The Allergies, Immunotherapy, and RhinoconjunctivitiS (AIRS) survey

Provider practices and beliefs about allergen immunotherapy

Bryan Leatherman, David P. Skoner, James A. Hadley, Nicole Walstein, Michael S. Blaiss, Mark S. Dykewicz, Timothy Craig, Nancy Smith, Felicia Allen-Ramey

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

8 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

Background: The practices and beliefs of the provider specialties that treat allergic rhinoconjunctivitis (ARC) with allergen immunotherapy (AIT) may vary. Methods: A telephone survey of 500 randomly selected health care practitioners in 7 specialties, conducted in 2012. Results: AIT was provided as a subcutaneous injection (SCIT) by 91% of allergist/immunologists, 54% of otolaryngologists, and 18% to 24% of other specialties. Otolaryngologists were the most frequent providers of sublingual drops of AIT (SLIT; 33%), compared to 2% to 10% of other specialties. AIT was recommended for adults with allergic rhinoconjunctivitis by 100% of allergist/immunologists vs 62% to 84% of the other specialties (p < 0.001). The primary reason for recommending AIT for adults (52%) or children (46%) was that other therapies did not work. Between 48% (nurse practitioners/physician assistants) and 93% (allergist/immunologists) of practitioners always or often decreased symptomatic medications over the course of AIT treatment. Most practitioners in all specialties (82-100%) thought that AIT was appropriate for patients with severe allergy symptoms. Significantly more allergist/immunologists and otolaryngologists than other specialists thought AIT was appropriate for mild allergy symptoms (p < 0.001 and p = 0.004, respectively, vs other specialties). Significantly more allergist/immunologists than other specialists thought that AIT was more effective than symptomatic medications (p < 0.001), could reduce the further development of allergies (p = 0.03), and could prevent the development of asthma. Conclusion: SCIT was more frequently provided than SLIT by all the specialties. Otolaryngologists were the most likely to offer SLIT, while very few allergist/immunologists offered SLIT. Allergist/immunologists differed from other specialties in some beliefs about the effectiveness of AIT.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)779-788
Number of pages10
JournalInternational Forum of Allergy and Rhinology
Volume4
Issue number10
DOIs
StatePublished - Jan 1 2014

Fingerprint

Immunologic Desensitization
Immunotherapy
Hypersensitivity
Subcutaneous Injections
Surveys and Questionnaires
Physician Assistants
Nurse Practitioners
Allergists
Telephone
Asthma

All Science Journal Classification (ASJC) codes

  • Immunology and Allergy
  • Otorhinolaryngology

Cite this

Leatherman, B., Skoner, D. P., Hadley, J. A., Walstein, N., Blaiss, M. S., Dykewicz, M. S., ... Allen-Ramey, F. (2014). The Allergies, Immunotherapy, and RhinoconjunctivitiS (AIRS) survey: Provider practices and beliefs about allergen immunotherapy. International Forum of Allergy and Rhinology, 4(10), 779-788. https://doi.org/10.1002/alr.21349
Leatherman, Bryan ; Skoner, David P. ; Hadley, James A. ; Walstein, Nicole ; Blaiss, Michael S. ; Dykewicz, Mark S. ; Craig, Timothy ; Smith, Nancy ; Allen-Ramey, Felicia. / The Allergies, Immunotherapy, and RhinoconjunctivitiS (AIRS) survey : Provider practices and beliefs about allergen immunotherapy. In: International Forum of Allergy and Rhinology. 2014 ; Vol. 4, No. 10. pp. 779-788.
@article{fc1f31f4a2434183bb254897072cdaf6,
title = "The Allergies, Immunotherapy, and RhinoconjunctivitiS (AIRS) survey: Provider practices and beliefs about allergen immunotherapy",
abstract = "Background: The practices and beliefs of the provider specialties that treat allergic rhinoconjunctivitis (ARC) with allergen immunotherapy (AIT) may vary. Methods: A telephone survey of 500 randomly selected health care practitioners in 7 specialties, conducted in 2012. Results: AIT was provided as a subcutaneous injection (SCIT) by 91{\%} of allergist/immunologists, 54{\%} of otolaryngologists, and 18{\%} to 24{\%} of other specialties. Otolaryngologists were the most frequent providers of sublingual drops of AIT (SLIT; 33{\%}), compared to 2{\%} to 10{\%} of other specialties. AIT was recommended for adults with allergic rhinoconjunctivitis by 100{\%} of allergist/immunologists vs 62{\%} to 84{\%} of the other specialties (p < 0.001). The primary reason for recommending AIT for adults (52{\%}) or children (46{\%}) was that other therapies did not work. Between 48{\%} (nurse practitioners/physician assistants) and 93{\%} (allergist/immunologists) of practitioners always or often decreased symptomatic medications over the course of AIT treatment. Most practitioners in all specialties (82-100{\%}) thought that AIT was appropriate for patients with severe allergy symptoms. Significantly more allergist/immunologists and otolaryngologists than other specialists thought AIT was appropriate for mild allergy symptoms (p < 0.001 and p = 0.004, respectively, vs other specialties). Significantly more allergist/immunologists than other specialists thought that AIT was more effective than symptomatic medications (p < 0.001), could reduce the further development of allergies (p = 0.03), and could prevent the development of asthma. Conclusion: SCIT was more frequently provided than SLIT by all the specialties. Otolaryngologists were the most likely to offer SLIT, while very few allergist/immunologists offered SLIT. Allergist/immunologists differed from other specialties in some beliefs about the effectiveness of AIT.",
author = "Bryan Leatherman and Skoner, {David P.} and Hadley, {James A.} and Nicole Walstein and Blaiss, {Michael S.} and Dykewicz, {Mark S.} and Timothy Craig and Nancy Smith and Felicia Allen-Ramey",
year = "2014",
month = "1",
day = "1",
doi = "10.1002/alr.21349",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "4",
pages = "779--788",
journal = "International Forum of Allergy and Rhinology",
issn = "2042-6976",
publisher = "Wiley-Blackwell",
number = "10",

}

Leatherman, B, Skoner, DP, Hadley, JA, Walstein, N, Blaiss, MS, Dykewicz, MS, Craig, T, Smith, N & Allen-Ramey, F 2014, 'The Allergies, Immunotherapy, and RhinoconjunctivitiS (AIRS) survey: Provider practices and beliefs about allergen immunotherapy', International Forum of Allergy and Rhinology, vol. 4, no. 10, pp. 779-788. https://doi.org/10.1002/alr.21349

The Allergies, Immunotherapy, and RhinoconjunctivitiS (AIRS) survey : Provider practices and beliefs about allergen immunotherapy. / Leatherman, Bryan; Skoner, David P.; Hadley, James A.; Walstein, Nicole; Blaiss, Michael S.; Dykewicz, Mark S.; Craig, Timothy; Smith, Nancy; Allen-Ramey, Felicia.

In: International Forum of Allergy and Rhinology, Vol. 4, No. 10, 01.01.2014, p. 779-788.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

TY - JOUR

T1 - The Allergies, Immunotherapy, and RhinoconjunctivitiS (AIRS) survey

T2 - Provider practices and beliefs about allergen immunotherapy

AU - Leatherman, Bryan

AU - Skoner, David P.

AU - Hadley, James A.

AU - Walstein, Nicole

AU - Blaiss, Michael S.

AU - Dykewicz, Mark S.

AU - Craig, Timothy

AU - Smith, Nancy

AU - Allen-Ramey, Felicia

PY - 2014/1/1

Y1 - 2014/1/1

N2 - Background: The practices and beliefs of the provider specialties that treat allergic rhinoconjunctivitis (ARC) with allergen immunotherapy (AIT) may vary. Methods: A telephone survey of 500 randomly selected health care practitioners in 7 specialties, conducted in 2012. Results: AIT was provided as a subcutaneous injection (SCIT) by 91% of allergist/immunologists, 54% of otolaryngologists, and 18% to 24% of other specialties. Otolaryngologists were the most frequent providers of sublingual drops of AIT (SLIT; 33%), compared to 2% to 10% of other specialties. AIT was recommended for adults with allergic rhinoconjunctivitis by 100% of allergist/immunologists vs 62% to 84% of the other specialties (p < 0.001). The primary reason for recommending AIT for adults (52%) or children (46%) was that other therapies did not work. Between 48% (nurse practitioners/physician assistants) and 93% (allergist/immunologists) of practitioners always or often decreased symptomatic medications over the course of AIT treatment. Most practitioners in all specialties (82-100%) thought that AIT was appropriate for patients with severe allergy symptoms. Significantly more allergist/immunologists and otolaryngologists than other specialists thought AIT was appropriate for mild allergy symptoms (p < 0.001 and p = 0.004, respectively, vs other specialties). Significantly more allergist/immunologists than other specialists thought that AIT was more effective than symptomatic medications (p < 0.001), could reduce the further development of allergies (p = 0.03), and could prevent the development of asthma. Conclusion: SCIT was more frequently provided than SLIT by all the specialties. Otolaryngologists were the most likely to offer SLIT, while very few allergist/immunologists offered SLIT. Allergist/immunologists differed from other specialties in some beliefs about the effectiveness of AIT.

AB - Background: The practices and beliefs of the provider specialties that treat allergic rhinoconjunctivitis (ARC) with allergen immunotherapy (AIT) may vary. Methods: A telephone survey of 500 randomly selected health care practitioners in 7 specialties, conducted in 2012. Results: AIT was provided as a subcutaneous injection (SCIT) by 91% of allergist/immunologists, 54% of otolaryngologists, and 18% to 24% of other specialties. Otolaryngologists were the most frequent providers of sublingual drops of AIT (SLIT; 33%), compared to 2% to 10% of other specialties. AIT was recommended for adults with allergic rhinoconjunctivitis by 100% of allergist/immunologists vs 62% to 84% of the other specialties (p < 0.001). The primary reason for recommending AIT for adults (52%) or children (46%) was that other therapies did not work. Between 48% (nurse practitioners/physician assistants) and 93% (allergist/immunologists) of practitioners always or often decreased symptomatic medications over the course of AIT treatment. Most practitioners in all specialties (82-100%) thought that AIT was appropriate for patients with severe allergy symptoms. Significantly more allergist/immunologists and otolaryngologists than other specialists thought AIT was appropriate for mild allergy symptoms (p < 0.001 and p = 0.004, respectively, vs other specialties). Significantly more allergist/immunologists than other specialists thought that AIT was more effective than symptomatic medications (p < 0.001), could reduce the further development of allergies (p = 0.03), and could prevent the development of asthma. Conclusion: SCIT was more frequently provided than SLIT by all the specialties. Otolaryngologists were the most likely to offer SLIT, while very few allergist/immunologists offered SLIT. Allergist/immunologists differed from other specialties in some beliefs about the effectiveness of AIT.

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=84908049408&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=84908049408&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1002/alr.21349

DO - 10.1002/alr.21349

M3 - Article

VL - 4

SP - 779

EP - 788

JO - International Forum of Allergy and Rhinology

JF - International Forum of Allergy and Rhinology

SN - 2042-6976

IS - 10

ER -