Assessing outcomes from the sleep disturbance associated with rhinitis

Sleep Disturbance and Sleep-Related Impairment in Adults With Atopic Dermatitis: A Cross-sectional Study

BACKGROUND

Little is known about the impact of sleep disturbances (SD) or sleep-related impairment (SRI) in adults with AD or their relationship with severity of AD and itch and other predictors.

OBJECTIVE

The aim of this study was to determine the relationship between AD severity, SD, and SRI.

METHODS

We conducted a prospective online questionnaire-based study of 287 adults with AD, including assessment of AD severity by Patient-Oriented Eczema Measure, self-reported global AD severity, Self-Assessed Eczema Area and Severity Index and visual analog scale-itch, Patient-Reported Outcome Measurement Information System SD and SRI individual items, and T scores.

RESULTS

Adults with AD commonly endorsed all SD and SRI symptoms examined; only 58 (21.8%) reported having good or very good sleep quality in the past week. However, only a minority of adults with AD endorsed a more profound impact from these individual aspects of SD and SRI in the past week or Patient-Reported Outcome Measurement Information System T scores greater than 55. In particular, SD and SRI were associated with severe or very severe AD (Patient-Oriented Eczema Measure, self-reported severity, visual analog scale-itch, and/or Self-Assessed Eczema Area and Severity Index). Sleep-related impairment was also associated with comorbid hay fever and/or anxiety.

CONCLUSIONS

This study suggests that SD and SRI are common in adults with AD, particularly those with severe diseases. Sleep disturbances and SRI should be considered when assessing burden of AD and therapeutic decisions.

Clinical practice guideline: Allergic rhinitis

OBJECTIVE

Allergic rhinitis (AR) is one of the most common diseases affecting adults. It is the most common chronic disease in children in the United States today and the fifth most common chronic disease in the United States overall. AR is estimated to affect nearly 1 in every 6 Americans and generates $2 to $5 billion in direct health expenditures annually. It can impair quality of life and, through loss of work and school attendance, is responsible for as much as $2 to $4 billion in lost productivity annually. Not surprisingly, myriad diagnostic tests and treatments are used in managing this disorder, yet there is considerable variation in their use. This clinical practice guideline was undertaken to optimize the care of patients with AR by addressing quality improvement opportunities through an evaluation of the available evidence and an assessment of the harm-benefit balance of various diagnostic and management options.

PURPOSE

The primary purpose of this guideline is to address quality improvement opportunities for all clinicians, in any setting, who are likely to manage patients with AR as well as to optimize patient care, promote effective diagnosis and therapy, and reduce harmful or unnecessary variations in care. The guideline is intended to be applicable for both pediatric and adult patients with AR. Children under the age of 2 years were excluded from the clinical practice guideline because rhinitis in this population may be different than in older patients and is not informed by the same evidence base. The guideline is intended to focus on a limited number of quality improvement opportunities deemed most important by the working group and is not intended to be a comprehensive reference for diagnosing and managing AR. The recommendations outlined in the guideline are not intended to represent the standard of care for patient management, nor are the recommendations intended to limit treatment or care provided to individual patients.

ACTION STATEMENTS

The development group made a strong recommendation that clinicians recommend intranasal steroids for patients with a clinical diagnosis of AR whose symptoms affect their quality of life. The development group also made a strong recommendation that clinicians recommend oral second-generation/less sedating antihistamines for patients with AR and primary complaints of sneezing and itching. The panel made the following recommendations: (1) Clinicians should make the clinical diagnosis of AR when patients present with a history and physical examination consistent with an allergic cause and 1 or more of the following symptoms: nasal congestion, runny nose, itchy nose, or sneezing. Findings of AR consistent with an allergic cause include, but are not limited to, clear rhinorrhea, nasal congestion, pale discoloration of the nasal mucosa, and red and watery eyes. (2) Clinicians should perform and interpret, or refer to a clinician who can perform and interpret, specific IgE (skin or blood) allergy testing for patients with a clinical diagnosis of AR who do not respond to empiric treatment, or when the diagnosis is uncertain, or when knowledge of the specific causative allergen is needed to target therapy. (3) Clinicians should assess patients with a clinical diagnosis of AR for, and document in the medical record, the presence of associated conditions such as asthma, atopic dermatitis, sleep-disordered breathing, conjunctivitis, rhinosinusitis, and otitis media. (4) Clinicians should offer, or refer to a clinician who can offer, immunotherapy (sublingual or subcutaneous) for patients with AR who have inadequate response to symptoms with pharmacologic therapy with or without environmental controls. The panel recommended against (1) clinicians routinely performing sinonasal imaging in patients presenting with symptoms consistent with a diagnosis of AR and (2) clinicians offering oral leukotriene receptor antagonists as primary therapy for patients with AR. The panel group made the following options: (1) Clinicians may advise avoidance of known allergens or may advise environmental controls (ie, removal of pets; the use of air filtration systems, bed covers, and acaricides [chemical agents formulated to kill dust mites]) in patients with AR who have identified allergens that correlate with clinical symptoms. (2) Clinicians may offer intranasal antihistamines for patients with seasonal, perennial, or episodic AR. (3) Clinicians may offer combination pharmacologic therapy in patients with AR who have inadequate response to pharmacologic monotherapy. (4) Clinicians may offer, or refer to a surgeon who can offer, inferior turbinate reduction in patients with AR with nasal airway obstruction and enlarged inferior turbinates who have failed medical management. (5) Clinicians may offer acupuncture, or refer to a clinician who can offer acupuncture, for patients with AR who are interested in nonpharmacologic therapy. The development group provided no recommendation regarding the use of herbal therapy for patients with AR.

Nasal allergies in the Middle Eastern population: results from the "Allergies in Middle East Survey"

BACKGROUND

Chronic respiratory diseases such as asthma and allergic rhinitis (AR) are a major public health problem in developing countries including those in the Middle East. However, to date, there is a paucity of information related to physician-diagnosed AR in this region. The Allergies in Middle East Survey was undertaken to help clarify and broaden the understanding of physician-diagnosed AR across Egypt, Iran, Lebanon, Saudi Arabia, and the United Arab Emirates. The survey explores the frequency of physician-diagnosed AR, prevalence and types of associated symptoms, the impact on quality of life (QOL), current treatment practices, and therapy expectations.

METHODS

In total, 7411 households in five countries (Egypt, Lebanon, Saudi Arabia, Iran and the United Arab Emirates) were screened to identify individuals that were ≥4 years old with a physician diagnosis of AR and either symptoms and/or treatment in the past 12 months. A total of 501 respondents from the five countries completed the survey. Standardized questionnaires were used to make comparisons across the regions; however, the data collection procedures were tailored for each country. The sample was probability based to ensure valid statistical inference to the population.

RESULTS

Ten percent of the Middle East population surveyed had a physician diagnosis of AR, with 65% of respondents stating that their allergies were intermittent in nature. An otolaryngologist or allergist diagnosed the majority of the individuals surveyed. Runny nose, nasal and throat itching, postnasal drip, and nasal congestion or stuffed up nose were the most common and bothersome symptoms of AR. The majority of survey participants (58% of the overall survey population) with AR reported that the condition had an impact on their daily private and professional life. Seventy-two percent of adults reported that their AR symptoms limited their work/school activities and 35% reported that their AR interfered with and caused them to miss work or school within the past 12 months. One factor, in addition to the outward AR symptoms, that could have contributed to these function impairments may have been sleep disturbances. Although a secondary symptom to AR, sleep disturbances (difficulty getting to sleep, waking up during the night or lack of a good night's sleep) were shown in this survey to be extremely troubling in ∼15% of AR sufferers. In the past year >90% of patients reported taking a medication of any type for their AR, with nearly a 4:1 ratio of patients taking a prescription medication versus an over-the-counter (OTC) medication in the past 4 weeks. Over 75% of survey respondents reported taking an intranasal corticosteroid (INCS) in the last 4 weeks and the satisfaction rate of INCS medications was similar to that reported for OTC medications. The most common reasons cited for dissatisfaction with INCS medications were inadequate effectiveness, bothersome side effects (e.g., unpleasant taste and retrograde drainage into the pharynx), decreased effectiveness with chronic use, and failure to provide 24-hour relief.

CONCLUSION

These data show that AR is common in the Middle East region as elsewhere in the world. Many patients with AR in Middle East region suffer from their symptoms (e.g., runny nose, nasal itching, nasal congestion, postnasal drip, and other symptoms) on all or most days during the times of the year that their allergies are worst. These symptoms have been shown to reduce QOL and performance at work/school to a significant degree. Additionally, the survey data underscore a considerable treatment gap with current therapies for AR and that many AR patients still have not found adequate effectiveness with currently available medications. Thus, through identification of disease impact on the Middle East population and highlighting treatment gaps, clinicians in the Middle East may better understand and treat AR, leading to improvements in overall patient satisfaction and QOL.

The effect of Korean red ginseng on allergic inflammation in a murine model of allergic rhinitis

Korean red ginseng (KRG) is reported to have anti-allergic properties, including beneficial effects on asthma and atopic dermatitis. However, its effect on allergic rhinitis has not been studied extensively. This study examined how KRG affected allergic inflammation of the nasal cavity in an allergic mouse model. A total of 40 Balb/c female mice were divided into four experimental groups according to treatment and allergic state: group 1 (G1), saline only; group 2 (G2), ovalbumin (OVA); group 3 (G3), OVA+KRG; and group 4 (G4), OVA+dexamethasone. Serum IgE levels were significantly lower in the KRG treatment group (G3) than in the allergic group (G2). However, serum IgG1 levels did not differ between G2 and G3. In the nasal lavage fluid, IL-4 and IL-5 levels were significantly lower in G3 than in G2 (p<0.05). H&E and Luna staining revealed that the eosinophil count was lower in G3 and G4 than in G2 (p<0.05). Immunohistochemical staining revealed that there were fewer IL-4-, IL- 5-, and MUC5AC-positive cells in G3 and G4 than in G2 (p<0.05). These results indicate that KRG reduces the nasal allergic inflammatory reaction in an allergic murine model by reducing Th2 cytokines.

Impact of sleep as a specific marker of quality of life in allergic rhinitis

Allergic rhinitis (AR) is a common disorder, which represents a considerable burden both on individual patients and society. It is associated with bothersome symptoms, which may impair usual daily activities, sleep quality, and productivity. Associated with impaired sleep, quality of life is significantly impaired in AR patients. AR significantly contributes to sleep-disordered breathing through multiple mechanisms, with the greatest impact mediated through nasal obstruction. Sleep impairment is very common in AR patients and has a significant impact on disease-specific measures of general health and quality of life. The degree of sleep disturbance is directly related to the severity of the disease. Nasal congestion also demonstrates circadian rhythm and positional variability, worsening during nighttime hours and in supine position. Increased sleep disordered events lead to poor sleep with fatigue and daytime somnolence, impaired performance, productivity and social functioning, and an increased risk of associated diseases.

Sleep and allergic disease: a summary of the literature and future directions for research

Atopic diseases, such as asthma and allergic rhinitis, are common conditions that can influence sleep and subsequent daytime functioning. Children and patients with allergic conditions from ethnic minority groups might be particularly vulnerable to poor sleep and compromised daytime functioning because of the prevalence of these illnesses in these groups and the high level of morbidity. Research over the past 10 years has shed light on the pathophysiologic mechanisms (eg, inflammatory mediators) involved in many atopic diseases that can underlie sleep disruptions as a consequence of the presence of nocturnal symptoms. Associations between nocturnal symptoms and sleep and poorer quality of life as a result of missed sleep have been demonstrated across studies. Patients with severe illness and poor control appear to bear the most burden in terms of sleep impairment. Sleep-disordered breathing is also more common in patients with allergic diseases. Upper and lower airway resistance can increase the risk for sleep-disordered breathing events. In patients with allergic rhinitis, nasal congestion is a risk factor for apnea and snoring. Finally, consistent and appropriate use of medications can minimize nocturnal asthma or allergic symptoms that might disrupt sleep. Despite these advances, there is much room for improvement in this area. A summary of the sleep and allergic disease literature is reviewed, with methodological, conceptual, and clinical suggestions presented for future research.

Nasal allergies in the Asian-Pacific population: results from the Allergies in Asia-Pacific Survey

BACKGROUND

The Allergies in Asia-Pacific Survey describes the symptoms, impact, and treatment of allergic rhinitis (AR) across Australia, China, Hong Kong, Malaysia, Singapore, Taiwan, Vietnam, and the Philippines. The Allergies in Asia-Pacific Survey was undertaken to further clarify the prevalence of physician-diagnosed nasal allergies (NAs), impact on quality-of-life (QOL), existing treatment paradigms and gaps, and NA medications currently used in treatment.

METHODS

Thirty-three thousand three hundred seventy-eight households were screened for individuals, ≥ 4 years old, with a physician diagnosis of AR or NA and either symptoms or treatment in the past 12 months. Standardized questionnaires were used to make comparisons across regions. A total of 1043 adults and 192 children were included in the survey.

RESULTS

Nine percent of participants were diagnosed with AR with two of three responding that their NAs were seasonal in nature. Nasal congestion was the most common and bothersome symptom of AR. Most participants reported that AR impacted their QOL with nearly one-half citing impairments in school/work performance/productivity. Sleep disturbances, secondary to AR, were also shown to be appreciable. Two-thirds of patients took medication for their AR. Less than one-quarter of survey respondents reported taking an intranasal corticosteroid and the satisfaction rate was similar to that of over-the-counter medications. The most common reasons cited for dissatisfaction were related to inadequate efficacy and bothersome side effects.

CONCLUSION

AR appears to be extremely common across Asia-Pacific nations. Many individuals with AR suffer from symptoms that reduce QOL and treatment gaps exist with current therapies. Through identification of disease impact and highlighting treatment gaps, clinicians may better understand and treat AR, leading to improvements in overall patient satisfaction and QOL.

Disease severity impairs sleep quality in allergic rhinitis (The SOMNIAAR study)

BACKGROUND

Sleep is impaired in allergic rhinitis (AR) patients, with subsequent effects on daytime performance and health-related quality of life (QOL). Sleep quality in AR has rarely been considered through validated tools and consensus classifications.

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate sleep quality and daytime somnolence in AR patients, and to estimate its relationship to disease severity according to Allergic Rhinitis and Its Impact on Asthma (ARIA) conventional and modified classifications, as well as in terms of QOL and comorbidities.

METHODS

Allergic rhinitis adult patients were evaluated through a prospective, observational, multicentre survey in Spain. Symptoms were assessed using the Total Symptoms Score (TSS), specific QOL by the Rhinitis Quality of Life Questionnaire (RQLQ), sleep quality by Pittsburgh scale, and diurnal somnolence by a scale based on Epworth's, all recorded in a unique visit.

RESULTS

A total of 2275 patients were included. According to ARIA criteria, 50.2% had persistent and 49.8% intermittent rhinitis, whereas 87.6% were classified as moderate-severe and 12.4% as mild; 52.8% had poor sleep quality, with a global median score for Pittsburgh scale of 6 (normal < 5) and 21.1% suffered from excessive diurnal somnolence. Correlation between Pittsburgh scale and RQLQ was moderate (r = 0.54). Among symptoms, nasal obstruction and concomitant asthma mainly, contributed to bad sleep quality. In a logistic regression model, moderate-severe rhinitis and nasal obstruction were all associated with a worse sleep quality.

CONCLUSIONS AND CLINICAL RELEVANCE

Sleep quality is altered in AR patients. Sleep quality was worse in moderate-severe, and particularly in severe AR. Nasal obstruction and RQLQ deterioration are associated with a poorer sleep quality. Sleep impairment is common in allergic rhinitis, particularly in more severe forms. Nasal obstruction and concomitant asthma should be considered as contributing factors.

CAPSULE SUMMARY

This is a large epidemiological survey of patients with allergic rhinitis showing a strong relationship between disease severity, as assessed by a consensus classification, and sleep impairment, as measured by a validated sleep quality tool.

Quality of life of Japanese seasonal allergic rhinitis patients is related to timing of pollen dispersal - multicenter analysis

CONCLUSION

Both the symptoms score and quality of life (QOL) score increased in patients with seasonal allergic rhinitis as pollen dispersed, and nasal congestion, which had a strong effect on sleep, had the largest effect on the decrease in 'total QOL' in all the groups of patients.

OBJECTIVES

To assess QOL scores in patients with Japanese cedar (JC) pollinosis in relationship to timing of pollen dispersal.

METHODS

A multicenter, inter-group, cross-sectional study was conducted in 905 adult symptomatic patients with JC pollinosis to investigate the Japanese Allergic Rhinitis Standard QOL Questionnaire (JRQLQ). The subjects were divided into five groups based on the timing of their responses to the questionnaire. JRQLQ scores were analyzed and compared among the patient groups.

RESULTS

Both the symptoms score and JRQLQ score increased in patients as pollen dispersed. Among the symptoms of pollinosis, nasal congestion had the largest effect on the decrease in QOL, and had a strong effect on sleep, which may influence daytime activities and reduce QOL.

Fluticasone Furoate Nasal Spray is Effective and Well Tolerated for Perennial Allergic Rhinitis in Adolescents and Adults

Background

Fluticasone furoate nasal spray (FFNS), an intranasal corticosteroid, has been shown to be effective in perennial allergic rhinitis in randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled studies but has been less extensively studied in perennial allergic rhinitis than seasonal allergic rhinitis. This study was designed to evaluate the efficacy and safety of FFNS in perennial allergic rhinitis in adolescents and adults ≥12 years of age.

Methods

In this randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, parallel-group study (FFU111439), patients ≥12 years old with perennial allergic rhinitis received FFNS, 110 micrograms (n = 160), or placebo (n = 155) q.d. for 4 weeks.

Results

Over the entire treatment period, FFNS was significantly (p < 0.05) more effective than placebo with respect to mean changes from baseline in daily reflective total nasal symptoms (primary end point), morning and evening reflective total nasal symptoms, daily reflective individual nasal symptoms, morning predose instantaneous total and individual nasal symptoms, and morning and evening peak nasal inspiratory flow. FFNS did not show a statistically significant difference from placebo in comparisons of ocular symptom measures. Clinically meaningful improvement versus placebo was observed on the Rhinoconjunctivitis Quality of Life Questionnaire with Standardised Activities overall score. Adverse events reported in >3% of patients in a treatment group and reported more frequently with FFNS than placebo were epistaxis (15% FFNS, 8% placebo) and nasopharyngitis (5% FFNS, 1% placebo).

Conclusion

Once-daily FFNS was well tolerated and more effective than placebo at improving nasal symptoms of perennial allergic rhinitis in adolescents and adults ≥12 years of age.

Intranasal mometasone furoate therapy for allergic rhinitis symptoms and rhinitis-disturbed sleep

BACKGROUND

Allergic rhinitis (AR) and related nasal congestion cause rhinitis-disturbed sleep (RDS). Intranasal corticosteroids reduce nasal congestion and improve sleep quality in AR but have not been extensively studied in RDS.

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the efficacy of mometasone furoate nasal spray (NS) on nasal symptoms, nasal patency, sleep variables, quality of life, and daytime functioning in perennial AR (PAR) and concomitant RDS.

METHODS

In this double-blind 4-week study, 30 adults with PAR and moderate RDS were randomized 2:1 to receive mometasone furoate NS, 200 microg, or placebo each morning. The primary end point was the apnea-hypopnea index. Secondary outcome measures included changes in total nasal symptom score (TNSS), nighttime symptom score, daytime peak nasal inspiratory flow, nighttime flow limitation index, Rhinoconjunctivitis Quality of Life Questionnaire-Standardized (RQLQ-S) score, Epworth Sleepiness Scale score, and Work Productivity and Activities Impairment-Allergy Specific (WPAI-AS) questionnaire score. Analysis of covariance was used for all efficacy end points.

RESULTS

The apnea-hypopnea index at study end was not statistically significantly different between groups. However, mometasone furoate NS therapy significantly improved morning (P = .04) and evening (P = .01) TNSSs, morning (P = .049) and evening (P = .03) nasal obstruction/blockage/congestion, daily peak nasal inspiratory flow (P = .03), flow limitation index (P = .02), Epworth Sleepiness Scale score (P = .048), RQLQ-S score (P = .03), and 2 of 5 WPAI-AS domains. Among patients receiving mometasone furoate NS, TNSS improvements were significantly correlated with improved work- and non-work-related productivity.

CONCLUSIONS

In patients with PAR and RDS, mometasone furoate NS use improved nasal symptoms, sleepiness, and impairment in daily activities. Correlated reduced nasal symptoms and improved performance suggest that improving AR symptoms with mometasone furoate NS administration can benefit sleep and daytime functioning.

Fluticasone furoate nasal spray: Profile of an enhanced-affinity corticosteroid in treatment of seasonal allergic rhinitis

Of the classes of pharmacotherapy for seasonal allergic rhinitis, intranasal corticosteroids are the preferred treatment and are recommended in practice guidelines as first-line pharmacotherapy for rhinitis with prominent nasal congestion. The enhanced-affinity intranasal corticosteroid fluticasone furoate nasal spray (GW685698X), is one of the newest additions to the armamentarium for allergic rhinitis. This review summarizes the preclinical and clinical data on fluticasone furoate nasal spray and discusses its place in pharmacotherapy for seasonal allergic rhinitis. Important attributes of fluticasone furoate in seasonal allergic rhinitis include low systemic bioavailability (<0.5%), onset of symptom relief as early as eight hours after initiation of treatment, 24-hour symptom relief with once-daily dosing, comprehensive coverage of both nasal and ocular symptoms, safety and tolerability with daily use, and availability in a side-actuated device that makes medication delivery simple and consistent. With these attributes, fluticasone furoate nasal spray has the potential to enhance patient satisfaction and compliance and reduce the need for polypharmacy in the management of seasonal allergic rhinitis.

Are intranasal corticosteroids all equally consistent in managing ocular symptoms of seasonal allergic rhinitis?

BACKGROUND

Nasal and ocular symptoms of allergic rhinitis (AR) are reported by >70% of patients and have a profound impact on quality of life while also incurring substantial healthcare costs. It has been suggested that intranasal corticosteroids (INS), in addition to effectively treating the nasal components of AR, are effective in treating the ocular symptoms.

OBJECTIVE

This review provides a comprehensive, updated assessment of available data in the public domain to determine the consistency of INS efficacy in treating ocular AR symptoms.

METHODS

MEDLINE and EMBASE searches, and research of governmental and regulatory institution sources identified 35 randomised, placebo-controlled trials of INS and seasonal AR (SAR) published between 1990 and May 2009 that specifically contained ocular efficacy as part of the study analyses.

RESULTS

Examination of these studies reveals substantial inconsistency of effect of some INS across, and even within, trials, casting doubt on the suggestion that ocular efficacy is a class effect of INS. Conflicting, inconsistent or even negative effects were observed for most INS examined including mometasone furoate and fluticasone propionate. Only fluticasone furoate nasal spray, in addition to established efficacy in treating nasal symptoms, demonstrated a consistent positive effect on ocular symptoms of SAR compared with placebo in a large number of patients across all of its prospective studies. Moreover, these results were consistent across different allergy seasons, including grass, ragweed, and mountain cedar seasons, and different geographical locations throughout Europe and the USA.

CONCLUSION

While additional prospective head-to-head clinical trials comparing the efficacy of INS in treating ocular symptoms of AR are needed to fully elucidate the benefits of one INS compared with another, data available to date suggest that not all INS are equally consistent in managing ocular symptoms of SAR. Fluticasone furoate is currently the most consistent.

[INSTANT: national survey of allergic rhinitis in a French adult population based-sample]

OBJECTIVE

To assess the prevalence of allergic rhinitis (AR) (according to the SFAR, Score For Allergic Rhinitis and the ARIA Allergic Rhinitis and its Impact on Asthma classification) in the French adult general population and to describe its impact on quality of life, quality of sleep and prevalence of associated ocular symptoms.

METHODS

This cross-sectional survey was carried out in 2006 in a French population-based sample. The data were collected by a polling organization in 3 waves using face-to-face interviews at home. Subjects answered to questionnaires of AR management, quality of life (SF-12), quality of sleep (MOS-Sleep) and daytime sleepiness (Epworth). Statistical analysis was performed using SAS software.

RESULTS

Among the 10, 038 interviewed subjects, (mean age: 43 years), the overall prevalence of AR was 31%, with regional variations (from 26% in South West to 37% in the Mediterranean area). The prevalence was higher in younger subjects (39% in 18-25 years, 35% in 26-35 years, vs. 22% in >65 years, p<0.001) and in women (36% vs. 25% in men, p<0.001). Among the 2005 subjects of the 1st wave, the first 601 subjects with a SFAR> or =7 constituted the AR group and 706 subjects with SFAR<7 the Control group. According to the ARIA classification, 44 % of individuals had a moderate to severe persistent AR, 6% a mild persistent AR, 43.5% a moderate to severe intermittent AR and 6.5% a mild intermittent AR. Asthma (26%) and eczema (14%) were the most frequent allergic conditions associated with AR. Ocular symptoms were present in 52% of AR subjects. Quality of life and of sleep did not differ significantly between the intermittent and the persistent forms of AR (or according to the length...) but were more significantly deteriorated in the AR group compared to the Control group (summary psychic score of SF-12: 45.5 vs. 49, p<0.001 and index 1 of MOS-Sleep: 34 vs. 25; p<0.01). The Epworth sleepiness score was also higher in the AR group than in the Control group (6.9 vs. 5.5, p<0.01). Furthermore, sleepiness was more frequent in the AR persistent form than in the AR intermittent form (MOS-sleep scores: 28.5 vs. 33, p<0.05).

CONCLUSION

This national survey confirmed the elevated prevalence of AR as assessed using the SFAR and associated ocular symptoms at the general population level and highlighted the important negative impact of AR on quality of life and sleep.

Relative strength of relationships of nasal congestion and ocular symptoms with sleep, mood and productivity

BACKGROUND

Nasal congestion associated with allergic rhinitis has been shown to be the most bothersome symptom. Ocular symptoms may be troublesome to patients as well.

OBJECTIVE

To estimate the relative strength of relationships of nasal congestion and ocular symptoms associated with allergic rhinitis with patient-reported outcomes of sleep quality; practical problems; somnolence; impairment at work, class, activities; and mood.

METHODS

Patients (n = 404) presenting with symptoms of allergic rhinitis completed five patient-reported outcomes that assessed the effect of morning allergic rhinitis symptoms on patients' reports of sleep, work and activity impairment, and mood. Multiple regression analyses were used to compare the relative strength of relationships of congestion and ocular symptoms with the patient-reported outcomes.

RESULTS

The majority of patients had both nasal congestion and ocular symptoms at baseline. A single nasal congestion item and a 3-item ocular symptom score were significantly related to the patient-reported outcomes: those with more severe congestion or ocular symptoms reported more negative scores on the patient-reported outcomes. Nasal congestion had the stronger relationship with patient-reported outcomes total scores or subscales in 14 of 20 regressions.

CONCLUSION

Although nasal congestion is generally more strongly related to the patient-reported outcomes, ocular symptoms have a significant negative effect on patients' lives. Study limitations include: (1) only baseline data were used because of greater severity and variability of symptoms scores; we are unable to establish causal relationships or discuss change, only correlation/covariation; (2) recruitment took place from September through November, thus different patients might have been recruited if sampling took place during the spring; (3) patients were screened for nasal congestion not for ocular symptoms, though there was high co-occurrence of each. These limitations aside, congestion and ocular symptoms are troublesome to patients and typically co-occur. Evaluating and treating these symptoms are key to managing allergic rhinitis and improving patient-reported outcomes.

Levocetirizine in persistent allergic rhinitis: continuous or on-demand use? A pilot study

BACKGROUND

Allergic rhinitis is a high-prevalence disease that affects quality of life (QOL), sleep quality and productivity of patients. According to the ARIA initiative, it is classified as intermittent and persistent, the latter being the most troublesome.

METHODS

The aim of this randomized, open-label, 6-month, pilot study was to determine whether levocetirizine 5 mg administered continuously once daily in the morning was better than levocetirizine 5 mg on-demand in symptomatic subjects with persistent allergic rhinitis. Total and individual symptom scores were recorded in a diary card throughout the study. QOL, quality of sleep, nasal cytology, rate of drug intake, and safety were also assessed at pre-defined time-points.

RESULTS

In all, adult patients (31 in each group) were enrolled, of whom 22 dropped out. Both treatment regimens considerably decreased the total and individual symptoms scores from baseline and achieved similar levels up to week 14. Continuous treatment was generally better than on-demand from week 15 onwards, reaching statistical significance from weeks 17 to 21 (from week 19 to 21 for nasal pruritus). Both regimens substantially improved QOL and sleep quality. Both treatments were well tolerated, although the on-demand group reported more adverse events.

CONCLUSION

The present open label study in 62 patients indicates that levocetirizine 5 mg reliably controls persistent rhinitis over a period of 6 months, and shows a trend to be more effective in controlling the symptoms of rhinitis, improving QOL and decreasing nasal inflammation, when administered as long-term continuous therapy rather than as on-demand therapy.