Respiratory allergic diseases and allergen immunotherapy: A French patient survey before and during the COVID-19 pandemic.

Background: The COVID-19 pandemic brought unprecedented global disruption to both healthcare providers and patients with respiratory allergies. There are limited real-life data on the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on the risk perception of patients with allergy treated with allergen immunotherapy (AIT). Objective: To understand the risk perception of allergic patients treated with sublingual immunotherapy (SLIT) before and during the pandemic, and their attitudes towards COVID-19 infection and vaccination. Methods: This was a non-interventional, cross-sectional survey conducted from October to November 2021 in France. Adult patients, who had been prescribed and had received a Stallergenes SLIT (liquid or liquid and tablets) before the pandemic (from August 1, 2018 to March 10, 2020) and during the pandemic (from March 11, 2020 to August 31, 2021), were identified from the Stallergenes named-patient products (NPP) database. Patients completed an online questionnaire. Data were analyzed descriptively. Results: A total of 5258 patients from all over France completed the questionnaire. Mean (±SD) age of the respondents was 39.3 (±13.0) years and 66.9% were female. Some of them (11.8%) were obese (BMI >30 kg/m2). Main allergic diseases were rhinitis (80.0% of patients) with or without conjunctivitis, and asthma (39.0%). More than half of the patients experienced moderate to severe (58.0%) and persistent allergic rhinitis profile (70.4%). Most patients were poly-allergic (72.7%), mostly to house dust mites (61.9%), grass pollens (61.5%), tree pollens (57.8%), and cat dander (37.2%). Only 14.1% of patients experienced an aggravation of their allergy symptoms during lockdown and 14.8% were infected with COVID-19, with hospitalization required for 1.8%. Only 3.1% of patients reported their SLIT initiation as being postponed due to the pandemic. SLIT was changed, temporarily interrupted or permanently discontinued during the pandemic in 21.9% of patients. Changes mainly concerned the maintenance dose for SLIT-liquid (63.2%). SLIT modification was due to COVID-19 infection in only 4.2%. Most patients did not feel vulnerable (53.1%), anxious (55.2%), at risk to present severe symptoms of COVID-19 (77.1%), or at risk to transmit coronavirus (80.4%). However, greater anxiety was reported in patients with allergic asthma (33.6%) or other respiratory disorders (50.4%). Patients who felt vulnerable partly assigned their vulnerability to their allergic disease (59.3%). Suffering from an allergic disease did not make patients feel more vulnerable to side effects of COVID-19 vaccine for 79.6% of them. Conclusion: Overall, most patients with allergy and under SLIT were not strongly concerned by the COVID-19 infection. SLIT did not have a negative impact on the COVID-19 symptoms.

Self-reported asthma prevalence and management in adults in France in 2018: ASTHMAPOP survey.

BACKGROUND: There is a paucity of epidemiological data on asthma classified by disease severity in France. The ASTHMAPOP cross-sectional study aimed to review the prevalence and current management of asthma in people aged ≥18 years in France. METHODS: A self-administered questionnaire was mailed to 19 676 people representative of the French population in age, gender, region, and socio-economic status. Asthma was classified by treatment steps per the 2017 Global Initiative for Asthma (GINA) report, according to prescribed treatments. Analyses were mostly descriptive. RESULTS: The questionnaire return rate was 81.7% (n = 16 083), and 15 587 questionnaires were analyzed. The prevalence of lifetime asthma was 12.8% (95% confidence interval (CI):12.3-13.3%; n = 1 989) in 2018. The prevalence of current asthma (i.e., 12 months before the survey) was 6.4% (95% CI: 6.0-6.8%; n = 993); most of these respondents (95.3% [n = 946]) were receiving asthma treatment, and 49.4% (n = 491) were treated for mild asthma (GINA step 1 or 2). Of people with current asthma, 47.6% reported ≥1 asthma exacerbation in the past 12 months-defined as episodes (several days) during which symptoms (cough, sputum, and dyspnea) were worse than usual; 14.3% had ≥1 emergency visit, and 3.1% had ≥1 hospitalization due to asthma. Of those taking continuous asthma controller medications who answered all Morisky Medication Adherence Scale questions (n = 501), 46.4% were adherent (score=4) to their treatment regimen. Based on the 6-item Asthma Control Questionnaire scores, asthma was partially controlled or uncontrolled in 47.7% of 969 people. CONCLUSIONS: The prevalence of asthma in France has remained stable since 2006, but levels of asthma control and treatment adherence continue to be relatively poor. Asthma management in France requires improvement.

ARIA digital anamorphosis: Digital transformation of health and care in airway diseases from research to practice.

Digital anamorphosis is used to define a distorted image of health and care that may be viewed correctly using digital tools and strategies. MASK digital anamorphosis represents the process used by MASK to develop the digital transformation of health and care in rhinitis. It strengthens the ARIA change management strategy in the prevention and management of airway disease. The MASK strategy is based on validated digital tools. Using the MASK digital tool and the CARAT online enhanced clinical framework, solutions for practical steps of digital enhancement of care are proposed.

Continuous positive airway pressure-treated patients' behaviours during the COVID-19 crisis.

The #COVID19 pandemic has had limited impact on CPAP use by obstructive sleep apnoea patients. Mainly only those with suspected or proven COVID-19 stopped CPAP use, sometimes without a physician's advice, and were more likely to move to a separate bedroom. https://bit.ly/2RxQDZO.

Next-generation Allergic Rhinitis and Its Impact on Asthma (ARIA) guidelines for allergic rhinitis based on Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) and real-world evidence

The selection of pharmacotherapy for patients with allergic rhinitis aims to control the disease and depends on many factors. Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) guidelines have considerably improved the treatment of allergic rhinitis. However, there is an increasing trend toward use of real-world evidence to inform clinical practice, especially because randomized controlled trials are often limited with regard to the applicability of results. The Contre les Maladies Chroniques pour un Vieillissement Actif (MACVIA) algorithm has proposed an allergic rhinitis treatment by a consensus group. This simple algorithm can be used to step up or step down allergic rhinitis treatment. Next-generation guidelines for the pharmacologic treatment of allergic rhinitis were developed by using existing GRADE-based guidelines for the disease, real-world evidence provided by mobile technology, and additive studies (allergen chamber studies) to refine the MACVIA algorithm.

Next-generation ARIA care pathways for rhinitis and asthma: a model for multimorbid chronic diseases.

BACKGROUND: In all societies, the burden and cost of allergic and chronic respiratory diseases are increasing rapidly. Most economies are struggling to deliver modern health care effectively. There is a need to support the transformation of the health care system into integrated care with organizational health literacy. MAIN BODY: As an example for chronic disease care, MASK (Mobile Airways Sentinel NetworK), a new project of the ARIA (Allergic Rhinitis and its Impact on Asthma) initiative, and POLLAR (Impact of Air POLLution on Asthma and Rhinitis, EIT Health), in collaboration with professional and patient organizations in the field of allergy and airway diseases, are proposing real-life ICPs centred around the patient with rhinitis, and using mHealth to monitor environmental exposure. Three aspects of care pathways are being developed: (i) Patient participation, health literacy and self-care through technology-assisted "patient activation", (ii) Implementation of care pathways by pharmacists and (iii) Next-generation guidelines assessing the recommendations of GRADE guidelines in rhinitis and asthma using real-world evidence (RWE) obtained through mobile technology. The EU and global political agendas are of great importance in supporting the digital transformation of health and care, and MASK has been recognized by DG Santé as a Good Practice in the field of digitally-enabled, integrated, person-centred care. CONCLUSION: In 20 years, ARIA has considerably evolved from the first multimorbidity guideline in respiratory diseases to the digital transformation of health and care with a strong political involvement.

[Regional health agencies: only sham autonomy two years later]. / Les Agences Régionales de Santé deux ans après: une autonomie de façade.

From the outset, reform of regional health agencies in France, has been torn between two conflicting approaches: traditional state planning and the more recent New Public Management. In fact, the "Hôpital Patients Santá Territoires" (Hospital Patients Health Territories) bill juxtaposes rather than supplants these conflicting approaches. Based on a sociological and qualitative survey conducted nationwide and in three regional health agencies, this article highlights the contradictions in which regional health agency management is entangled and how it tries to accommodate them in its everyday professional activity. Officially, and paradoxically, regional agencies are required to be "autonomous" and "innovative" to ensure more "territorialized" health policies, but in fact, they are caught in a meshwork of somewhat arbitrary national regulatory and budgetary controls that are very similar to the traditional French model of administration. In the light of the example of three different schemes of regional/territorial delegation regulations, this article shows how the various stakeholders are nevertheless trying to innovate even if, ultimately, they are faced with a more traditional, centralised healthcare system with decreased participation at the more local levels.

Do general practitioners overestimate the health of their patients with lower education?

This study sought to ascertain whether disagreement between patients and physicians on the patients' health status varies according to patients' education level. INTERMEDE is a cross-sectional multicentre study. Data were collected from both patients and doctors via pre- and post consultation questionnaires at the GP's office over a two-week period in October 2007 in 3 regions of France. The sample consists of 585 eligible patients (61% women) and 27 GPs. A significant association between agreement/disagreement between GP and patient on the patient's health status and patient's education level was observed: 75% of patients with a high education level agreed with their GP compared to 50% of patients with a low level of education. Patients and GPs disagreed where patients with the lowest education level said that their health was worse relative to their doctor's evaluation 37% of the time, versus 16% and 14% for those with a medium or high education level respectively. A multilevel multivariate analysis revealed that patients with a low educational level and medium educational level respectively were at higher risk of being overestimated by GP's in respect of self-reported health even if controlling for confounders. These findings suggest that people with a lower education level who consider themselves to have poor health are less reliably identified as such in the primary care system. This could potentially result in lack of advice and treatment for these patients and ultimately the maintenance of health inequalities.

Do doctors and patients agree on cardiovascular-risk management recommendations post-consultation? The INTERMEDE study.

BACKGROUND: Understanding interactions between patients and GPs may be important for optimising communication during consultations and improving health promotion, notably in the management of cardiovascular risk factors. AIM: To explore the agreement between physicians and patients on the management of cardiovascular risk factors, and whether potential disagreement is linked to the patient's educational level. DESIGN OF STUDY: INTERMEDE is a cross-sectional study with data collection occurring at GPs' offices over a 2-week period in October 2007 in France. METHOD: Data were collected from both patients and doctors respectively via pre- and post-consultation questionnaires that were 'mirrored', meaning that GPs and patients were presented with the same questions. RESULTS: The sample consisted of 585 eligible patients (61% females) and 27 GPs. Agreement between patients and GPs was better for tangible aspects of the consultation, such as measuring blood pressure (κ = 0.84, standard deviation [SD] = 0.04), compared to abstract elements, like advising the patient on nutrition (κ = 0.36, SD = 0.04), and on exercise (κ = 0.56, SD = 0.04). Patients' age was closely related to level of education: half of those without any qualification were older than 65 years. The statistical association between education and agreement between physicians and patients disappeared after adjustment for age, but a trend remained. CONCLUSION: This study reveals misunderstandings between patients and GPs on the content of the consultation, especially for health-promotion outcomes. Taking patients' social characteristics into account, notably age and educational level, could improve mutual understanding between patients and GPs, and therefore, the quality of care.

Patient-physician interaction in general practice and health inequalities in a multidisciplinary study: design, methods and feasibility in the French INTERMEDE study.

BACKGROUND: The way in which patients and their doctors interact is a potentially important factor in optimal communication during consultations as well as treatment, compliance and follow-up care. The aim of this multidisciplinary study is to use both qualitative and quantitative methods to explore the 'black box' that is the interaction between the two parties during a general practice consultation, and to identify factors therein that may contribute to producing health inequalities. This paper outlines the original multidisciplinary methodology used, and the feasibility of this type of study. METHODS AND DESIGN: The study design combines methodologies on two separate samples in two phases. Firstly, a qualitative phase collected ethnographical and sociological data during consultation, followed by in-depth interviews with both patients and doctors independently. Secondly, a quantitative phase on a different sample of patients and physicians collected data via several questionnaires given to patients and doctors consisting of specific 'mirrored' questions asked post-consultation, as well as collecting information on patient and physician characteristics. DISCUSSION: The design and methodology used in this study were both successfully implemented, and readily accepted by doctors and patients alike. This type of multidisciplinary study shows great potential in providing further knowledge into the role of patient/physician interaction and its influence on maintaining or producing health inequalities. The next challenge in this study will be implementing the multidisciplinary approach during the data analysis.