Safety of rush immunotherapy using a modified schedule: a cumulative experience of 893 patients receiving multiple aeroallergens.

Conventional immunotherapy (IT) is effective in treating allergic rhinitis, allergic asthma, and chronic rhinosinusitis. Disadvantages include poor compliance, delayed efficacy, and patient frustration. Rush IT, or rapid desensitization, offers the advantages of rapid response, improved compliance, and cost-effectiveness.

Managing difficult-to-treat asthma: Lessons from a center of excellence in allergy and asthma care.

One in four asthma patients may not have their condition adequately controlled despite being treated according to current practice guidelines, and these patients experience persistent symptoms, frequent exacerbations, and high healthcare utilization. The Allergy and Asthma Center, a recognized center of excellence in the treatment of allergy and asthma, is based on a patient-first philosophy, and this article explains how the practice operates and the importance of maintaining efficient office flow, implementing technology, and building a caring and dedicated staff Because asthma patients are often referred from primary care physicians, many present with difficult-to-treat disease. Even though many of these patients have received inhaled corticosteroids either alone or in combination with other medications, their condition still remains not well controlled.

Improved immunotherapy with a rapid allergen vaccination schedule: a study of 137 patients.

Rapid allergen vaccination (RAV) is the updated term for what was previously called rush immunotherapy and rapid desensitization. RAV offers several advantages over traditional immunotherapy--that is, conventional allergen vaccination (CAV)--in terms of faster efficacy, better compliance, and cost-effectiveness. We used a 3-hour RAV protocol to treat 137 allergy patients.

Evaluating the response of patients undergoing both allergy skin testing and in vitro allergy testing with the ImmunoCAP Technology System.

Purpose: To evaluate the response of patients who underwent both skin and in vitro allergy testing, both of which are accepted methods.

Data Sources: Retrospective review of the case notes of 100 patients evaluated by both testing methods for allergic disease.

Conclusions: A total of 62 patients (62%) tested positive to at least one of the tested allergens via the in vitro method.