Heterogeneity of the pharmacologic treatment of allergic rhinitis in Europe based on MIDAS and OTCims platforms.

BACKGROUND: The practice of allergology varies widely between countries, and the costs and sales for the treatment of rhinitis differ depending on practices and health systems. To understand these differences and their implications, the rhinitis market was studied in some of the EU countries. METHODS: We conducted a pharmaco-epidemiological database analysis to assess the medications that were being prescribed for allergic rhinitis in the years 2016, 2017 and 2018. We used the IQVIA platforms for prescribed medicines (MIDAS®- Meaningful Integration of Data, Analytics and Services) and for OTC medicines (OTC International Market Tracking-OTCims). We selected the five most important markets in the EU (France, Germany, Italy, Poland and Spain). RESULTS: Intranasal decongestants were excluded from the analyses because they are rarely prescribed for allergic rhinitis. For both Standard Units (SU) and costs, France is leading the other countries. In terms of SU, the four other countries are similar. For costs, Poland is lower than the three others. However, medication use differs largely. For 2018, in SU, intranasal corticosteroid is the first treatment in Poland (70.0%), France (51.3%), Spain (51.1%) and Germany (50.3%), whereas the Italian market is dominated by systemic antihistamines (41.4%) followed by intranasal corticosteroids (30.1%). Results of other years were similar. DISCUSSION: There are major differences between countries in terms of rhinoconjunctivitis medication usage.

Rhinitis Control and Medication Use in a Real-World Sample of Patients With Persistent Rhinitis or Rhinosinusitis: A Community Pharmacy Study.

BACKGROUND: Little is known about rhinitis control in real-life, nor about the contribution of treatment-related and patient-related factors. OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to examine the level of rhinitis control and rhinitis medication utilization in patients with persistent rhinitis and to identify predictors of rhinitis control. METHODS: A cross-sectional observational study was conducted in patients with persistent rhinitis recruited in community pharmacies. Participants completed the Rhinitis Control Assessment Test, a questionnaire on patient/rhinitis characteristics, and rhinitis medication use. A visual analog scale for nasal symptoms was also completed. Pharmacy dispensing data were used to calculate adherence to intranasal glucocorticoids. Nasal spray technique was evaluated using a standardized checklist. Predictors of rhinitis control were explored using a linear regression model. RESULTS: A total of 1,514 patients, recruited in 215 pharmacies, participated in the study (mean age 48.7 y, 62% female). Almost 60% exhibited suboptimal rhinitis control (Rhinitis Control Assessment Test ≤ 21 of 30). A 50-mm cut-off on the visual analog scale yielded 78.1% sensitivity to identify suboptimal rhinitis control. Participants most frequently used intranasal glucocorticoids (55.6%) and intranasal decongestants (47.4%). Only 10.3% of current nasal spray users demonstrated perfect technique. More than half (54.8%) of glucocorticoid users were identified as underadherent. Female sex, self-reported nasal hyperreactivity, active asthma, and use of oral/intranasal decongestants or nasal saline were identified as predictors of worse rhinitis control. CONCLUSIONS: Suboptimal rhinitis control was common in this real-life sample of persistent rhinitis patients. Improving use of rhinitis medication may be key to increase disease control.

The Indispensable Nasal Decongestant: Patients' Views and Perspectives on Nasal Decongestant Overuse.

BACKGROUND: Rhinitis medicamentosa (RM) is a type of nonallergic rhinitis caused by prolonged use of nasal decongestants (NDs). Although it is a preventable phenotype of rhinitis, little is known about patients dealing with this condition. OBJECTIVE: To gain a better understanding of patients' views and experiences of ND overuse, and potential facilitators and barriers to discontinue the overuse. METHODS: We performed a qualitative study using in-depth semistructured interviews with 22 patients who have been using an ND on an almost daily basis for at least 6 months. The interviews were conducted face-to-face, audio-recorded, and transcribed verbatim. Data analysis followed the grounded theory approach. RESULTS: Interviewees described the large impact of nasal congestion on their daily lives. Despite efforts to try other treatment options, the ND was considered the only effective aid to resolve the troublesome symptom. Most participants were aware that the prolonged use was problematic, sometimes leading to hiding behavior in order to avoid criticism by others including their health professionals. Many participants expressed a strong will to discontinue. However, multiple barriers to withdrawal were identified including fear of surgery or the impact of withdrawal on sleep, lack of good alternatives, and negative experiences with past withdrawal attempts. Patients thus face a dilemma in which the barriers to withdrawal currently outweigh the possible benefits. CONCLUSION: The use of NDs is considered indispensable by many chronic users. The facilitators and barriers identified in this study provide opportunities to reduce the use of NDs and the prevalence of RM in the future.

Management of allergic rhinitis symptoms in the pharmacy Pocket guide 2022.

Background: Allergic rhinitis (AR) management requires a coordinated effort from healthcare providers and patients. Pharmacists are key members of these integrated care pathways resolving medication-related problems, optimizing regimens, improving adherence and recommending therapies while establishing liaisons between patients and physicians. Methods: Allergic Rhinitis and its Impact on Asthma (ARIA) first published a reference document on the pharmacist's role in allergic rhinitis management in 2004. Several guidelines were developed over the past 20 years improving the care of allergic rhinitis patients through an evidence-based, integrated care approach. Results: This ARIA/EAACI/FIP Position Paper is based on the latest ARIA in the Pharmacy guidelines and provides: (a) a structured approach to pharmacists identifying people with AR and/or allergic conjunctivitis as well as those at risk of poor disease control; (b) an evidence-based clinical decision support tool for optimising the management of allergic rhinitis in the community pharmacy; and (c) a framework of referral to the physician. Conclusion: This document is not intended to be a mandatory standard of care but is provided as a basis for pharmacists and their staff to develop relevant local standards of care for their patients, within their local practice environment. Pharmacy care varies between countries, and the guide should be adapted to the local situation.

Managing Allergic Rhinitis in the Pharmacy: An ARIA Guide for Implementation in Practice.

The paradigm of how we manage allergic rhinitis is shifting with a growing understanding that it is a complex process, requiring a coordinated effort from healthcare providers and patients. Pharmacists are key members of these integrated care pathways resolving medication-related problems, optimizing regimens, improving adherence and recommending therapies while establishing liaisons between patients and physicians. Community pharmacists are the most accessible healthcare professionals to the public and allergic rhinitis is one of the most common diseases managed by pharmacists. Allergic Rhinitis and its Impact on Asthma (ARIA) guidelines developed over the past 20 years have improved the care of allergic rhinitis patients through an evidence-based, integrated care approach. In this paper, we propose an integrated approach to allergic rhinitis management in community pharmacy following the 2019 ARIA in the pharmacy guidelines.

Benefits and harm of systemic steroids for short- and long-term use in rhinitis and rhinosinusitis: an EAACI position paper.

Because of the inflammatory mechanisms of most chronic upper airway diseases such as rhinitis and chronic rhinosinusitis, systemic steroids have been used for their treatment for decades. However, it has been very well documented that-potentially severe-side-effects can occur with the accumulation of systemic steroid courses over the years. A consensus document summarizing the benefits of systemic steroids for each upper airway disease type, as well as highlighting the potential harms of this treatment is currently lacking. Therefore, a panel of international experts in the field of Rhinology reviewed the available literature with the aim of providing recommendations for the use of systemic steroids in treating upper airway disease.

Correction to: Benefits and harm of systemic steroids for short- and long-term use in rhinitis and rhinosinusitis: an EAACI position paper.

[This corrects the article DOI: 10.1186/s13601-019-0303-6.].