Barrier Protection Measures for the Management of Allergic Rhinitis: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis
Background Pharmacotherapy for allergic rhinitis (AR) still remains unsatisfying regarding its effect and safety. Barrier protection measures may be a good choice for the patients with AR. Objective To assess the efficacy and safety of barrier protection measures in the treatment of AR. Methods We s...
Gespeichert in:
| Veröffentlicht in: | American Journal of Rhinology & Allergy 2020-07, Vol.34 (4), p.564-572 |
|---|---|
| Hauptverfasser: | , , , , , , |
| Format: | Artikel |
| Sprache: | eng |
| Schlagworte: | |
| Online-Zugang: | Volltext |
| Tags: |
Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
|
| container_end_page | 572 |
|---|---|
| container_issue | 4 |
| container_start_page | 564 |
| container_title | American Journal of Rhinology & Allergy |
| container_volume | 34 |
| creator | Chen, Xianzhen Deng, Chuntao Mi, Jiaoping Chen, Mo Li, Yanfei Liu, Zhigang Feng, Shaoyan |
| description | Background
Pharmacotherapy for allergic rhinitis (AR) still remains unsatisfying regarding its effect and safety. Barrier protection measures may be a good choice for the patients with AR.
Objective
To assess the efficacy and safety of barrier protection measures in the treatment of AR.
Methods
We selected relevant randomized controlled trials published between January 1, 1990, and February 20, 2019, by searching Embase, PubMed, Cochrane, Web of Knowledge, and ClinicalTrials.gov. The primary outcome for this analysis was rhinitis symptom scores, overall quality of life, nasal peak inspiratory flow (NPIF), and adverse events. Differences were expressed as weighted mean difference (WMD) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) for continuous outcomes. Statistical heterogeneity across trials was assessed with the statistic (P |
| doi_str_mv | 10.1177/1945892420912370 |
| format | Article |
| fullrecord | <record><control><sourceid>sage_cross</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_crossref_primary_10_1177_1945892420912370</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><sage_id>10.1177_1945892420912370</sage_id><sourcerecordid>10.1177_1945892420912370</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c337t-be339030c7c362d3e68a282730038e87ebe1da1b4d625966f800f04dd0339ff73</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNp1kMtOwzAQRS0EoqWwZ4X8A4GxncQOu1KVh9QKxGMdOcm4dZVHZbug_j2pCl0gsZrR6J4rzSHkksE1Y1LesCxOVMZjDhnjQsIRGe5OkcoEPz7sPB6QM-9XAGmcxOyUDARnUiVcDMnqTjtn0dEX1wUsg-1aOkftNw49NZ2jYYl0rlu9wAbbQDtDx3WNbmFL-rq0rQ3W39Ixfdv6gI0OuzN-Wvyiuq36pqCjHq633vpzcmJ07fHiZ47Ix_30ffIYzZ4fnibjWVQKIUNUoBAZCChlKVJeCUyV5opLASAUKokFskqzIq5SnmRpahSAgbiqoOeMkWJEYN9bus57hyZfO9tot80Z5Dtt-V9tPXK1R9abosHqAPx66gPRPuB7Efmq27j-Kf9_4Tew-3Ta</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype></control><display><type>article</type><title>Barrier Protection Measures for the Management of Allergic Rhinitis: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis</title><source>MEDLINE</source><source>SAGE Complete</source><source>Alma/SFX Local Collection</source><creator>Chen, Xianzhen ; Deng, Chuntao ; Mi, Jiaoping ; Chen, Mo ; Li, Yanfei ; Liu, Zhigang ; Feng, Shaoyan</creator><creatorcontrib>Chen, Xianzhen ; Deng, Chuntao ; Mi, Jiaoping ; Chen, Mo ; Li, Yanfei ; Liu, Zhigang ; Feng, Shaoyan</creatorcontrib><description>Background
Pharmacotherapy for allergic rhinitis (AR) still remains unsatisfying regarding its effect and safety. Barrier protection measures may be a good choice for the patients with AR.
Objective
To assess the efficacy and safety of barrier protection measures in the treatment of AR.
Methods
We selected relevant randomized controlled trials published between January 1, 1990, and February 20, 2019, by searching Embase, PubMed, Cochrane, Web of Knowledge, and ClinicalTrials.gov. The primary outcome for this analysis was rhinitis symptom scores, overall quality of life, nasal peak inspiratory flow (NPIF), and adverse events. Differences were expressed as weighted mean difference (WMD) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) for continuous outcomes. Statistical heterogeneity across trials was assessed with the statistic (P < .1) and the I2 statistic.
Results
Fifteen RCTs (with data for 1154 participants) satisfied our inclusion criteria. The types of barrier protection measures comprised cellulose, pollen blocker cream, microemulsion, and nasal filter. To reduce the potential risk of bias and heterogeneity, we carried out subgroup analysis according to different types of barrier protection measures (cellulose: WMD = –2.18, 95% CI, –3.01 to –1.35, P < .00001; pollen blocker cream: WMD = –4.55, 95% CI, –6.10 to –3.00, P < .00001; microemulsion: WMD = –0.22, 95% CI, –0.42 to –0.03, P = .03). Findings from our meta-analysis show that, compared with placebo, barrier protection measures can yield improved symptomatic control for AR, with no increase in adverse events. Furthermore, barrier protection measures can improve the quality of life and NPIF.
Conclusion
Although further studies are still needed, our findings clearly lend support to barrier protection measures as a safe and efficacious option for the treatment of AR patients.</description><identifier>ISSN: 1945-8924</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1945-8932</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1177/1945892420912370</identifier><identifier>PMID: 32178523</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>Los Angeles, CA: SAGE Publications</publisher><subject>Administration, Intranasal ; Allergens - immunology ; Antigens, Plant - immunology ; Humans ; N95 Respirators ; Pollen - immunology ; Quality of Life ; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic ; Rhinitis, Allergic, Seasonal - therapy ; Severity of Illness Index ; Skin Cream - therapeutic use</subject><ispartof>American Journal of Rhinology & Allergy, 2020-07, Vol.34 (4), p.564-572</ispartof><rights>The Author(s) 2020</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c337t-be339030c7c362d3e68a282730038e87ebe1da1b4d625966f800f04dd0339ff73</citedby><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c337t-be339030c7c362d3e68a282730038e87ebe1da1b4d625966f800f04dd0339ff73</cites><orcidid>0000-0002-2894-3647</orcidid></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><linktopdf>$$Uhttps://journals.sagepub.com/doi/pdf/10.1177/1945892420912370$$EPDF$$P50$$Gsage$$H</linktopdf><linktohtml>$$Uhttps://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/1945892420912370$$EHTML$$P50$$Gsage$$H</linktohtml><link.rule.ids>313,314,776,780,788,21798,27899,27901,27902,43597,43598</link.rule.ids><backlink>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32178523$$D View this record in MEDLINE/PubMed$$Hfree_for_read</backlink></links><search><creatorcontrib>Chen, Xianzhen</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Deng, Chuntao</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Mi, Jiaoping</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Chen, Mo</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Li, Yanfei</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Liu, Zhigang</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Feng, Shaoyan</creatorcontrib><title>Barrier Protection Measures for the Management of Allergic Rhinitis: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis</title><title>American Journal of Rhinology & Allergy</title><addtitle>Am J Rhinol Allergy</addtitle><description>Background
Pharmacotherapy for allergic rhinitis (AR) still remains unsatisfying regarding its effect and safety. Barrier protection measures may be a good choice for the patients with AR.
Objective
To assess the efficacy and safety of barrier protection measures in the treatment of AR.
Methods
We selected relevant randomized controlled trials published between January 1, 1990, and February 20, 2019, by searching Embase, PubMed, Cochrane, Web of Knowledge, and ClinicalTrials.gov. The primary outcome for this analysis was rhinitis symptom scores, overall quality of life, nasal peak inspiratory flow (NPIF), and adverse events. Differences were expressed as weighted mean difference (WMD) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) for continuous outcomes. Statistical heterogeneity across trials was assessed with the statistic (P < .1) and the I2 statistic.
Results
Fifteen RCTs (with data for 1154 participants) satisfied our inclusion criteria. The types of barrier protection measures comprised cellulose, pollen blocker cream, microemulsion, and nasal filter. To reduce the potential risk of bias and heterogeneity, we carried out subgroup analysis according to different types of barrier protection measures (cellulose: WMD = –2.18, 95% CI, –3.01 to –1.35, P < .00001; pollen blocker cream: WMD = –4.55, 95% CI, –6.10 to –3.00, P < .00001; microemulsion: WMD = –0.22, 95% CI, –0.42 to –0.03, P = .03). Findings from our meta-analysis show that, compared with placebo, barrier protection measures can yield improved symptomatic control for AR, with no increase in adverse events. Furthermore, barrier protection measures can improve the quality of life and NPIF.
Conclusion
Although further studies are still needed, our findings clearly lend support to barrier protection measures as a safe and efficacious option for the treatment of AR patients.</description><subject>Administration, Intranasal</subject><subject>Allergens - immunology</subject><subject>Antigens, Plant - immunology</subject><subject>Humans</subject><subject>N95 Respirators</subject><subject>Pollen - immunology</subject><subject>Quality of Life</subject><subject>Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic</subject><subject>Rhinitis, Allergic, Seasonal - therapy</subject><subject>Severity of Illness Index</subject><subject>Skin Cream - therapeutic use</subject><issn>1945-8924</issn><issn>1945-8932</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2020</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>EIF</sourceid><recordid>eNp1kMtOwzAQRS0EoqWwZ4X8A4GxncQOu1KVh9QKxGMdOcm4dZVHZbug_j2pCl0gsZrR6J4rzSHkksE1Y1LesCxOVMZjDhnjQsIRGe5OkcoEPz7sPB6QM-9XAGmcxOyUDARnUiVcDMnqTjtn0dEX1wUsg-1aOkftNw49NZ2jYYl0rlu9wAbbQDtDx3WNbmFL-rq0rQ3W39Ixfdv6gI0OuzN-Wvyiuq36pqCjHq633vpzcmJ07fHiZ47Ix_30ffIYzZ4fnibjWVQKIUNUoBAZCChlKVJeCUyV5opLASAUKokFskqzIq5SnmRpahSAgbiqoOeMkWJEYN9bus57hyZfO9tot80Z5Dtt-V9tPXK1R9abosHqAPx66gPRPuB7Efmq27j-Kf9_4Tew-3Ta</recordid><startdate>202007</startdate><enddate>202007</enddate><creator>Chen, Xianzhen</creator><creator>Deng, Chuntao</creator><creator>Mi, Jiaoping</creator><creator>Chen, Mo</creator><creator>Li, Yanfei</creator><creator>Liu, Zhigang</creator><creator>Feng, Shaoyan</creator><general>SAGE Publications</general><scope>CGR</scope><scope>CUY</scope><scope>CVF</scope><scope>ECM</scope><scope>EIF</scope><scope>NPM</scope><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0002-2894-3647</orcidid></search><sort><creationdate>202007</creationdate><title>Barrier Protection Measures for the Management of Allergic Rhinitis: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis</title><author>Chen, Xianzhen ; Deng, Chuntao ; Mi, Jiaoping ; Chen, Mo ; Li, Yanfei ; Liu, Zhigang ; Feng, Shaoyan</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c337t-be339030c7c362d3e68a282730038e87ebe1da1b4d625966f800f04dd0339ff73</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2020</creationdate><topic>Administration, Intranasal</topic><topic>Allergens - immunology</topic><topic>Antigens, Plant - immunology</topic><topic>Humans</topic><topic>N95 Respirators</topic><topic>Pollen - immunology</topic><topic>Quality of Life</topic><topic>Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic</topic><topic>Rhinitis, Allergic, Seasonal - therapy</topic><topic>Severity of Illness Index</topic><topic>Skin Cream - therapeutic use</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Chen, Xianzhen</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Deng, Chuntao</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Mi, Jiaoping</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Chen, Mo</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Li, Yanfei</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Liu, Zhigang</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Feng, Shaoyan</creatorcontrib><collection>Medline</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE (Ovid)</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>PubMed</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><jtitle>American Journal of Rhinology & Allergy</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Chen, Xianzhen</au><au>Deng, Chuntao</au><au>Mi, Jiaoping</au><au>Chen, Mo</au><au>Li, Yanfei</au><au>Liu, Zhigang</au><au>Feng, Shaoyan</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Barrier Protection Measures for the Management of Allergic Rhinitis: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis</atitle><jtitle>American Journal of Rhinology & Allergy</jtitle><addtitle>Am J Rhinol Allergy</addtitle><date>2020-07</date><risdate>2020</risdate><volume>34</volume><issue>4</issue><spage>564</spage><epage>572</epage><pages>564-572</pages><issn>1945-8924</issn><eissn>1945-8932</eissn><abstract>Background
Pharmacotherapy for allergic rhinitis (AR) still remains unsatisfying regarding its effect and safety. Barrier protection measures may be a good choice for the patients with AR.
Objective
To assess the efficacy and safety of barrier protection measures in the treatment of AR.
Methods
We selected relevant randomized controlled trials published between January 1, 1990, and February 20, 2019, by searching Embase, PubMed, Cochrane, Web of Knowledge, and ClinicalTrials.gov. The primary outcome for this analysis was rhinitis symptom scores, overall quality of life, nasal peak inspiratory flow (NPIF), and adverse events. Differences were expressed as weighted mean difference (WMD) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) for continuous outcomes. Statistical heterogeneity across trials was assessed with the statistic (P < .1) and the I2 statistic.
Results
Fifteen RCTs (with data for 1154 participants) satisfied our inclusion criteria. The types of barrier protection measures comprised cellulose, pollen blocker cream, microemulsion, and nasal filter. To reduce the potential risk of bias and heterogeneity, we carried out subgroup analysis according to different types of barrier protection measures (cellulose: WMD = –2.18, 95% CI, –3.01 to –1.35, P < .00001; pollen blocker cream: WMD = –4.55, 95% CI, –6.10 to –3.00, P < .00001; microemulsion: WMD = –0.22, 95% CI, –0.42 to –0.03, P = .03). Findings from our meta-analysis show that, compared with placebo, barrier protection measures can yield improved symptomatic control for AR, with no increase in adverse events. Furthermore, barrier protection measures can improve the quality of life and NPIF.
Conclusion
Although further studies are still needed, our findings clearly lend support to barrier protection measures as a safe and efficacious option for the treatment of AR patients.</abstract><cop>Los Angeles, CA</cop><pub>SAGE Publications</pub><pmid>32178523</pmid><doi>10.1177/1945892420912370</doi><tpages>9</tpages><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0002-2894-3647</orcidid></addata></record> |
| fulltext | fulltext |
| identifier | ISSN: 1945-8924 |
| ispartof | American Journal of Rhinology & Allergy, 2020-07, Vol.34 (4), p.564-572 |
| issn | 1945-8924 1945-8932 |
| language | eng |
| recordid | cdi_crossref_primary_10_1177_1945892420912370 |
| source | MEDLINE; SAGE Complete; Alma/SFX Local Collection |
| subjects | Administration, Intranasal Allergens - immunology Antigens, Plant - immunology Humans N95 Respirators Pollen - immunology Quality of Life Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic Rhinitis, Allergic, Seasonal - therapy Severity of Illness Index Skin Cream - therapeutic use |
| title | Barrier Protection Measures for the Management of Allergic Rhinitis: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis |
| url | https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-02-05T06%3A57%3A15IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-sage_cross&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Barrier%20Protection%20Measures%20for%20the%20Management%20of%20Allergic%20Rhinitis:%20A%20Systematic%20Review%20and%20Meta-analysis&rft.jtitle=American%20Journal%20of%20Rhinology%20&%20Allergy&rft.au=Chen,%20Xianzhen&rft.date=2020-07&rft.volume=34&rft.issue=4&rft.spage=564&rft.epage=572&rft.pages=564-572&rft.issn=1945-8924&rft.eissn=1945-8932&rft_id=info:doi/10.1177/1945892420912370&rft_dat=%3Csage_cross%3E10.1177_1945892420912370%3C/sage_cross%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_id=info:pmid/32178523&rft_sage_id=10.1177_1945892420912370&rfr_iscdi=true |