Suppr超能文献

英国的处方实践作为变应性鼻炎未满足需求的替代指标:一项回顾性观察研究。

UK prescribing practices as proxy markers of unmet need in allergic rhinitis: a retrospective observational study.

机构信息

University of Aberdeen, Aberdeen, UK.

Research in Real Life, Oakington, Cambridge, UK.

出版信息

NPJ Prim Care Respir Med. 2016 Jun 23;26:16033. doi: 10.1038/npjpcrm.2016.33.

Abstract

Little data on UK prescribing patterns and treatment effectiveness for allergic rhinitis (AR) are available. We quantified unmet pharmacologic needs in AR by assessing AR treatment effectiveness based on the prescribing behaviour of UK general practitioners (GP) during two consecutive pollen seasons (2009 and 2010). We conducted a retrospective observational study with the data from the Optimum Patient Care Research Database. We assessed diagnoses and prescription data for patients with a recorded diagnosis of rhinitis who took rhinitis medication during the study period. We assessed the data from 25,069 patients in 2009 and 22,381 patients in 2010. Monotherapy was the initial prescription of the season for 67% of patients with seasonal AR (SAR) and 77% of patients with nonseasonal upper airways disease (NSUAD), for both years. Initial oral antihistamine (OAH) or intranasal corticosteroid (INS) monotherapy proved insufficient for >20% of SAR and >37% of NSUAD patients. Multiple therapy was the initial prescription for 33% of SAR and 23% of NSUAD in both years, rising to 45% and >50% by season end, respectively. For NSUAD, dual-therapy prescriptions doubled and triple-therapy prescriptions almost tripled during both seasons. Many patients revisited their GP regardless of initial prescription. Initial OAH or INS monotherapy provides insufficient symptom control for many AR patients. GPs often prescribe multiple therapies at the start of the season, with co-prescription becoming more common as the season progresses. However, patients prescribed multiple therapies frequently revisit their GP, presumably to adjust treatment. These data suggest the need for more effective AR treatment and management strategies.

摘要

关于英国过敏(AR)处方模式和治疗效果的数据很少。我们通过评估英国全科医生(GP)在两个连续花粉季节(2009 年和 2010 年)期间的处方行为来评估 AR 治疗效果,以此确定 AR 的未满足药物需求。我们进行了一项回顾性观察性研究,使用 Optimum Patient Care Research Database 中的数据。我们评估了在研究期间记录有鼻炎诊断并使用鼻炎药物的患者的诊断和处方数据。我们评估了 2009 年的 25069 名患者和 2010 年的 22381 名患者的数据。对于季节性 AR(SAR)患者和非季节性上呼吸道疾病(NSUAD)患者,单药治疗是本季节的初始处方,占两个年份的 67%和 77%。对于 SAR 患者和 NSUAD 患者,初始口服抗组胺药(OAH)或鼻内皮质类固醇(INS)单药治疗的效果不佳,超过 20%的 SAR 患者和超过 37%的 NSUAD 患者属于这种情况。在两个年份中,SAR 的初始处方为 33%,NSUAD 的初始处方为 23%,到本季节末,分别上升至 45%和>50%。对于 NSUAD,双药治疗处方在两个季节中增加了一倍,三药治疗处方几乎增加了两倍。许多患者无论初始处方如何,都会再次就诊。初始 OAH 或 INS 单药治疗对许多 AR 患者的症状控制效果不佳。GP 通常在季节开始时开多种疗法,随着季节的进展,联合处方越来越常见。然而,开了多种疗法的患者经常再次就诊,大概是为了调整治疗。这些数据表明,需要制定更有效的 AR 治疗和管理策略。

https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/a5b7/4918055/4bd88ccedcb8/npjpcrm201633-f1.jpg

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验