ArticleThe World Allergy Organization journal2024
General practitioner and patient perspectives on intranasal corticosteroids for allergic rhinitis: Treatment duration and obstacles to adherence, findings from a recent survey.
Article in The World Allergy Organization journal, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT06858137 (Efficacy and Safety of Thread Embedding Acupuncture for Rhinitis Allergy), which is not on this map. Cited by 7 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Efficacy and Safety of Thread Embedding Acupuncture for Rhinitis Allergy: Randomized Controlled Trial
Who cites it
7 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Pharmacotherapeutic Medication Adherence in Patients With Allergic Rhinitis: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.Current allergy and asthma reports · 2026Pooled it
- The SPRR2A-CSTA axis drives IL-17A-induced squamous metaplasia and steroid resistance in allergic rhinitis.The Journal of allergy and clinical immunology · 2026Article
- Knowledge, attitudes, and practices regarding intranasal corticosteroid use in adult outpatients with allergic rhinitis: a cross-sectional study in Sichuan Province, China.Frontiers in public health · 2026Article
- Diagnosis and management of allergic rhinitis: An Indian expert consensus by otorhinolaryngologists.Asia Pacific allergy · 2025Review
- Moving Towards an Integrated Approach to Allergic Rhinitis Management: ARIA and EUFOREA Guidelines Similarities and Differences.Current allergy and asthma reports · 2025Review
- An Overview of Adherence-What It Is and Why It Is Important.The journal of allergy and clinical immunology. In practice · 2024Review
- EUFOREA meeting on defining disease states in allergic rhinitis: towards a unified language in AR.Frontiers in allergy · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background and objective: Currently, there are no guideline recommendations for the duration of intranasal corticosteroid (INCS) treatment for allergic rhinitis (AR). We aimed to catalogue real-world AR-INCS prescription patterns. Materials and methods: This multicenter, non-interventional, cross-sectional study used online general practitioner (GP) and patient surveys from 4 countries. Eligible GPs had 3-35 years of practical experience, regularly prescribed INCSs for AR treatment, and had managed ≥5 patients with AR per month according to Allergic Rhinitis and its Impact on Asthma (ARIA) guidelines in the previous year. Eligible patients with AR were non-pregnant females or males, aged 18-65 years, previous AR-INCS users (≥12 months), and receiving GP-prescribed AR therapy. Survey participants were from countries with 15-50% AR prevalence and mostly prescription-only INCS use of ≥100 million units annually (Brazil, Mexico, Spain, Thailand). GP surveys and GP-completed patient record forms (PRFs) gathered AR-care and INCS-use data over 10 months; each GP completed patient record forms (PRFs) for 3 patients with AR under their care. The patient survey reflected actual AR-INCS experience, treatment duration, and adherence factors from patient perspectives. The target sample size was 75 GPs, 75 patients, and ≥30 respondents per country. Results: From 900 GP-PRFs, the mean GP-recommended AR-INCS durations reported were 8.4 (Brazil), 8.3 (Mexico), 5.4 (Spain), and 6.4 (Thailand) weeks. From 300 patient surveys, mean reported INCS recommended durations were 6.4 (Brazil), 5.1 (Mexico), 4.0 (Spain), and 4.9 (Thailand) weeks; reported actual use durations were 6.2, 4.8, 3.6, and 6.4 weeks, respectively. The most frequent GP-PRF-reported factors influencing AR-INCS treatment duration were symptom severity (76-85%), symptom recurrence (49-73%), and existing comorbidities (33-57%). The most frequent GP-PRF-reported obstacles to adherence included forgetting to take medication regularly (54-100%), subsiding symptoms (42-91%), and being unable to continue activities (33-51%). Subsiding symptoms (36-53%) and reaching the prescription duration end (20-51%) were most frequent obstacles reported by the patient survey. Patients from all surveyed countries indicated that they visited the GP, a different physician, or a pharmacy for assistance with symptom recurrence; some patients also self-medicated. Conclusions: Real-world AR-INCS prescription durations vary between countries and actual use tends to be shorter than prescribed. Understanding underlying factors may support appropriate AR-INCS use. The study was not powered to statistically compare intercountry differences; hence, comparisons have not been drawn, and the small sample may not reflect a complete picture of clinical practice and patients with AR in each country.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.