METHOD AND ANALYSIS: A randomized, nonblinded, controlled trial will be carried out by recruiting a total of 66 eligible allergic rhinitis patients who fulfill the inclusion criteria from a university health center. The subjects will be randomly assigned into 2 groups: intervention group receiving facial candling treatment and control group (no treatment given). Samples of blood and nasal mucus will be collected right before and after intervention. Samples collected will be analyzed. The primary outcomes are the changes in the level of SP in both blood and mucus samples between both groups. The secondary outcomes include the levels of inflammatory mediators (ie, tumor necrosis factor alpha, interleukin (IL)-3, IL-5, IL-6, IL-10, and IL-13) and the severity of allergic rhinitis symptoms as measured by a visual analogous scale and QoL using the Rhinitis Quality of Life Questionnaire (RQLQ).
ETHICAL AND TRIAL REGISTRATION: The study protocols are approved from the Ethical and Research Committee of the Universiti Teknologi MARA (REC/113/15). The trial is registered under the Australia New Zealand Clinical Trial Registry (ACTRN12616000299404). The trial was registered on 03/07/2016 and the first patient was enrolled on 10/12/2016.
CONCLUSION: Facial candling is one of the unique treatments using candles to reduce the severity of symptoms and inflammation. This is the first ever study conducted on facial candling that will give rise to new knowledge underlying the effects of facial candling on severity of symptoms and inflammation relief mechanism mediated by substance P and inflammatory mediators.
Materials and Methods: The study used a qualitative exploratory design, comprising 12 in-depth interviews. A semi-structured topic guide was used to explore all relevant aspects of the topic, which were audio recorded, transcribed verbatim. All the interviews were conducted in a few beauty salons in purposively selected city areas in the state of Kedah, Malaysia.
Results: Of the 12 patients, seven (58%) reported a positive experience of facial candling treatment, with improvement in the condition of their allergic rhinitis. Specific themes about the experience of facial candling treatment that were identified within the transcript data included knowledge about facial candling, options for disease treatment, effectiveness of facial candling, sources of information, comparison, application of treatment, treatment budget, and safety. The major strength lies in the fact that reasons for using facial candling were uncovered from the perspectives of people with allergic rhinitis through the in-depth interviews.
Conclusions: The motives of these participants for using facial candling are mainly due to cultural influence and its low cost of treatment. There were mixed responses from the participants about the usefulness of facial candling. Most of the respondents had not assessed the safety of prolonged use of facial candling and regarded it as a safe procedure as this has been practiced for generations.