Safety and Efficacy of Oral Fexofenadine in Children with Seasonal Allergic Rhinitis - a Pooled Analysis of Three Studies

Allergic rhinitis is one of the most common clinical conditions in children; however, data regarding the safety of antihistamines in children with seasonal allergic rhinitis are limiting. To evaluate the safety and efficacy of fexofenadine in children with seasonal allergic rhinitis, data were pooled from three, double-blind, randomized, placebo-controlled, parallel-group, 2-week trials in children (6-11 year) with seasonal allergic rhinitis. All studies assessed fexofenadine HCl 30 mg b.i.d.; two studies included fexofenadine HCl at 15 and 60 mg b.i.d. Patients (and investigators) reported any adverse events during the trial. Physical examinations, including measurements of vital signs and laboratory tests, were performed. Efficacy assessments (total symptom score and individual symptom scores) were evaluated. Exposure to fexofenadine HCl 30 mg b.i.d. and to any fexofenadine dose exceeded 10,000 and 17,000 patient days, respectively. Incidences of adverse events, and discontinuations because of adverse events, were low and similar across treatment groups. In the placebo group, 24.4% of subjects reported adverse events compared with 24.1% for fexofenadine HCl 30 mg b.i.d., and 28.4% for all fexofenadine-treated groups. The most common adverse event overall was headache (4.3% placebo; 5.8% fexofenadine HCl 30 mg b.i.d.; and 7.2% any fexofenadine doses). Treatment-related adverse events were similar across treatment groups with no sedative effects. Fexofenadine HCl 30 mg b.i.d. was significantly superior to placebo in reducing the total symptom score and all individual seasonal allergic rhinitis symptoms, including nasal congestion (p < 0.05). Fexofenadine, at doses of up to 60 mg b.i.d., is safe and non-sedating, and fexofenadine HCl 30 mg b.i.d. effectively reduces all seasonal allergic rhinitis symptoms in children aged 6-11 years.

The Role of Psychological Adjustment in the Decision-Making Process for Voluntary Termination of Pregnancy

BACKGROUND: This study's objective was to evaluate the role of psychological adjustment in the decision-making process to have an abortion and explore individual variables that might influence this decision. METHODS: In this cross-sectional study, we sequentially enrolled 150 women who made the decision to voluntarily terminate a pregnancy in Maternity Dr. Alfredo da Costa, in Lisbon, Portugal, between September 2008 and June 2009. The instruments were the Depression, Anxiety and Stress Scale (DASS), Satisfaction with Social Support Scale (SSSS), Emotional Assessment Scale (EAS), Decision Conflict Scale (DCS), and Beliefs and Values Questionnaire (BVQ). We analyzed the data using Student's T-tests, MANOVA, ANOVA, Tukey's post-hoc tests and CATPCA. Statistically significant effects were accepted for p<0.05. RESULTS: The participants found the decision difficult and emotionally demanding, although they also identified it as a low conflict decision. The prevailing emotions were sadness, fear and stress; but despite these feelings, the participants remained psychologically adjusted in the moment they decided to have an abortion. The resolution to terminate the pregnancy was essentially shared with supportive people and it was mostly motivated by socio-economic issues. The different beliefs and values found in this sample, and their possible associations are discussed. CONCLUSION: Despite high levels of stress, the women were psychologically adjusted at the time of making the decision to terminate the pregnancy. However, opposing what has been previously reported, the women presented high levels of sadness and fear, showing that this decision was hard to make, triggering disruptive emotions.