessed prospectively.
RESULTS: Thirty-nine patients, comprising 24 children and 15 adults, were studied. Total Nasal Symptom Scores and Mini Rhinoconjunctivitis Quality of Life scores dropped significantly at three months into therapy, and continued to improve. Medication usage scores improved at one year into immunotherapy.
CONCLUSION: Sublingual immunotherapy with house dust mite extracts, including B tropicalis, is efficacious as a treatment for patients with house dust mite allergic rhinitis.
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.
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 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.
METHODS: A PubMed search for relevant published articles was conducted using the following search terms singly or in combination: "atopy," "atopic disease," "atopic disorder," "International Study of Asthma and Allergies in Childhood," "ISAAC," "asthma," "allergic rhinitis," "eczema," and "food allergy" in combination with the names of countries of the Arabian Peninsula (Kuwait, United Arab Emirates, Bahrain, Qatar, Oman, Kingdom of Saudi Arabia, and Yemen). The search captured studies published up to December 2017.
RESULTS: A total of 8 publications reporting prevalence rates of any type of atopic disease in children in 7 countries of the Arabian Peninsula were retrieved. The prevalence of all atopic disorders was comparable between countries of the Arabian Peninsula. The overall prevalence of asthma ranged from 8 to 23%, while the reported prevalence of eczema ranged from 7.5 to 22.5%. There was great variation in the prevalence rates of rhinoconjunctivitis, which ranged from 6.3 to 30.5%. The prevalence of food allergy (8.1%) was reported for 1 country only, the United Arab Emirates.
CONCLUSIONS: The reported overall rates of atopic disease in countries of the Arabian Peninsula are comparable to those reported in other industrialized countries. This is probably related to the good economic status in the region, which is reflected in the living standards and lifestyle. Further, genetic factors, such as factors related to gene polymorphism, and the high rate of consanguinity in the region may contribute to the higher prevalence of atopic diseases.