Efficacy observation and compliance analysis of pollen allergen drops in seasonal allergic rhinitis.
10.3760/cma.j.cn112150-20230711-00002
- Author:
Dong Dong YU
1
;
Ying LIU
2
;
Zhi Ying ZHENG
2
;
Jing ZHANG
1
;
Lu GAO
1
;
Min ZHANG
2
;
Chan HE
2
;
Jian Li HAO
1
;
Ke Jun ZHANG
2
;
Yan FENG
2
Author Information
1. First Clinical Medical College, Shanxi Medical University, Taiyuan 030001, China.
2. Department of Otolaryngology Head and Neck Surgery, First Hospital of Shanxi Medical University, Taiyuan 030001, China.
- Publication Type:Journal Article
- MeSH:
Humans;
Rhinitis, Allergic, Seasonal/therapy*;
Rhinitis, Allergic;
Pollen;
Ambulatory Care Facilities;
Allergens
- From:
Chinese Journal of Preventive Medicine
2023;57(12):1996-2001
- CountryChina
- Language:Chinese
-
Abstract:
To study the efficacy and compliance analysis of pollen allergen drops in the treatment of allergic rhinitis. The method of single-center controlled was used to analyze the dates' results. From July 2021 to September 2021, 80 patients with seasonal allergic rhinitis were referred to the clinic of otorhinolaryngology in First Hospital of Shanxi Medical University.40 patients received sublingual immunotherapy (SLIT group), and the other 40 patients received symptomatic drug treatment as the control group. The total rhinoconjunctivitis symptom score (TRSS), the visual analogue scale(VAS), total medication score (TMS) and combined scores of medication and rhinoconjunctivitis symptoms (CSMRS) of the patient before the start of the treatment and after the first year of the treatment were compared to assess the efficacy of sublingual immunotherapy of Artemisia pollen. Follow the shedding during the study, the safety of the drug and the causes for compliance analysis were analyzed and recorded. The results of comparison with TRSS, VAS, TMS and CSMRS in two groups in the period of pretherapy were as follows: TRSS(12.393±3.023, 12.450±3.029, t=-0.077, P=0.939), VAS(8.357±1.026, 8.400±0.982, t=-0.173, P=0.862), TMS(3.214±0.568, 3.175±0.501, t=0.301, P=0.764), CSMRS (5.286±0.680, 5.253±0.677, t=0.199, P=0.843), there was no significant difference (P>0.05); lower observed symptom scores were got in the post-treatment pollen peak SLIT group compared to the control group, TRSS(3.964±1.551, 7.750±2.169, t=-7.918, P<0.05), VAS(2.893±0.956, 5.175±1.481, t=-8.286, P<0.05), TMS (1.821±0.863, 3.175±0.501, t=-8.163, P<0.05), CSMRS (2.489±0.921, 4.468±0.601, t=-10.723, P<0.05), and the differences between the groups were statistically significant (P<0.05); the SLIT group significantly reduced all symptom scores at the first peak compared to the starting, TRSS(12.393±3.023, 3.964±1.551, t=20.576, P<0.05), VAS (8.357±1.026, 2.893±0.956, t=30.070, P<0.05), TMS (3.214±0.568, 1.821±0.863, t=7.151, P<0.05), CSMRS(5.286±0.680, 2.489±0.921, t=14.533, P<0.05) and there was statistical difference (P<0.05). No significant adverse reactions occured during medication in the SLIT group. A total of 12 cases were shed in the SLIT group, so the compliance rate was 70%. The four reasons were that patients considered the course was long (4 cases, 33%); the drugs were expensive (3 cases, 25%); patients were busy with their work and life (3 cases, 25%); patients were affected by the outbreak (2 cases, 17%). In summary, Artemisia pollen sublingual drops may improve the symptoms of the patients who got allergic rhinitis caused by Artemisia pollen after the treatment for one year. However, due to the lack of sufficient understanding of immunotherapy or the difficulty in adhering to standardized medication, the compliance with sublingual immunotherapy is still poor, the compliance with sublingual immunotherapy needs to be further improved through patient education.
