Israel Medical Association Journal

Intranasal corticosteroids (INCS) are frequently prescribed for allergic rhinitis but can also be used for other indications, such as sinusitis and nasal congestion. INCS are considered effective in controlling nasal symptoms with a similar safety profile among the different INCS formulations. In this review, we presented all available INCS formulations marketed in Israel while emphasizing the differences among them with a practical approach for medical providers in selecting a specific INCS agent. We conducted a literature review using PubMed, Medline, and Google Scholar to identify articles related to INCS, triamcinolone acetonide, fluticasone propionate, and fluticasone furoate. Currently, five brands of INCS are available in Israel. While they all have similar efficacy in treating nasal symptoms, only fluticasone furoate consistently demonstrated a reduction in ocular symptoms compared to placebo. Other differences included sensory attributes, recommended regimens, approved age for use, and cost. When selecting INCS agent, a personalized approach is advised. Factors such as age, co-morbidities, concurrent medications, pregnancy, and patient preferences should be considered.

Background: Guidelines recommend initiation of parenteral biologic or oral target-specific disease-modifying anti-rheumatic drugs (bDMARDs/tsDMARDs) in rheumatoid arthritis (RA) patients who do not adequately respond to conventional DMARDs.

Objectives: To compare the preferred route of administration of bDMARDs or tsDMARDs in RA patients who were previously treated with at least one type.

Methods: A cross-sectional survey was conducted of consecutive RA patients previously prescribed bDMARDs or tsDMARDs. We analyzed the factors associated with patients' preferred route of administration.

Results: The cohort included 95 patients, mostly female (72.6%), seropositive (81.05%), mean age 63.4 ± 11.9 years. The oral route was preferred by 39 patients (41%) and 56 (59%) preferred the parenteral route. Most patients (65.9%) preferred to continue with their current route (P < 0.001). Switching from a current route was less common with patients who were currently using the oral route (13.3% vs. 38.2%, P = 0.04). Many patients (53.8%) who preferred the oral route had never experienced it before, while this was rare (3.6%) regarding the parenteral route (P = 0.0001). Employment status was associated with preference of the subcutaneous route over the intravenous route of bDMARDs (P = 0.01). Of the 21 patients who had previously experienced both parenteral and oral treatment, 16 (76.2%) preferred the oral route.

Conclusions: RA patients preferred to continue treatment with an administration route they have already experienced. However, when choosing an unexperienced route, significantly more patients preferred the oral route. Our results strengthen the understanding of patient preferences, which could improve drug adherence, compliance, and disease outcome.