Relevant Patient Benefit of Sublingual Immunotherapy with Birch Pollen Allergen Extract in Allergic Rhinitis: An Open, Prospective, Non-Interventional Study.

INTRODUCTION: Sublingual immunotherapy (SLIT) with birch pollen extract has been shown to be an efficacious treatment of allergic rhinitis (AR). An as-yet unanswered question is whether and how clinical benefit translates into patient benefit, i.e. what benefit patients derive from this treatment. METHODS: This 1-year, open, prospective, multicenter, non-interventional study conducted in 75 German centers measured patient-relevant benefit of birch pollen SLIT (Staloral® Birch) using the questionnaire "Patient Benefit Index for Allergic Rhinitis (PBI-AR)". At treatment onset, patients rated the importance of 25 treatment needs; after the first birch pollen season on treatment, goal achievement was evaluated. A preference-weighted benefit index was calculated and its association with gender, asthma, allergy status, and severity of AR symptoms was determined. RESULTS: Mean age of the 291 adult patients was 38.8 years; 58.4% were female. The most important treatment goals were to "be able to stay outdoors without symptoms" (87.3% quite or very important), "no longer have a runny or stuffed-up nose" (86.9%), and "be able to breathe through your nose more freely" (86.9%). The treatment goals with the highest benefit ratings (referring to those patients to whom the respective goal applied) were to "have confidence in the therapy" (60.5% has helped "quite" or "very much"), "have an easily applicable treatment" (55.6%), and "be able to breathe through my nose more freely" (51.7%). The average PBI-AR global score was 2.19 (SD 1.04) (0-4; with 4 indicating maximum benefit). No significant differences in PBI-AR global score or subscales were found between men and women, poly- and monoallergic patients, or patients with severe versus mild rhinoconjunctivitis. Patients with asthma reported relevant but lower benefit than patients without asthma. CONCLUSION: After 1 year of birch pollen SLIT treatment, patients reported considerable benefit, mainly due to a reduction of physical symptoms and treatment burden.

Differences between patient- and proxy-reported HRQoL using the Wound-QoL.

The purpose of this study was to examine the patient- and proxy-report agreement on the Wound-quality of life (QoL) questionnaire to assess health-related QoL in patients with chronic wounds. Patients and their proxies (in this case, relatives) were recruited via different nursing services in Germany and asked to complete the Wound-QoL. Intraclass correlation coefficients were calculated for each Wound-QoL scale and the total score, and weighted Cohen's Kappa coefficients for individual items. Proxies tended to report lower health-related QoL in the Wound-QoL than their relatives with chronic wounds. Agreement between the two perspectives was moderate on single-item level and excellent on scale level. Proxy-reports can be helpful, if patients are unable to provide information, although caution remains when interpreting the results. However, the patient's own perspective remains preferable.