4.4 Article

A common language to assess allergic rhinitis control: results from a survey conducted during EAACI 2013 Congress

Journal

CLINICAL AND TRANSLATIONAL ALLERGY
Volume 5, Issue -, Pages -

Publisher

BMC
DOI: 10.1186/s13601-015-0080-9

Keywords

Allergic rhinitis; Control; Digital; Survey; Visual analogue scale; VAS

Categories

Funding

  1. GSK
  2. Merck
  3. Stallergenes
  4. ALK
  5. Meda
  6. Biopharma
  7. ALK-Abello
  8. Boheringer-Ingelheim
  9. Pierre Fabre
  10. Sanofi-Aventis
  11. Schering Plough
  12. UCB
  13. Uriach Group
  14. Zambon
  15. UK National Health Service
  16. British Lung Foundation
  17. Aerocrine
  18. AKL Ltd
  19. Almirall
  20. AstraZeneca
  21. Boehringer Ingelheim
  22. Chiesi
  23. Eli Lilly
  24. GlaxoSmithKline
  25. Mundipharma
  26. Napp
  27. Novartis
  28. Orion
  29. Pfizer
  30. Respiratory Effectiveness Group
  31. Takeda
  32. Teva
  33. Zentiva
  34. Almirral
  35. Nestle and Merck

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Background: The concept of control is gaining importance in the field of allergic rhinitis (AR), with a visual analogue scale (VAS) score being a validated, easy and attractive tool to evaluate AR symptom control. The doctors' perception of a VAS score as a good tool for evaluating AR symptom control is unknown, as is the level of AR control perceived by physicians who treat patients. Methods: 307 voluntarily selected physicians attending the annual (2013) European Academy of Allergy and Clinical Immunology (EAACI) meeting completed a digital survey. Delegates were asked to (1) estimate how many AR patients/week they saw during the season, (2) estimate the proportion of patients they considered to have well-, partly-and un-controlled AR, (3) communicate how they gauged this control and (4) assess how useful they would find a VAS as a method of gauging control. 257 questionnaires were filled out completely and analysed. Results: EAACI delegates reported seeing 46.8 [standard deviation (SD) 68.5] AR patients/week during the season. They estimated that 38.7 % (SD 24.0), 34.2 % (SD 20.2) and 20.0 % (SD 16.34) of their AR patients had well-controlled (no AR symptoms), partly-controlled (some AR symptoms), or un-controlled-(moderate/severe AR symptoms) disease despite taking medication [remainder unknown (7.1 %)]. However, AR control was assessed in many ways, including symptom severity (74 %), frequency of day-and night-time symptoms (67 %), activity impairment (57 %), respiratory function monitoring (nasal and/or lung function; 40 %) and incidence of AR exacerbations (50 %). 91 % of delegates felt a simple VAS would be a useful tool to gauge AR symptom control. Conclusions: A substantial portion of patients with AR are perceived as having uncontrolled or partly controlled disease even when treated. A simple VAS score is considered a useful tool to monitor AR control.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.4
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available