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.

Mobile technology offers novel insights into the control and treatment of allergic rhinitis: The MASK study.

BACKGROUND: Mobile health can be used to generate innovative insights into optimizing treatment to improve allergic rhinitis (AR) control. OBJECTIVES: A cross-sectional real-world observational study was undertaken in 22 countries to complement a pilot study and provide novel information on medication use, disease control, and work productivity in the everyday life of patients with AR. METHODS: A mobile phone app (Allergy Diary, which is freely available on Google Play and Apple stores) was used to collect the data of daily visual analogue scale (VAS) scores for (1) overall allergic symptoms; (2) nasal, ocular, and asthma symptoms; (3) work; and (4) medication use by using a treatment scroll list including all allergy medications (prescribed and over-the-counter) customized for 22 countries. The 4 most common intranasal medications containing intranasal corticosteroids and 8 oral H1-antihistamines were studied. RESULTS: Nine thousand one hundred twenty-two users filled in 112,054 days of VASs in 2016 and 2017. Assessment of days was informative. Control of days with rhinitis differed between no (best control), single (good control for intranasal corticosteroid-treated days), or multiple (worst control) treatments. Users with the worst control increased the range of treatments being used. The same trend was found for asthma, eye symptoms, and work productivity. Differences between oral H1-antihistamines were found. CONCLUSIONS: This study confirms the usefulness of the Allergy Diary in accessing and assessing behavior in patients with AR. This observational study using a very simple assessment tool (VAS) on a mobile phone had the potential to answer questions previously thought infeasible.

Adherence to treatment in allergic rhinitis using mobile technology. The MASK Study.

BACKGROUND: Mobile technology may help to better understand the adherence to treatment. MASK-rhinitis (Mobile Airways Sentinel NetworK for allergic rhinitis) is a patient-centred ICT system. A mobile phone app (the Allergy Diary) central to MASK is available in 22 countries. OBJECTIVES: To assess the adherence to treatment in allergic rhinitis patients using the Allergy Diary App. METHODS: An observational cross-sectional study was carried out on all users who filled in the Allergy Diary from 1 January 2016 to 1 August 2017. Secondary adherence was assessed by using the modified Medication Possession Ratio (MPR) and the Proportion of days covered (PDC) approach. RESULTS: A total of 12 143 users were registered. A total of 6 949 users reported at least one VAS data recording. Among them, 1 887 users reported ≥7 VAS data. About 1 195 subjects were included in the analysis of adherence. One hundred and thirty-six (11.28%) users were adherent (MPR ≥70% and PDC ≤1.25), 51 (4.23%) were partly adherent (MPR ≥70% and PDC = 1.50) and 176 (14.60%) were switchers. On the other hand, 832 (69.05%) users were non-adherent to medications (MPR <70%). Of those, the largest group was non-adherent to medications and the time interval was increased in 442 (36.68%) users. CONCLUSION AND CLINICAL RELEVANCE: Adherence to treatment is low. The relative efficacy of continuous vs on-demand treatment for allergic rhinitis symptoms is still a matter of debate. This study shows an approach for measuring retrospective adherence based on a mobile app. This also represents a novel approach for analysing medication-taking behaviour in a real-world setting.

Mobile Technology in Allergic Rhinitis: Evolution in Management or Revolution in Health and Care?

Smart devices and Internet-based applications (apps) are largely used in allergic rhinitis and may help to address some unmet needs. However, these new tools need to first of all be tested for privacy rules, acceptability, usability, and cost-effectiveness. Second, they should be evaluated in the frame of the digital transformation of health, their impact on health care delivery, and health outcomes. This review (1) summarizes some existing mobile health apps for allergic rhinitis and reviews those in which testing has been published, (2) discusses apps that include risk factors of allergic rhinitis, (3) examines the impact of mobile health apps in phenotype discovery, (4) provides real-world evidence for care pathways, and finally (5) discusses mobile health tools enabling the digital transformation of health and care, empowering citizens, and building a healthier society.