Patient-centered digital biomarkers for allergic respiratory diseases and asthma: The ARIA-EAACI approach - ARIA-EAACI Task Force Report.

Biomarkers for the diagnosis, treatment and follow-up of patients with rhinitis and/or asthma are urgently needed. Although some biologic biomarkers exist in specialist care for asthma, they cannot be largely used in primary care. There are no validated biomarkers in rhinitis or allergen immunotherapy (AIT) that can be used in clinical practice. The digital transformation of health and health care (including mHealth) places the patient at the center of the health system and is likely to optimize the practice of allergy. Allergic Rhinitis and its Impact on Asthma (ARIA) and EAACI (European Academy of Allergy and Clinical Immunology) developed a Task Force aimed at proposing patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) as digital biomarkers that can be easily used for different purposes in rhinitis and asthma. It first defined control digital biomarkers that should make a bridge between clinical practice, randomized controlled trials, observational real-life studies and allergen challenges. Using the MASK-air app as a model, a daily electronic combined symptom-medication score for allergic diseases (CSMS) or for asthma (e-DASTHMA), combined with a monthly control questionnaire, was embedded in a strategy similar to the diabetes approach for disease control. To mimic real-life, it secondly proposed quality-of-life digital biomarkers including daily EQ-5D visual analogue scales and the bi-weekly RhinAsthma Patient Perspective (RAAP). The potential implications for the management of allergic respiratory diseases were proposed.

COVID-19 pandemic: Practical considerations on the organization of an allergy clinic-An EAACI/ARIA Position Paper.

BACKGROUND: The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) has evolved into a pandemic infectious disease transmitted by the severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus (SARS-CoV-2). Allergists and other healthcare providers (HCPs) in the field of allergies and associated airway diseases are on the front line, taking care of patients potentially infected with SARS-CoV-2. Hence, strategies and practices to minimize risks of infection for both HCPs and treated patients have to be developed and followed by allergy clinics. METHOD: The scientific information on COVID-19 was analysed by a literature search in MEDLINE, PubMed, the National and International Guidelines from the European Academy of Allergy and Clinical Immunology (EAACI), the Cochrane Library, and the internet. RESULTS: Based on the diagnostic and treatment standards developed by EAACI, on international information regarding COVID-19, on guidelines of the World Health Organization (WHO) and other international organizations, and on previous experience, a panel of experts including clinicians, psychologists, IT experts, and basic scientists along with EAACI and the "Allergic Rhinitis and its Impact on Asthma (ARIA)" initiative have developed recommendations for the optimal management of allergy clinics during the current COVID-19 pandemic. These recommendations are grouped into nine sections on different relevant aspects for the care of patients with allergies. CONCLUSIONS: This international Position Paper provides recommendations on operational plans and procedures to maintain high standards in the daily clinical care of allergic patients while ensuring the necessary safety measures in the current COVID-19 pandemic.

Management of anaphylaxis due to COVID-19 vaccines in the elderly.

Older adults, especially men and/or those with diabetes, hypertension, and/or obesity, are prone to severe COVID-19. In some countries, older adults, particularly those residing in nursing homes, have been prioritized to receive COVID-19 vaccines due to high risk of death. In very rare instances, the COVID-19 vaccines can induce anaphylaxis, and the management of anaphylaxis in older people should be considered carefully. An ARIA-EAACI-EuGMS (Allergic Rhinitis and its Impact on Asthma, European Academy of Allergy and Clinical Immunology, and European Geriatric Medicine Society) Working Group has proposed some recommendations for older adults receiving the COVID-19 vaccines. Anaphylaxis to COVID-19 vaccines is extremely rare (from 1 per 100,000 to 5 per million injections). Symptoms are similar in younger and older adults but they tend to be more severe in the older patients. Adrenaline is the mainstay treatment and should be readily available. A flowchart is proposed to manage anaphylaxis in the older patients.

Identifying an effective mobile health application for the self-management of allergic rhinitis and asthma in Australia.

Objective: People with allergic rhinitis (AR) often self-manage in the community pharmacy setting without consulting health care professionals and trivialize their comorbidities such as asthma. A mobile health application (mHealth app) with a self-monitoring and medication adherence system can assist with the appropriate self-management of AR and asthma. This study aimed to identify an app effective for the self-management of AR and/or asthma.Methods: MHealth apps retrieved from the Australian Apple App Store and Android Google Play Store were included in this study if they were developed for self-management of AR and/or asthma; in English language; free of charge for the full version; and accessible to users of the mHealth app. The mHealth app quality was evaluated on three domains using a two-stage process. In Stage 1, the apps were ranked along Domain 1 (Accessibility in both app stores). In Stage 2, the apps with Stage 1, maximum score were ranked along Domain 2 (alignment with theoretical principles of the self-management of AR and/or asthma) and Domain 3 (usability of the mHealth app using Mobile App Rating Scale instrument).Results: Of the 418 apps retrieved, 31 were evaluated in Stage 1 and 16 in Stage 2. The MASK-air achieved the highest mean rank and covered all self-management principles except the doctor's appointment reminder and scored a total MARS mean score of 0.91/1.Conclusions:MASK-air is ranked most highly across the assessment domains for the self-management of both AR and coexisting asthma. This mHealth app covers the majority of the self-management principles and is highly engaging.

Allergic Rhinitis and its Impact on Asthma (ARIA) guidelines-2016 revision.

BACKGROUND: Allergic rhinitis (AR) affects 10% to 40% of the population. It reduces quality of life and school and work performance and is a frequent reason for office visits in general practice. Medical costs are large, but avoidable costs associated with lost work productivity are even larger than those incurred by asthma. New evidence has accumulated since the last revision of the Allergic Rhinitis and its Impact on Asthma (ARIA) guidelines in 2010, prompting its update. OBJECTIVE: We sought to provide a targeted update of the ARIA guidelines. METHODS: The ARIA guideline panel identified new clinical questions and selected questions requiring an update. We performed systematic reviews of health effects and the evidence about patients' values and preferences and resource requirements (up to June 2016). We followed the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation (GRADE) evidence-to-decision frameworks to develop recommendations. RESULTS: The 2016 revision of the ARIA guidelines provides both updated and new recommendations about the pharmacologic treatment of AR. Specifically, it addresses the relative merits of using oral H1-antihistamines, intranasal H1-antihistamines, intranasal corticosteroids, and leukotriene receptor antagonists either alone or in combination. The ARIA guideline panel provides specific recommendations for the choice of treatment and the rationale for the choice and discusses specific considerations that clinicians and patients might want to review to choose the management most appropriate for an individual patient. CONCLUSIONS: Appropriate treatment of AR might improve patients' quality of life and school and work productivity. ARIA recommendations support patients, their caregivers, and health care providers in choosing the optimal treatment.

MACVIA clinical decision algorithm in adolescents and adults with allergic rhinitis.

The selection of pharmacotherapy for patients with allergic rhinitis (AR) depends on several factors, including age, prominent symptoms, symptom severity, control of AR, patient preferences, and cost. Allergen exposure and the resulting symptoms vary, and treatment adjustment is required. Clinical decision support systems (CDSSs) might be beneficial for the assessment of disease control. CDSSs should be based on the best evidence and algorithms to aid patients and health care professionals to jointly determine treatment and its step-up or step-down strategy depending on AR control. Contre les MAladies Chroniques pour un VIeillissement Actif en Languedoc-Roussillon (MACVIA-LR [fighting chronic diseases for active and healthy ageing]), one of the reference sites of the European Innovation Partnership on Active and Healthy Ageing, has initiated an allergy sentinel network (the MACVIA-ARIA Sentinel Network). A CDSS is currently being developed to optimize AR control. An algorithm developed by consensus is presented in this article. This algorithm should be confirmed by appropriate trials.

The ability of people with intellectual disability to use inhalers--an exploratory mixed methods study.

OBJECTIVE: This aim of this study was to assess inhaler technique of people with intellectual disability (ID), and evaluate the effectiveness of teaching with respect to their individual ability to adopt correct technique. METHODS: Seventeen people with ID were recruited through existing networks of general practitioners and disability support organisations. Inhaler technique was assessed using validated checklists and placebo devices, followed by provision of individualised training. The educational interaction between participant and researcher was captured via video recording and analysed qualitatively. RESULTS: Seventeen people with ID participated; females comprised 65%. At baseline, no participants correctly used any device. Pressurised metered dose inhalers, with or without accessory devices, were the most poorly used devices. Inhalation steps were poorly performed across all devices. Following training, the proportions of assessed participants that were able to master inhaler technique were 100% of Accuhaler users, 40% of Turbuhaler users, 25% of pressurised metered dose inhaler users and 0% of Handihaler users. Barriers identified included poor comprehension of breathing processes, the lack of attentiveness and poor dexterity. Facilitators for educator delivery of inhaler technique education included the use of analogies and being patient. CONCLUSIONS: This is the first study to examine inhaler technique mastery in people with ID. Results show that with education that addresses the unique patient barriers inherent in this group, some individuals can be trained to mastery. Structured modules of inhaler technique training tailored for people with ID, but which can be individualised, are recommended.

A snapshot of pharmacist attitudes and behaviors surrounding the management of pediatric asthma.

OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study is to identify the current status of pediatric asthma management in the Australian community pharmacy setting from the pharmacists' perspective. This research will allow us to identify training needs of community pharmacists. METHOD: Pharmacists were recruited from the Sydney metropolitan region and asked to complete a self-reported questionnaire that elucidated information on four general domains relating to pediatric asthma management within community pharmacy. All data collected were analysed descriptively. Bivariate Pearson correlations were performed to determine whether interrelationships existed between specific domains. RESULTS: All 77 pharmacists completed the questionnaire. Thirty-two percent had not completed any asthma related CPD in the past year and only 25% of pharmacists reported using the national asthma guidelines in practice. Just over half of the pharmacists (54%) reported that they provide device technique demonstrations for new inhaled medicines, and 35% of pharmacists reported that they check for written asthma self-management plan possession. Although 65% of pharmacists reported confidence in communication skills, most pharmacists were not confident in setting short-/long-term goals with the patient and carer for managing asthma at home. Pharmacists believed that they are just as effective as doctors in providing asthma counseling and education. Lack of time was identified as a significant barrier. CONCLUSION: We have identified a gap between guideline recommended practices and the self-reported practices of community pharmacists. Pharmacists need more appropriate continuing education programs that can translate into improved pediatric asthma self-management practices and thus improved asthma outcomes in children. This may require an alternative approach.

Uncovering the Burden of Rhinitis in Patients Purchasing Nonprescription Short-Acting ß-Agonist (SABA) in the Community.

Asthma and rhinitis are common comorbidities that amplify the burden of each disease. They are both characterized by poor symptom control, low adherence to clinical management guidelines, and high levels of patient self-management. Therefore, this study aims to investigate the prevalence of self-reported rhinitis symptoms in people with asthma purchasing Short-Acting Beta Agonist (SABA) reliever medication from a community pharmacy and compare the medication-related behavioral characteristics among those who self-report rhinitis symptoms and those who do not. Data were analyzed from 333 people with asthma who visited one of eighteen community pharmacies in New South Wales from 2017-2018 to purchase SABA and completed a self-administered questionnaire. Participants who reported rhinitis symptoms (71%), compared to those who did not, were significantly more likely to have coexisting gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD), overuse SABA, and experience side effects. They may have been prescribed daily preventer medication but forget to take it, and worry about its side effects. They were also more likely to experience moderate-to-severe rhinitis (74.0%), inaccurately perceive their asthma as well-controlled (50.0% self-determined vs. 14.8% clinical-guideline defined), and unlikely to use rhinitis medications (26.2%) or daily preventer medication (26.7%). These findings enhance our understanding of this cohort and allow us to identify interventions to improve patient outcomes.

The impact of implementing an allergic rhinitis clinical management pathway (AR-CMaP) in the community pharmacy.

Background: The Allergic Rhinitis Clinical Management Pathway (AR-CMaP) was developed to overcome the challenge of implementing current AR guidelines in the Australian community pharmacy practice and support pharmacists in optimally managing patients' AR. Objectives: To evaluate the impact of AR-CMaP on patients' behaviour and pharmacists' needs in managing AR in the pharmacy. Methods: This study used a cross-sectional, pre-post study design in which the primary outcome was the appropriateness of medications purchased from community pharmacies in Australia. Patient data were collected before and after the implementation of AR-CMaP. Pharmacist needs were recorded before and after AR-CMaP training. Data were analysed descriptively. Results: Six pharmacies, 19 pharmacists and a total of 416 patients were included in the study; 206 pre-AR-CMaP implementation and 210 post-AR-CMaP implementation. Pre-AR-CMaP, 22.4% of patients purchased appropriate AR medication compared with 29.0% post-AR-CMaP implementation. Over half the patient cohort (52%) consulted a pharmacist pre-AR-CMaP and 37% consulted a pharmacist post-AR-CMaP implementation. Post-AR-CMaP, pharmacists reported increased awareness of barriers such as patients' lack of time, patients' perceptions about the pharmacist's role and patient choice to self-manage. Pharmacists also rated an increased desire to interact with other health care providers (HCPs) in caring for patients with AR. Conclusions: While there was a non-statistically significant increase in the proportion of patients purchasing optimal AR medication, AR-CMaP did empower patients to self-select their own medication without further detriment. Moreover, following the implementation of AR-CMaP, pharmacists developed a greater awareness of their role in AR management, exemplified by their increased desire to be actively involved in AR management and increased interaction with other HCPs. Future research needs to explore more effective tools to support pharmacists' clinical decision-making and target patients' self-selection of AR medications. This study highlights that there is an ingrained self-reliance of AR decision-making that has become a habit for people living with AR.

Healthcare expenditure and its socio-demographic and clinical predictors in Australians with poorly controlled asthma.

INTRODUCTION: Asthma has substantial and increasing health and economic burden worldwide. This study aimed to estimate healthcare expenditure and determine the factors that increase expenditure in Australians with poorly controlled asthma. METHODS: Individuals ≥18 years of age with poorly controlled asthma, as determined by a score ≥1.5 on the Asthma Control Questionnaire, were included in the study. Healthcare utilization costs from medical services and medications were estimated over an average follow-up of 12 months from administratively linked data: the Medicare Benefits Schedule and Pharmaceutical Benefits Scheme. A generalized linear model with gamma distribution and log link was used to predict participants' key baseline characteristics associated with variations in healthcare costs. RESULTS: A total of 341 participants recruited through community pharmacies were included. The mean (standard deviation, SD) age of participants was 56.6 (SD 17.6) years, and approximately 71% were females. The adjusted average monthly healthcare expenditure per participant was $AU386 (95% CI: 336, 436). On top of the average monthly costs, an incremental expenditure was found for each year increase in age ($AU4; 95% CI: 0.78, 7), being unemployed ($AU201; 95% CI: 91, 311), one unit change in worsening quality of life ($AU35; 95% CI: 9, 61) and being diagnosed with depression and anxiety ($AU171; 95% CI: 36, 306). CONCLUSIONS: In a cohort of Australian patients, characterized by poor asthma control and co-morbidities individuals impose substantial economic burden in terms of Medicare funded medical services and medications. Programs addressing strategies to improve the quality of life and manage co-morbid anxiety and depression and encourage asthma patients' engagement in clinically tolerable jobs, may result in significant cost savings to the health system.

Integrating Pharmacy and Registry Data Strengthens Clinical Assessments of Patient Adherence.

Background: Accurate clinical assessment of patient adherence using reliable and valid measures is essential in establishing the presence of adherence issues and support practices for pharmacists. Objective: This investigation aims to conduct a novel assessment of patient adherence to asthma controller therapy by combining 1) patient-specific dosage data found in pharmacy dispensing data with 2) centrally collected administrative claims records, to determine the added value of using both sources of data. Methods: A total of 381 clinically uncontrolled asthma patients, from 95 community pharmacies across three Australian States were recruited and provided consent for the retrieval of their claims records and pharmacy dispensing data. Patients were stratified as multiple or single pharmacy users and adherence scores were calculated via the proportion of days covered (PDC) method using 1) patient claims records, 2) patient pharmacy dispensing data, and 3) combined claims records and pharmacy dispensing data. Cohort and subgroup adherence estimates were then compared. Results: Low levels of adherence were evident amongst the cohort irrespective of the data source used. PDC estimates based on claims records alone or combined claims records and pharmacy dispensing data were significantly higher than estimates based on pharmacy dispensing data for the total cohort (56%, 52%, 42% respectively, p < 0.001) and more noticeably for multiple pharmacy users (67%, 64%, 35% respectively, p < 0.001). PDC estimates based on combined claims records and pharmacy dispensing data were significantly lower than estimates based on claims records alone, indicating that perhaps standard daily dose is not a robust proxy for prescribed dosage to inhaled respiratory devices in adherence approximations. Poorer adherence was found amongst single pharmacy users than multiple pharmacy users when combined claims records and pharmacy dispensing data (46% compared to 64% respectively, p < 0.001) or claims records alone (51% compared to 67% respectively, p < 0.001) were compared. Conclusion: Access to routine collected data increases clinical acuity over patient adherence to asthma controller medications and is a valuable resource for health care professionals. A policy of secure accessibility of such data at the patient-pharmacist or patient-GP interface may allow real-time intervention and assist in decision making across numerous therapeutic areas.

Exploring General Practitioners' Preferences and Experience with Respiratory Inhaler Devices.

INTRODUCTION: Correct inhaler technique is essential for the optimal delivery of inhaled medicines and the successfully management of respiratory conditions. The general practitioner (GP), the prescriber of inhaled medicines, plays a crucial role in educating patients on inhaler technique. However, in the real-world setting, there are barriers. For the GP, it is time and competence and for the patient, it is their ability to recognise inhaler technique as an issue and their ability to maintain correct inhaler technique over time. This study aimed to determine GPs' experience, skills and priority placed on inhaler technique and to identify factor(s) associated with inhaler technique competence. METHODS: This cross-sectional observational study design surveyed GPs' perspectives on inhaler use and preferences for inhaler prescribing within their practice setting. GP inhaler technique was assessed. GPs were recruited through an established network of GP practices. Data collected include (i) practice demographics, (ii) inhaler technique opinions and experience, (iii) inhaler prescribing preferences and (iv) inhaler education history data. Data were analysed descriptively and multivariate logistic regression modelling was used to explore the relationship between outcomes and GPs' ability to use devices correctly. RESULTS: A total of 227 GPs completed the inhaler survey. Sixty-three percent of GPs reported receiving previous inhaler education and 73.3% educated or checked their patients' inhaler technique; 64.5% felt they were somewhat competent in doing so. GPs who reported not demonstrating inhaler technique believed that a pharmacist or a practice nurse would do so. When prescribing new inhaler devices, GPs considered the disease being treated first and then patient's experience with inhalers; they often already have an inhaler preference and this was related to familiarity and perceived ease of use. For GPs, inhaler competence was not associated with their previous inhaler education or the priority placed on inhaler technique. CONCLUSION: GPs do recognise the importance of inhaler technique in respiratory management but their technique can be better supported with regular educational updates to inform them about new inhalers and management practices and to support appropriate inhaler choices for their patients.

Patient uptake and outcomes following pharmacist-initiated referrals to general practitioners for asthma review.

Uptake and outcomes of pharmacist-initiated general practitioner (GP) referrals for patients with poorly controlled asthma were investigated. Pharmacists referred at-risk patients for GP assessment. Patients were categorized as action takers (consulted their GP on pharmacist's advice) or action avoiders (did not action the referral). Patient clinical data were compared to explore predictors of uptake and association with health outcomes. In total, 58% of patients (n = 148) received a GP referral, of whom 78% (n = 115) were action takers, and 44% (n = 50) reported changes to their asthma therapy. Patient rurality and more frequent pre-trial GP visits were associated with action takers. Action takers were more likely to have an asthma action plan (P = 0.001) at month 12, and had significantly more GP visits during the trial period (P = 0.034). Patient uptake of pharmacist-initiated GP referrals was high and led to GP review and therapy changes in patients with poorly controlled asthma.

A Multi-Mode Education Program to Enhance Asthma Care by Pharmacists.

Objective. To provide optimal asthma care, community pharmacists must have advanced, contemporary knowledge, and the skills to translate that knowledge into practice. The development and evaluation of an innovative multi-mode education program to enhance pharmacists' clinical knowledge and practical skills is described.Methods. The online education modules were collaboratively developed alongside asthma and pharmacy organizations. The education program was comprised of five evidence-based education modules delivered online and a skills review conducted either in-person with real-time feedback (urban pharmacists) or via video upload and scheduled video-conference feedback (regional and remote pharmacists). A mixed methods approach was used to evaluate the feedback obtained from pharmacists to assess the content, efficacy, and applicability of the education.Results. Ninety-seven pharmacists opted into the program and successfully completed all education requirements. A larger proportion of pharmacists did not pass trial protocol-based education modules on their first attempts compared to the number that passed the asthma and medication knowledge-based modules. Prior to skills review, the proportion of pharmacists demonstrating device technique competency was suboptimal. Pharmacists rated the education modules highly in both quantitative and qualitative evaluations and reported that the program adequately prepared them to better deliver care to asthma patients.Conclusion. We developed, implemented, and evaluated a novel multi-mode asthma education program for community pharmacists that supports knowledge and practical skill development in this crucial area of patient care. The education program was well received by pharmacists. This form of education could be used more broadly in international collaborative trials.

Patients' and physicians' perspectives on the burden and management of asthma: Results from the APPaRENT 2 study.

BACKGROUND: The 2021 Global Initiative for Asthma (GINA) report recommends 2 treatment tracks depending on choice of reliever therapy: either inhaled corticosteroid (ICS)/formoterol, or short-acting ß2-agonist (SABA) with ICS to be used whenever a SABA is taken. OBJECTIVE: The Asthma Patients' and Physicians' Perspectives on the Burden and Management of Asthma (APPaRENT) 2 study aimed to understand current real-world treatment approaches and their alignment with GINA recommendations. METHODS: Patients and physicians were recruited for the online survey from online panels from August-November 2021. INCLUSION CRITERIA: adults, physician diagnosis of asthma, ≥6 months prescribed inhaler use (patients); primary care, ≥4 patients with asthma per month, ≥3 years clinical practice (physicians). RESULTS: 1650 patients and 1080 physicians were included. For patients with moderate to severe asthma, physicians prescribed proactive regular dosing (PRD) with ICS/long-acting ß2-agonist (LABA) combination with (47%) or without (15%) SABA as initial therapy. Most pulmonologists (75%) and general practitioners (57%) selected a PRD approach. The majority of patients, 85% (79-91%), considered to be using maintenance and reliever therapy (MART), were also prescribed non-ICS rescue inhaler. CONCLUSIONS: Physicians preferred a preventive regular dosing approach to achieve symptom control for patients with moderate to severe asthma, which is more aligned with GINA 2021 Track 2 recommendations than Track 1. Many patients on MART request additional rescue inhalers, suggesting that MART is being misapplied in most instances and that patients may perceive their asthma as inadequately controlled with MART therapy.

Characterisation of the Australian Adult Population Living with Asthma: Severe - Exacerbation Frequency, Long-Term OCS Use and Adverse Effects.

Introduction: Asthma poses a significant burden for the Australian population. Understanding severe exacerbation rates, and steroid-related burden for adults diagnosed with asthma stands to offer insights into how this could be reduced. Methods: Electronic medical records (EMR) and questionnaires from the Optimum Patient Care Research Database Australia (OPCRDA) were utilised retrospectively. OPCRDA is a real-world database with >800,000 medical records from Australian primary care practices. Outcomes were severe asthma exacerbations in Australian adults, over a 12-month period, stratified by Global Initiative for Asthma (GINA) treatment intensity steps, and steroid associated comorbidities. Results: Of the 7868 adults treated for asthma, 19% experienced at least one severe exacerbation in the last 12-months. Severe exacerbation frequency increased with treatment intensity (≥1 severe exacerbation GINA 1 13%; GINA 4 23%; GINA 5a 33% and GINA 5b 28%). Questionnaire participants reported higher rates of severe exacerbations than suggested from their EMR (32% vs 23%) especially in steps 1, 4 and 5. Patients repeatedly exposed to steroids had an increased risk of osteoporosis (OR 1.95, 95% CI 1.43-2.66) and sleep apnoea (OR 1.78, 95% CI 1.30-2.46). Conclusion: The Australian population living with GINA 1, 4, 5a and 5b asthma have high severe exacerbation rates and steroid-related burden, especially when compared to other first world countries, with these patients needing alternative strategies or possibly specialist assessment to better manage their condition.

Management of allergic rhinitis symptoms in the pharmacy Pocket guide 2022.

Background: Allergic rhinitis (AR) management requires a coordinated effort from healthcare providers and patients. Pharmacists are key members of these integrated care pathways resolving medication-related problems, optimizing regimens, improving adherence and recommending therapies while establishing liaisons between patients and physicians. Methods: Allergic Rhinitis and its Impact on Asthma (ARIA) first published a reference document on the pharmacist's role in allergic rhinitis management in 2004. Several guidelines were developed over the past 20 years improving the care of allergic rhinitis patients through an evidence-based, integrated care approach. Results: This ARIA/EAACI/FIP Position Paper is based on the latest ARIA in the Pharmacy guidelines and provides: (a) a structured approach to pharmacists identifying people with AR and/or allergic conjunctivitis as well as those at risk of poor disease control; (b) an evidence-based clinical decision support tool for optimising the management of allergic rhinitis in the community pharmacy; and (c) a framework of referral to the physician. Conclusion: This document is not intended to be a mandatory standard of care but is provided as a basis for pharmacists and their staff to develop relevant local standards of care for their patients, within their local practice environment. Pharmacy care varies between countries, and the guide should be adapted to the local situation.