Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
Non-randomized trial reports improved satisfaction with a mouth film for allergic reactions, suggesting better accessibility and safety.
Despite the need for immediate treatment during acute allergic reactions (AARs), many patients do not consistently carry medication. A new mouth-dissolving dexamethasone film offers a portable, easily administered alternative to corticosteroid tablets. This non-randomized, open-label, low-interventional real-world trial assessed satisfaction (accessibility and safety/security) with the mouth film versus betamethasone tablets in adults prescribed tablets for moderate to severe AARs at a Swedish primary care center. Over six months, participants had access to both treatments and reported monthly via an electronic diary; qualitative responses were converted to Likert scales where applicable. Of 50 enrolled, 44 provided diary data (mean age 50 years, 74% female, 58% had an epinephrine autoinjector). In total, 189 responses were collected: 98% stated that the participant was satisfied or very satisfied with mouth film accessibility versus 58% for tablets (mean Likert scores 3.5–3.7 vs. 2.5–2.8; p < 0.001). A higher feeling of safety with the mouth film versus tablets was reported in 78% of responses and improved medication carriage compliance in 77%. At six months, 69% preferred the film. Of 18 AARs in total reported by 13 participants, the mouth film was chosen for treatment of 16 (11 participants); in 94%, the mouth film was found immediately accessible, and in 94%, the efficacy was rated as good or very good. In conclusion, the mouth film improved perceived accessibility, safety/security, and medication-carriage compliance compared with tablets for the treatment of AARs.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Bjermer et al. (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 10 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: