RESUMO
BACKGROUND: Probiotics in allergic rhinitis (AR) have shown improvement in clinical and quality of life scores, whereas the role of synbiotics in the treatment of AR has been poorly investigated. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the clinical efficacy of synbiotics in children with AR. METHODS: An observational, prospective cohort study of pediatric outpatients with AR from a private medical center in Peru (2021) was conducted. At baseline, patients who were prescribed synbiotics during routine and those who were not (controls) recruited and followed up on Days 30, 60, and 90 of follow-up. Clinical efficacy was assessed with differences in Visual Analogous Scale (VAS), Total Nasal Symptom Score (TNSS), Rhinitis Control Assessment Test (RCAT), and the Pediatric Rhinoconjunctivitis Quality of Life Questionnaire (PRQLQ) scores between groups at follow-up. Mean differences ± standard deviation (SD) and 95% confidence intervals (95% CI) are reported. RESULTS: Two hundred and fifteen participants were analyzed. Compared to controls (n = 115), those who used synbiotics (n = 100) had significantly lower VAS (mean difference 1.3; 95% CI: 0.8-1.8), TNSS (mean difference 1.1; 95% CI: 0.5-1.7) and higher RCAT scores and PRQLQ scores (mean difference 2.2; 95% CI: -3.3 to -1.2) and (mean difference 7.0; 95% CI: 3.1-10.9), respectively, at Day 90 of follow-up CONCLUSIONS: This paper reports significant improvement in clinical (VAS, RCAT, TNSS) and quality of life (PRQLQ) scores of small and large sizes, respectively. These preliminary findings support the need of future trials to assess the role of synbiotics in children with AR.
Assuntos
Rinite Alérgica , Simbióticos , Humanos , Criança , Qualidade de Vida , Peru , Estudos Prospectivos , Rinite Alérgica/epidemiologia , Rinite Alérgica/terapia , Resultado do Tratamento , Estudos de CoortesRESUMO
BACKGROUND: Information/communication technologies such as mobile phone applications (apps) would enable chronic urticaria (CU) patients to self-evaluate their disease activity and control. Yet, recently Antó et al (2021) reported a global paucity of such apps for patients with CU. In this analysis, we assessed patient interest in using apps to monitor CU disease activity and control using questions from the chronic urticaria information and communication technologies (CURICT) study. METHODS: The methodology for CURICT has been reported. Briefly, a 23-item questionnaire was completed by 1841 CU patients from 17 UCAREs across 17 countries. Here, we analyzed patient responses to the CURICT questions on the use of apps for urticaria-related purposes. RESULTS: As previously published, the majority of respondents had chronic spontaneous urticaria (CSU; 63%; 18% chronic inducible urticaria (CIndU) [CIndu]; 19% with both), were female (70%) and in urban areas (75%). Over half of patients were very/extremely interested in an app to monitor disease activity (51%) and control (53%), while only â¼1/10 were not. Patients with both urticaria types versus those with CSU only (odds ratio [OR], 1.36 [1.03-1.79]) and females versus males (OR [95% CI], 1.47 [1.17-1.85]) were more likely to be very to extremely interested in an app to assess disease control. CONCLUSIONS: Overall, half of the patients with CU were very to extremely interested in using an app to assess their disease activity and control. Development of well-designed apps, specific to disease types (CSU, CIndU, CSU + CIndU, etc), validated by experts across platforms would help improve the management and possibly outcomes of CU treatment while providing important patient information to be used in future research.
RESUMO
BACKGROUND: Patients with chronic urticaria (CU) are increasingly using information and communication technologies (ICTs) to manage their health. What CU patients expect from ICTs and which ICTs they prefer remains unknown. We assessed why CU patients use ICTs, which ones they prefer, and what drives their expectations and choices. METHODS: In this cross-sectional study, 1841 patients across 17 countries were recruited at UCAREs (Urticaria Centers of Reference and Excellence). Patients with CU who were >12 years old completed a 23-item questionnaire. RESULTS: Most patients were interested in receiving disease information (87.3%), asking physicians about CU (84.1%), and communicating with other patients through ICTs (65.6%). For receiving disease information, patients preferred one-to-one and one-to-many ICTs, especially web browsers. One-to-one ICTs were also the ICTs of choice for asking physicians about urticaria and for communicating with other patients, and e-mail and WhatsApp were the preferred ICTs, respectively. Many-to-many ICTs such as Facebook, Instagram, LinkedIn, and Twitter were least preferred for all 3 purposes. Living in rural areas and higher education were linked to higher odds of being interested in receiving disease information, asking physicians, and communicating with patients through ICTs. CONCLUSIONS: Most patients and especially patients with higher education who live in rural areas are interested in using ICTs for their healthcare, but prefer different ICTs for different purposes, ie, web browsers for obtaining information, e-mail for asking physicians, and WhatsApp for communicating with other patients. Our findings may help to improve ICTs for CU.
RESUMO
BACKGROUND: Chronic urticaria (CU) is characterized by itchy recurrent wheals, angioedema, or both for 6 weeks or longer. CU can greatly impact patients' physical and emotional quality of life. Patients with chronic conditions are increasingly seeking information from information and communications technologies (ICTs) to manage their health. The objective of this study was to assess the frequency of usage and preference of ICTs from the perspective of patients with CU. METHODS: In this cross-sectional study, 1800 patients were recruited from primary healthcare centers, university hospitals or specialized clinics that form part of the UCARE (Urticaria Centers of Reference and Excellence) network throughout 16 countries. Patients were >12 years old and had physician-diagnosed chronic spontaneous urticaria (CSU) or chronic inducible urticaria (CIndU). Patients completed a 23-item questionnaire containing questions about ICT usage, including the type, frequency, preference, and quality, answers to which were recorded in a standardized database at each center. For analysis, ICTs were categorized into 3 groups as follows: one-to-one: SMS, WhatsApp, Skype, and email; one-to-many: YouTube, web browsers, and blogs or forums; many-to-many: Instagram, Twitter, Facebook, and LinkedIn. RESULTS: Overall, 99.6% of CU patients had access to ICT platforms and 96.7% had internet access. Daily, 85.4% patients used one-to-one ICT platforms most often, followed by one-to-many ICTs (75.5%) and many-to-many ICTs (59.2%). The daily ICT usage was highest for web browsers (72.7%) and WhatsApp (70.0%). The general usage of ICT platforms increased in patients with higher levels of education. One-to-many was the preferred ICT category for obtaining general health information (78.3%) and for CU-related information (75.4%). A web browser (77.6%) was by far the most commonly used ICT to obtain general health information, followed by YouTube (25.8%) and Facebook (16.3%). Similarly, for CU-specific information, 3 out of 4 patients (74.6%) used a web browser, 20.9% used YouTube, and 13.6% used Facebook. One in 5 (21.6%) patients did not use any form of ICT for obtaining information on CU. The quality of the information obtained from one-to-many ICTs was rated much more often as very interesting and of good quality for general health information (53.5%) and CU-related information (51.5%) as compared to the other categories. CONCLUSIONS: Usage of ICTs for health and CU-specific information is extremely high in all countries analyzed, with web browsers being the preferred ICT platform.