口服类固醇和类固醇鼻腔喷雾剂治疗慢性鼻窦炎的效果:比较研究

IF 0.8 Q3 Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutics Journal of Pharmacy and Bioallied Sciences Pub Date : 2024-07-01 DOI:10.4103/jpbs.jpbs_409_24
Asma Ahmed, Rajunaik Ajmeera, M. Bagrecha, Ganaraj Shetty, D. Mallika, Priyanka Sharma, Raj Kumar Tiwari
{"title":"口服类固醇和类固醇鼻腔喷雾剂治疗慢性鼻窦炎的效果:比较研究","authors":"Asma Ahmed, Rajunaik Ajmeera, M. Bagrecha, Ganaraj Shetty, D. Mallika, Priyanka Sharma, Raj Kumar Tiwari","doi":"10.4103/jpbs.jpbs_409_24","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT\n \n \n \n To assess how well steroidal nasal sprays and oral steroids work for treating CRS.\n \n \n \n Two hundred patients with CRS were included in a randomized controlled experiment. The patients were split into two groups: Group B received steroidal nasal sprays (fluticasone propionate 110 mcg/day in each nostril for 12 weeks) and Group A received oral steroids (prednisolone 30 mg/day for 14 days, followed by tapering over 7 days). The “Sino-Nasal Outcome Test (SNOT-22)” was used to quantify improvement in symptoms, the “Rhinosinusitis Disability Index (RSDI)” was used to measure quality of life, and the recurrence rate was measured at the 6-month follow-up.\n \n \n \n At 12 weeks, SNOT-22 and RSDI scores significantly improved with both oral steroids and steroidal nasal sprays (P < 0.05). At the 6-month follow-up, however, oral steroids had a greater recurrence rate (25% vs. 12%, P = 0.02) when compared to steroidal nasal sprays. The two groups’ adverse effects were similar and of low severity.\n \n \n \n In conclusion, nasal sprays containing steroids seem to be a safer and more successful option than oral steroids for treating CRS, making them worthy of being used as the first line of treatment.\n","PeriodicalId":16824,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Pharmacy and Bioallied Sciences","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.8000,"publicationDate":"2024-07-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Efficiency of Oral Steroids and Steroidal Nasal Spray in Treatment of Chronic Rhinosinusitis: A Comparative Study\",\"authors\":\"Asma Ahmed, Rajunaik Ajmeera, M. Bagrecha, Ganaraj Shetty, D. Mallika, Priyanka Sharma, Raj Kumar Tiwari\",\"doi\":\"10.4103/jpbs.jpbs_409_24\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"ABSTRACT\\n \\n \\n \\n To assess how well steroidal nasal sprays and oral steroids work for treating CRS.\\n \\n \\n \\n Two hundred patients with CRS were included in a randomized controlled experiment. The patients were split into two groups: Group B received steroidal nasal sprays (fluticasone propionate 110 mcg/day in each nostril for 12 weeks) and Group A received oral steroids (prednisolone 30 mg/day for 14 days, followed by tapering over 7 days). The “Sino-Nasal Outcome Test (SNOT-22)” was used to quantify improvement in symptoms, the “Rhinosinusitis Disability Index (RSDI)” was used to measure quality of life, and the recurrence rate was measured at the 6-month follow-up.\\n \\n \\n \\n At 12 weeks, SNOT-22 and RSDI scores significantly improved with both oral steroids and steroidal nasal sprays (P < 0.05). At the 6-month follow-up, however, oral steroids had a greater recurrence rate (25% vs. 12%, P = 0.02) when compared to steroidal nasal sprays. The two groups’ adverse effects were similar and of low severity.\\n \\n \\n \\n In conclusion, nasal sprays containing steroids seem to be a safer and more successful option than oral steroids for treating CRS, making them worthy of being used as the first line of treatment.\\n\",\"PeriodicalId\":16824,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Pharmacy and Bioallied Sciences\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.8000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-07-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Pharmacy and Bioallied Sciences\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.4103/jpbs.jpbs_409_24\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutics\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Pharmacy and Bioallied Sciences","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.4103/jpbs.jpbs_409_24","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutics","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

摘要 评估类固醇鼻腔喷雾剂和口服类固醇治疗 CRS 的效果。 200 名 CRS 患者被纳入随机对照实验。患者被分为两组:B 组接受类固醇鼻腔喷雾剂(丙酸氟替卡松 110 微克/天,每个鼻孔使用 12 周),A 组接受口服类固醇(泼尼松龙 30 毫克/天,使用 14 天,然后在 7 天内逐渐减量)。采用 "中鼻结果测试(SNOT-22)"量化症状改善情况,采用 "鼻炎致残指数(RSDI)"衡量生活质量,并在 6 个月随访时测量复发率。 12 周后,口服类固醇和类固醇鼻腔喷雾剂均可显著改善 SNOT-22 和 RSDI 评分(P < 0.05)。然而,在 6 个月的随访中,口服类固醇的复发率(25% 对 12%,P = 0.02)高于类固醇鼻腔喷雾剂。两组的不良反应相似,且严重程度较低。 总之,与口服类固醇相比,含类固醇的鼻腔喷雾剂似乎是治疗 CRS 更安全、更成功的选择,因此值得作为一线治疗药物。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Efficiency of Oral Steroids and Steroidal Nasal Spray in Treatment of Chronic Rhinosinusitis: A Comparative Study
ABSTRACT To assess how well steroidal nasal sprays and oral steroids work for treating CRS. Two hundred patients with CRS were included in a randomized controlled experiment. The patients were split into two groups: Group B received steroidal nasal sprays (fluticasone propionate 110 mcg/day in each nostril for 12 weeks) and Group A received oral steroids (prednisolone 30 mg/day for 14 days, followed by tapering over 7 days). The “Sino-Nasal Outcome Test (SNOT-22)” was used to quantify improvement in symptoms, the “Rhinosinusitis Disability Index (RSDI)” was used to measure quality of life, and the recurrence rate was measured at the 6-month follow-up. At 12 weeks, SNOT-22 and RSDI scores significantly improved with both oral steroids and steroidal nasal sprays (P < 0.05). At the 6-month follow-up, however, oral steroids had a greater recurrence rate (25% vs. 12%, P = 0.02) when compared to steroidal nasal sprays. The two groups’ adverse effects were similar and of low severity. In conclusion, nasal sprays containing steroids seem to be a safer and more successful option than oral steroids for treating CRS, making them worthy of being used as the first line of treatment.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
1.50
自引率
0.00%
发文量
275
审稿时长
34 weeks
期刊介绍: Journal of Pharmacy And Bioallied Sciences is a Quarterly multidisciplinary open access biomedical journal. Journal of Pharmacy And Bioallied Sciences is an international medium of interaction between scientist, academicians and industrial personnel’s.JPBS is now offial publication of OPUBS.
期刊最新文献
The Role of Tele-Orthodontics in Enhancing Patient Compliance and Treatment Monitoring Exploring the Therapeutic Potential of Omega-3 Fatty Acid Supplementation in Dry Eye Syndrome: An In vitro Investigation Enhancing Precision in Endodontic Procedures: An In vitro Investigation of Magnification and Enhanced Visualization Comparative Evaluation of Surgical Techniques for Pterygium Management: An In Vitro Study Schoolchildren’s Musculoskeletal Pain and Backpack Weight Impact on Posture: A Short-Term Study
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1