Claus Bachert1, Tarek El-Akkad. 1. Department of Ear, Nose, and Throat, University Hospital, Ghent, Belgium. Claus.bachert@rug.ac.be
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Although they have comparable safety and efficacy profiles, different intranasal corticosteroids possess different sensory/chemical properties that can be easily differentiated by patients, and which may influence their preference and compliance. OBJECTIVE: We sought to compare patient assessments of sensory attributes of three intranasal corticosteroid sprays: triamcinolone acetonide aqueous (TAA), fluticasone propionate (FP), and mometasone furoate (MF). METHODS: In a multicenter, randomized, double-blind, crossover study, 95 patients with allergic rhinitis rated 14 sensory items (100-point scales), product preference, and likelihood of compliance with treatment. RESULTS: Immediately after administration, compared with MF, TAA was rated as having significantly better comfort during administration, less irritation, less odor strength, preferred odor, more moistness of nose/throat, milder taste (all P < or = 0.001), and preferred taste (P < or = 0.01). Compared with FP, TAA was rated as having significantly less odor strength, preferred odor (both P < or = 0.001), more moistness of nose/throat (P < or = 0.01), and milder taste (P < or = 0.05). Two minutes after application, TAA was rated as having less aftertaste than FP (P < or = 0.01) or MF (P < or = 0.001), and produced significantly less irritation (FP P < or = 0.05; MF P < or = 0.01). Of patients, 54.7% said they would prefer a prescription of TAA over one for MF (24.2%; P = 0.001) or FP (21.1%; P = 0.001). More patients indicated that they would be more compliant with treatment if given the TAA prescription (67.4%) than if given a prescription with FP (54.7%) or MF (49.5%). CONCLUSION: Several of the TAA sensory attributes were preferred over those of MF and FP. Patient preference may play a role in enhancing treatment compliance. Such findings indicate that TAA nasal spray may be a better choice than MF or FP in the treatment of seasonal and perennial allergic rhinitis.
RCT Entities:
BACKGROUND: Although they have comparable safety and efficacy profiles, different intranasal corticosteroids possess different sensory/chemical properties that can be easily differentiated by patients, and which may influence their preference and compliance. OBJECTIVE: We sought to compare patient assessments of sensory attributes of three intranasal corticosteroid sprays: triamcinolone acetonide aqueous (TAA), fluticasone propionate (FP), and mometasone furoate (MF). METHODS: In a multicenter, randomized, double-blind, crossover study, 95 patients with allergic rhinitis rated 14 sensory items (100-point scales), product preference, and likelihood of compliance with treatment. RESULTS: Immediately after administration, compared with MF, TAA was rated as having significantly better comfort during administration, less irritation, less odor strength, preferred odor, more moistness of nose/throat, milder taste (all P < or = 0.001), and preferred taste (P < or = 0.01). Compared with FP, TAA was rated as having significantly less odor strength, preferred odor (both P < or = 0.001), more moistness of nose/throat (P < or = 0.01), and milder taste (P < or = 0.05). Two minutes after application, TAA was rated as having less aftertaste than FP (P < or = 0.01) or MF (P < or = 0.001), and produced significantly less irritation (FP P < or = 0.05; MF P < or = 0.01). Of patients, 54.7% said they would prefer a prescription of TAA over one for MF (24.2%; P = 0.001) or FP (21.1%; P = 0.001). More patients indicated that they would be more compliant with treatment if given the TAA prescription (67.4%) than if given a prescription with FP (54.7%) or MF (49.5%). CONCLUSION: Several of the TAA sensory attributes were preferred over those of MF and FP. Patient preference may play a role in enhancing treatment compliance. Such findings indicate that TAA nasal spray may be a better choice than MF or FP in the treatment of seasonal and perennial allergic rhinitis.
Authors: Alexander V Karaulov; Natalia I Ilina; Natalia Shartanova; Aleksandr Maslakov; Luiz Lucio Journal: Int Arch Allergy Immunol Date: 2021-09-14 Impact factor: 2.749