Two young and two middle-aged subjects were taking anti-allergic medication as needed and four middle-aged individuals were regularly using L-Thyroxin.
Similar results were seen in relation to NOX for nasal anti-allergic medication [Table 2].
A limitation was the low power for nasal anti-allergic medication, which was inevitable since this is a rare health outcome in young age.
This study investigated the relationship between living close to traffic and ever dispense of prescribed oral antihistamines or nasal anti-allergic medication, among young children.
There was no association between living close to traffic and incidence of dispensed nasal anti-allergic medication or oral antihistamines [Table 2].
The Kaplan-Meier survival curves (Figs. 2 and 3) showed almost no incidence for nasal anti-allergic medication before the age of 2 years, and then increasing dispense until age 6.
This could be due to the fact that patients might not be aware that anti-allergic medication has a negative effect on driving ability or that side-effects occur when the patient is not driving.
Living in close proximity to a road with equal to or greater than 8640 cars/day (compared to 0 8639 cars/day), was not associated with higher incidence of ever dispensed oral antihistamine or nasal anti-allergic medication, with or without adjustment for confounders (sex, breastfeeding, parental allergy, parental origin, season, and year of birth).
The use of anti-histamine and anti-allergic medications were strongly associated with ADEs.
Six patients used one or a combination of the following: proton pump inhibitors (n=4), anti-hypertensive Losartan (n=1), anti-allergic medications (n=3), contraceptive pills (n=2), thyroxin substitution tablet (n=2), asthma inhalator medications (n=1), and anti-depressants/anxiolytics (n=2).
This correlates well to the notion that during monitoring for occurrence of ADEs, the use of anti-histamines and anti-allergic medications give a clue for further evaluation of ADEs.
