4.2 Article

Efficacy of intranasal corticosteroids for the ocular symptoms of allergic rhinitis: A systematic review

Journal

ALLERGY AND ASTHMA PROCEEDINGS
Volume 32, Issue 1, Pages 22-35

Publisher

OCEAN SIDE PUBLICATIONS INC
DOI: 10.2500/aap.2011.32.3420

Keywords

-

Categories

Funding

  1. Schering-Plough
  2. GlaxoSmithKline
  3. Sunovion
  4. Sanofi-Aventis

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Current treatment options for allergic rhinoconjunctivitis include topical antihistamines, vasoconstrictors, mast cell stabilizers, intranasal corticosteroids (INCS), and nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs that are generally used as a supplement to oral or intranasal therapies, necessitating the use of multiple treatments for the different symptoms of allergic rhinitis (AR). To assess the efficacy of INCS for ocular symptoms (OS) of AR. A search was performed of clinical trials (n = 32) from 1973 to 2009 of English articles (Medline, Embase, and PubMed) using intranasal corticosteroid, allergic rhinitis, ocular symptoms, allergic conjunctivitis, and rhinoconjunctivitis as key words. Quality assessment for the 32 eligible studies was performed using the Jadad score. Statistical analysis for continuous data was done by weighted mean difference or standardized mean difference. Thirty-two trials were included and separated into three different groups. The overall weighted mean was obtained from the Jadad score and came out to 9.29 (95% CI, 8.7-9.88). For meta-analysis for total OS scores and individual symptoms (10 parallel studies) the weighted mean was 10.17 (95% CI, 9.34-11). In the parallel studies, meta-analysis of individual symptoms (nine studies) gave a weighted mean of 10.09 (95% CI, 9.55-10.63). For eye symptoms but no individual symptoms (13 studies), the weighted mean was 8.56 (95% CI, 7.66-9.46). To date, clinical studies conducted statistically showed the efficacy of INCS on the OS of AR as evidenced by the meta-analysis results for the studies reporting total OSs. (Allergy Asthma Proc 32:22-35, 2011; doi: 10.2500/aap.2011.32.3420)

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.2
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available