			Home About us Contact

Nasal Corticosteroids (nasal + corticosteroid)

Distribution by Scientific Domains

Medical Sciences	100%

Selected Abstracts

How appropriate is asthma therapy in general practice?

FUNDAMENTAL & CLINICAL PHARMACOLOGY, Issue 1 2005
Laurent Laforest
Abstract High association between burden of asthma and inadequate disease control make asthma management a major public health issue. We studied asthma management practices of general practitioners (GPs) in France to describe drug therapy and more specifically, to identify correlates of antibiotic prescriptions, a marker of inappropriate asthma management. Patients with persistent asthma aged 17,50 years were evaluated in a 12-month retrospective study using a computerized GPs database (Thales) and a patient survey, in which patients reported hospital contacts, use of oral corticosteroids and recent asthma symptoms. Therapy was described and the correlates of antibiotic prescriptions in the previous year were identified using multivariate logistic regression. During the study period, 16.4% of 1038 patients received one or more prescriptions of theophylline, 31.3% long-acting beta-agonists and 61.6% inhaled corticosteroids. Rates of prescription of antibiotics, expectorants, antihistamines, antitussives and nasal corticosteroids were 57.6, 42.0, 33.0, 19.9, and 14.4%, respectively. In parallel, 15% of patients reported at least one hospital contact for asthma and 43.1% used oral corticosteroids. Antibiotic prescriptions were more likely co-prescribed in patients using expectorants [odds ratio (OR) = 13.0, 95% confidence interval (CI) = 8.5,19.8] and antitussives (OR = 6.5, 95% CI =3.7,11.6). Moreover, patients using courses of oral corticosteroids, and often visiting their GP (more than four times) during the study period were more likely to receive antibiotics. The results were unchanged when analyses were restricted to non-smokers and younger patients (,40 years). Asthma management was sub-optimal among asthma patients treated by general practitioners in France. Antibiotics, expectorants, antihistamines, antitussives and nasal corticosteroids were commonly prescribed while asthma controllers were under-used. [source]

Nasal nitric oxide in objective evaluation of chronic rhinosinusitis therapy

ALLERGY, Issue 6 2006
S. M. Ragab
Background:, The assessment of the response of chronic rhinosinusitis (CRS) to therapy is difficult. Computerized tomographic (CT) scans cannot be repeatedly used so measures such as symptom scores, endoscopic findings, and parallel measures such as saccharin clearance time are employed instead. Objective:, To study the effect of CRS therapy on nasal nitric oxide and to see whether nasal nitric oxide level changes correlate with other assessments. Methods:, The study was a prospective randomized trial of patients with CRS, with or without polyps, who had failed initial medical therapy with douching and nasal corticosteroids and who then had abnormal CT scans. They were treated either medically or surgically, with follow up at 6 and 12 months whilst still taking nasal corticosteroids. Nasal nitric oxide was measured initially and at 6 and 12 months as well as symptom scores, endoscopy, polyp grading, and saccharin clearance time. Results:, Initial absolute nasal nitric oxide levels correlated inversely with CT scan changes, (P < 0.001). The percentage rise in nasal nitric oxide seen on both medical and surgical treatment correlated with changes in symptom scores (P < 0.001), saccharin clearance time (P < 0.001), endoscopic changes (P < 0.001), polyp grades (P < 0.05 at 6 months, P < 0.01 at 12 months) and surgical scores (P < 0.01). There was no significant correlation with age, sex, smoking or allergy. Conclusion:, Nasal nitric oxide, which is easily measured, provides a valuable non-invasive objective measure of the response of CRS to therapy. Topical nasal corticosteroids may be needed to reduce the contribution of nasal epithelial nitric oxide and allow that emanating from the sinuses to be measured. [source]

Allergic rhinitis in children: Incidence and treatment in Dutch general practice in 1987 and 2001

PEDIATRIC ALLERGY AND IMMUNOLOGY, Issue 6 2009
Cindy M. A. De Bot
Allergic rhinitis is a common chronic disorder in children, mostly diagnosed in primary health care. This study investigated the national incidence and treatment of allergic rhinitis among children aged 0,17 yr in Dutch general practice in 1987 and 2001 to establish whether changes have occurred. A comparison was made with data from the first (1987) and second (2001) Dutch national surveys of general practice on children aged 0,17 yr. Incidence rates were compared by age, sex, level of urbanization and season. The management of the general practitioner was assessed regarding drug prescriptions and referrals to medical specialists, and compared with the clinical guideline issued in 1996. The incidence rate of allergic rhinitis increased from 6.6 (1987) to 9.2 (2001) per 1000 person-years. We found a male predominance with a switch in adolescence to a female predominance at both time points. The increase in incidence was the highest in rural (<30,000 inhabitants) and suburban areas (30,000,50,000 inhabitants). Compared to 1987, there was a significant increase in incidence in the central part of the Netherlands in 2001. In both years, the incidence was higher in spring compared with the other seasons. In 2001, children of natives and western immigrants visited the general practitioner more often with complaints of allergic rhinitis compared to 1987. In 1987, prescribed medication consisted mainly of nasal corticosteroids (36%) and in 2001 of oral antihistamines (45%). Although a clinical guideline was not issued until 1996, overall, the treatment of allergic rhinitis by general practitioners was in both years in accordance with the current clinical guideline, but with a stronger adherence in 2001. The results show an increased incidence in the past decades of allergic rhinitis in children in Dutch general practice. The shift to a smaller spectrum of prescriptions in 2001 may be a result of the 1996 clinical guideline. [source]