Skip to Main Content (Press Enter)

Logo HUMANITAS
  • ×
  • Home
  • Corsi
  • Insegnamenti
  • Persone
  • Pubblicazioni
  • Competenze

UNI-FIND
Logo HUMANITAS

|

UNI-FIND

hunimed.eu
  • ×
  • Home
  • Corsi
  • Insegnamenti
  • Persone
  • Pubblicazioni
  • Competenze
  1. Pubblicazioni

Comparison of Allergic Rhinitis Treatments on Patient Satisfaction: A MASK‐air and EAACI Methodological Committee Report

Articolo
Data di Pubblicazione:
2025
Abstract:
Introduction Satisfaction with treatments may affect medication adherence and use patterns, including the use of co-medication. We aimed to compare different medications for allergic rhinitis (AR) on (i) patients' satisfaction and (ii) co-medication use frequency.Methods We assessed data from the mHealth app MASK-air. We evaluated days on which users with self-reported AR had used-alone or in co-medication-intranasal corticosteroids (INCS), intranasal antihistamines (INAH), fixed combinations of INAH+INCS, or oral antihistamines (OAH). We built multivariable regression models to compare these different AR medication classes (as well as individual medications) on their (i) treatment satisfaction levels (measured using a specific daily visual analogue scale ['VAS satisfaction']) and (ii) odds of being used in co-medication.Results We assessed 28,177 days reported by 1691 MASK-air users. For all medication classes, co-medication usage was associated with lower treatment satisfaction. When used in monotherapy, OAH were associated with lower VAS satisfaction than INCS (-1.7 points; 95% CI = -2.7; -0.7) or INAH+INCS (-2.1 points; 95% CI = -3.5; -0.7). INCS displayed higher odds of being used in co-medication than OAH (OR = 1.3; 95% CI = 1.0; 1.6) or INAH+INCS (OR = 1.3; 95% CI = 0.8; 1.8). When comparing individual intranasal medications, fluticasone furoate and fluticasone propionate tended to be more frequently used in co-medication. Among individual OAH, desloratadine and rupatadine were associated with higher satisfaction, while fexofenadine was more frequently used in co-medication.Conclusion Using patient-reported data, we evaluated different medication classes and treatments in terms of satisfaction and co-medication frequency. These results provide key insights into the acceptability of AR treatments and will contribute to future treatment guidelines.
Tipologia CRIS:
1.1 Articolo in rivista
Elenco autori:
Sousa‐pinto, Bernardo; José Vieira, Rafael; Bognanni, Antonio; Martini, Matteo; Ordak, Michal; Paoletti, Giovanni; Gil‐mata, Sara; Amaral, Rita; Bedbrook, Anna; Bonadonna, Patrizia; Brussino, Luisa; Walter Canonica, G.; Coutinho‐almeida, João; Cruz, Álvaro A.; Czarlewski, Wienczyslawa; Dykewicz, Mark; Giovannini, Mattia; Gemicioglu, Bilun; Carlos Ivancevich, Juan; Klimek, Ludger; Kvedariene, Violeta; Larenas‐linnemann, Desiree E.; Marques‐cruz, Manuel; Moreira, André; Niedoszytko, Marek; Margarida Pereira, Ana; Papadopoulos, Nikolaos G.; Pham‐thi, Nhan; Regateiro, Frederico S.; Toppila‐salmi, Sanna K.; Samolinski, Boleslaw; Sastre, Joaquin; Taborda‐barata, Luís; Thomander, Tuuli; Vardaloğlu Koyuncu, Ilgım; Valiulis, Arunas; De Las Vecillas, Leticia; Teresa Ventura, Maria; Walusiak‐skorupa, Jolanta; Xiang, Yi‐kui; Pfaar, Oliver; Fonseca, João A.; Zuberbier, Torsten; Schünemann, Holger J.; Di Bona, Danilo; Bousquet, Jean
Autori di Ateneo:
Paoletti Giovanni
Link alla scheda completa:
https://iris.hunimed.eu/handle/11699/102008
Pubblicato in:
ALLERGY
Journal
  • Utilizzo dei cookie

Realizzato con VIVO | Designed by Cineca | 26.9.3.0