Abstract | BACKGROUND: Oral antihistamines are recommended by a World Health Organisation working group as a first-line pharmacological treatment in mild persistent allergic rhinitis. There is, however, uncertainty with respect to their effectiveness for a common symptom, that of nasal obstruction. OBJECTIVE: METHODS: Protocol based review of double-blind randomized controlled trials of oral antihistamine (i.e. drugs considered to act as a histamine receptor type-1 antagonist) vs. placebo. A search was carried out for published and unpublished trials. Individuals had to be age 12 years or older (with a diagnosis confirmed by skin prick tests, IgE blood tests or nasal allergen challenge), experiencing their normal allergen exposure. A symptom score for nasal obstruction had to be recorded. Predetermined quality criteria were applied. Treating their data as 4-point scores, a meta-analysis was carried out for studies, which provided enough data to be pooled. RESULTS: Meta-analysis found a weighted mean difference of -0.52 in favour of treatment for patient-assessed symptom scores (95% confidence interval (CI)-0.73,-0.31, P<0.00001), and of -0.33 in favour of treatment for healthcare worker assessed scores (95% CI -0.49, -0.16, P = 0.0001). CONCLUSION:
|
Authors | I Hore, C Georgalas, G Scadding |
Journal | Clinical and experimental allergy : journal of the British Society for Allergy and Clinical Immunology
(Clin Exp Allergy)
Vol. 35
Issue 2
Pg. 207-12
(Feb 2005)
ISSN: 0954-7894 [Print] England |
PMID | 15725193
(Publication Type: Journal Article, Meta-Analysis, Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't, Review, Systematic Review)
|
Chemical References |
|
Topics |
- Administration, Oral
- Adolescent
- Adult
- Double-Blind Method
- Histamine H1 Antagonists
(administration & dosage, therapeutic use)
- Humans
- Middle Aged
- Nasal Obstruction
(drug therapy, immunology)
- Patient Selection
- Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic
- Rhinitis, Allergic, Perennial
(complications, drug therapy)
- Treatment Outcome
|