Real-world biologics response and super-response in the International Severe Asthma Registry cohort.

BACKGROUND: Biologic asthma therapies reduce exacerbations and long-term oral corticosteroids (LTOCS) use in randomized controlled trials (RCTs); however, there are limited data on outcomes among patients ineligible for RCTs. Hence, we investigated responsiveness to biologics in a real-world population of adults with severe asthma. METHODS: Adults in the International Severe Asthma Registry (ISAR) with ≥24 weeks of follow-up were grouped into those who did, or did not, initiate biologics (anti-IgE, anti-IL5/IL5R, anti-IL4/13). Treatment responses were examined across four domains: forced expiratory volume in 1 second (FEV1) increase by ≥100 mL, improved asthma control, annualized exacerbation rate (AER) reduction ≥50%, and any LTOCS dose reduction. Super-response criteria were: FEV1 increase by ≥500 mL, new well-controlled asthma, no exacerbations, and LTOCS cessation or tapering to ≤5 mg/day. RESULTS: 5.3% of ISAR patients met basic RCT inclusion criteria; 2116/8451 started biologics. Biologic initiators had worse baseline impairment than non-initiators, despite having similar biomarker levels. Half or more of initiators had treatment responses: 59% AER reduction, 54% FEV1 increase, 49% improved control, 49% reduced LTOCS, of which 32%, 19%, 30%, and 39%, respectively, were super-responses. Responses/super-responses were more frequent in biologic initiators than in non-initiators; nevertheless, ~40-50% of initiators did not meet response criteria. CONCLUSIONS: Most patients with severe asthma are ineligible for RCTs of biologic therapies. Biologics are initiated in patients who have worse baseline impairments than non-initiators despite similar biomarker levels. Although biologic initiators exhibited clinical responses and super-responses in all outcome domains, 40-50% did not meet the response criteria.

Consistent trajectories of rhinitis control and treatment in 16,177 weeks: The MASK-air® longitudinal study.

INTRODUCTION: Data from mHealth apps can provide valuable information on rhinitis control and treatment patterns. However, in MASK-air®, these data have only been analyzed cross-sectionally, without considering the changes of symptoms over time. We analyzed data from MASK-air® longitudinally, clustering weeks according to reported rhinitis symptoms. METHODS: We analyzed MASK-air® data, assessing the weeks for which patients had answered a rhinitis daily questionnaire on all 7 days. We firstly used k-means clustering algorithms for longitudinal data to define clusters of weeks according to the trajectories of reported daily rhinitis symptoms. Clustering was applied separately for weeks when medication was reported or not. We compared obtained clusters on symptoms and rhinitis medication patterns. We then used the latent class mixture model to assess the robustness of results. RESULTS: We analyzed 113,239 days (16,177 complete weeks) from 2590 patients (mean age ± SD = 39.1 ± 13.7 years). The first clustering algorithm identified ten clusters among weeks with medication use: seven with low variability in rhinitis control during the week and three with highly-variable control. Clusters with poorly-controlled rhinitis displayed a higher frequency of rhinitis co-medication, a more frequent change of medication schemes and more pronounced seasonal patterns. Six clusters were identified in weeks when no rhinitis medication was used, displaying similar control patterns. The second clustering method provided similar results. Moreover, patients displayed consistent levels of rhinitis control, reporting several weeks with similar levels of control. CONCLUSIONS: We identified 16 patterns of weekly rhinitis control. Co-medication and medication change schemes were common in uncontrolled weeks, reinforcing the hypothesis that patients treat themselves according to their symptoms.

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.

Identifying critical inhalation technique errors in Dry Powder Inhaler use in patients with COPD based on the association with health status and exacerbations: findings from the multi-country cross-sectional observational PIFotal study.

BACKGROUND: Correct inhaler use depends on a complex interplay of factors, including device preparation and generating sufficient inspiratory flow. It is currently unknown which inhalation technique errors can be considered critical in Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease (COPD) patients on Dry Powder Inhaler (DPI) maintenance therapy. OBJECTIVE: To investigate the association between inhalation technique errors and health status or exacerbations in patients with COPD. Additionally, the association between the number of errors and COPD outcomes was determined. METHODS: The PIFotal study is a cross-sectional multi-country observational study in a primary care setting, including 1434 COPD patients aged ≥ 40 years (50.1% female; mean age 69.2 yrs) using a DPI for their maintenance therapy. Inhalation technique was video recorded and scored by two independent researchers using inhaler-specific checklists. Health status was assessed with two questionnaires; the Clinical COPD Questionnaire (CCQ) and the COPD Assessment Test (CAT). The number of moderate and severe exacerbations in the past 12 months was recorded. Critical errors were identified based on their association with health status or exacerbations through multi-level prediction models adjusted for identified confounding. RESULTS: Errors in inhalation technique steps 'Breathe in', 'Hold breath', and 'Breathe out calmly after inhalation' were significantly associated with poorer CCQ and CAT outcomes and thus deemed critical. None of the errors were significantly associated with moderate exacerbations. Patients with errors 'Preparation', 'Hold inhaler in correct position during inhalation', and 'Breathe in' had significantly more severe exacerbations, and therefore these errors were also deemed critical. 81.3% of patients with COPD made at least one critical error. Specific combinations of errors were associated with worse outcomes. The more inhalation technique errors identified, the poorer the health status and the higher the exacerbation rate. CONCLUSION: In this study, we identified multiple critical inhalation technique errors in COPD patients using DPIs each associated with poorer outcomes. Explorative analysis revealed that specific combinations of errors may be of clinical relevance, especially those related to the inhalation manoeuvre. COPD outcomes worsened with increasing error count. These results warrant further prospective longitudinal studies to establish the effect of correcting these errors on COPD control. TRIAL REGISTRATION: https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT04532853 (31/08/2020).

Automatic market research of mobile health apps for the self-management of allergic rhinitis.

BACKGROUND: Only a small number of apps addressing allergic rhinitis (AR) patients have been evaluated. This makes their selection difficult. We aimed to introduce a new approach to market research for AR apps, based on the automatic screening of Apple App and Google Play stores. METHODS: A JavaScript programme was devised for automatic app screening, and applied in a market assessment of AR self-management apps. We searched the Google Play and Apple App stores of three countries (USA, UK and Australia) with the following search terms: "hay fever", "hayfever", "asthma", "rhinitis", "allergic rhinitis". Apps were eligible if symptoms were evaluated. Results obtained with the automatic programme were compared to those of a blinded manual search. As an example, we used the search to assess apps that can be used to design a combined medication score for AR. RESULTS: The automatic search programme identified 39 potentially eligible apps out of a total of 1593 retrieved apps. Each of the 39 apps was individually checked, with 20 being classified as relevant. The manual search identified 19 relevant apps (out of 6750 screened apps). Combining both methods, a total of 21 relevant apps were identified, pointing to a sensitivity of 95% and a specificity of 99% for the automatic method. Among these 21 apps, only two could be used for the combined symptom-medication score for AR. CONCLUSIONS: The programmed algorithm presented herein is able to continuously retrieve all relevant AR apps in the Apple App and Google Play stores, with high sensitivity and specificity. This approach has the potential to unveil the gaps and unmet needs of the apps developed so far.

Current allergy educational needs in primary care. Results of the EAACI working group on primary care survey exploring the confidence to manage and the opportunity to refer patients with allergy.

The aim of this survey was to explore the specific educational needs of a cohort of European GPs with regards to allergy training so that future educational initiatives may better support the delivery of allergy services in primary care. METHOD: This study took the form of a cross-sectional observational study in which a structured electronic questionnaire was distributed to primary care providers, in eight languages, across 8 European countries between September 2019 and November 2019. Data associated with demographic parameters, professional qualifications, type of employment, level of confidence regarding competencies for diagnosis and treatment of allergic diseases, referral of patients to allergist and preferred method of learning and assessment were collected. A 5-point Likert scale was used to assess level of confidence. Exploratory analysis was carried out. RESULTS: A total of 687 responses were available for analysis, with 99.3% of responders working within Europe. 70.1% of participants were female; and 48.0% and 48.0% of participants respectively had received some undergraduate and/or postgraduate allergy education. Confidence in dealing with different aspect of allergy management differed between countries. The main reason for specialist referral was a perceived need for tertiary assessment (54.3%), and the main barrier for referral was the consideration that the patient's condition could be appropriately diagnosed and treated in a primary care facility. Up to 44.7% and 55.3% of participants reported that they preferred e-Learning over traditional learning. CONCLUSIONS: This study identified the specific areas of skills training and educational needs of GPs in managing allergic conditions in primary care, and provided insights into possible strategies for more feasible and cost-effective approaches.

Comparison of rhinitis treatments using MASK-air® data and considering the minimal important difference.

BACKGROUND: Different treatments exist for allergic rhinitis (AR), including pharmacotherapy and allergen immunotherapy (AIT), but they have not been compared using direct patient data (i.e., "real-world data"). We aimed to compare AR pharmacological treatments on (i) daily symptoms, (ii) frequency of use in co-medication, (iii) visual analogue scales (VASs) on allergy symptom control considering the minimal important difference (MID) and (iv) the effect of AIT. METHODS: We assessed the MASK-air® app data (May 2015-December 2020) by users self-reporting AR (16-90 years). We compared eight AR medication schemes on reported VAS of allergy symptoms, clustering data by the patient and controlling for confounding factors. We compared (i) allergy symptoms between patients with and without AIT and (ii) different drug classes used in co-medication. RESULTS: We analysed 269,837 days from 10,860 users. Most days (52.7%) involved medication use. Median VAS levels were significantly higher in co-medication than in monotherapy (including the fixed combination azelastine-fluticasone) schemes. In adjusted models, azelastine-fluticasone was associated with lower average VAS global allergy symptoms than all other medication schemes, while the contrary was observed for oral corticosteroids. AIT was associated with a decrease in allergy symptoms in some medication schemes. A difference larger than the MID compared to no treatment was observed for oral steroids. Azelastine-fluticasone was the drug class with the lowest chance of being used in co-medication (adjusted OR = 0.75; 95% CI = 0.71-0.80). CONCLUSION: Median VAS levels were higher in co-medication than in monotherapy. Patients with more severe symptoms report a higher treatment, which is currently not reflected in guidelines.

Development and validation of combined symptom-medication scores for allergic rhinitis.

BACKGROUND: Validated combined symptom-medication scores (CSMSs) are needed to investigate the effects of allergic rhinitis treatments. This study aimed to use real-life data from the MASK-air® app to generate and validate hypothesis- and data-driven CSMSs. METHODS: We used MASK-air® data to assess the concurrent validity, test-retest reliability and responsiveness of one hypothesis-driven CSMS (modified CSMS: mCSMS), one mixed hypothesis- and data-driven score (mixed score), and several data-driven CSMSs. The latter were generated with MASK-air® data following cluster analysis and regression models or factor analysis. These CSMSs were compared with scales measuring (i) the impact of rhinitis on work productivity (visual analogue scale [VAS] of work of MASK-air® , and Work Productivity and Activity Impairment: Allergy Specific [WPAI-AS]), (ii) quality-of-life (EQ-5D VAS) and (iii) control of allergic diseases (Control of Allergic Rhinitis and Asthma Test [CARAT]). RESULTS: We assessed 317,176 days of MASK-air® use from 17,780 users aged 16-90 years, in 25 countries. The mCSMS and the factor analyses-based CSMSs displayed poorer validity and responsiveness compared to the remaining CSMSs. The latter displayed moderate-to-strong correlations with the tested comparators, high test-retest reliability and moderate-to-large responsiveness. Among data-driven CSMSs, a better performance was observed for cluster analyses-based CSMSs. High accuracy (capacity of discriminating different levels of rhinitis control) was observed for the latter (AUC-ROC = 0.904) and for the mixed CSMS (AUC-ROC = 0.820). CONCLUSION: The mixed CSMS and the cluster-based CSMSs presented medium-high validity, reliability and accuracy, rendering them as candidates for primary endpoints in future rhinitis trials.

Perceptions, attitudes, and behaviors of short-acting beta2 agonist users: an Australian cross-sectional community pharmacy-based study.

BACKGROUND: High use of short-acting beta-2-agonist (SABA) medication is a significant problem. Attitudes and perceptions toward asthma of over-the-counter (OTC) reliever users are unknown. The study aimed to describe the asthma attitudes, perceptions, medication knowledge and information gathering behavior of people with asthma with recent high SABA use (i.e. SABA use > twice a week in the last 4 weeks) and compare them to people with asthma with no recent high SABA use. METHOD: A real-world cross-sectional observational study in Australian community pharmacies was conducted; surveying patients ages ≥ 16 years requesting SABA medication OTC. Data collected included; demographics, medication usage, asthma control, asthma-related perceptions and behaviors. Data were summarized by using descriptive analyses. RESULTS: 375 participants completed the survey, 73.9% were high SABA users. Of the 375, 90.4% reported that their asthma symptoms were controlled or somewhat controlled and 56.0% felt that their asthma was not serious. However, only 17.6%, had controlled asthma according to GINA-defined criteria. High SABA users tended to be more anxious about their asthma and worried about its impact in the future (50.5% vs. 28.6%, p < 0.001). High SABA users were more likely to agree with the statements suggesting that asthma impacted on activities of daily living (46.6% vs. 16.3%, p < 0.001); were socially conscious about their asthma and more likely to feel embarrassed carrying (21.3% vs 9.2%, p = 0.007) and using (29.2% vs 18.4%, p = 0.036) their asthma inhaler. CONCLUSION: This study revealed the extent of uncontrolled asthma and uncovered an anxious and socially conscious group of OTC SABA users. There is a need to better understand patient perceptions and their relationships to high-SABA use, to ensure targeted educational interventions are developed and implemented.

Pharmacist-delivered asthma management services-what do patients think?

BACKGROUND: Evaluating pharmacy services from the perspective of the end user-patients-is imperative for ensuring the sustainability of services. OBJECTIVES: This study evaluated patient feedback regarding an evidence-based community pharmacist-delivered Pharmacy Asthma Service (PAS), in terms of overall satisfaction, satisfaction with PAS delivery, and perceived impact, and explored determinates of satisfaction. METHODS: All patients who received the 12-month PAS (n = 143) were invited to provide feedback via a project-specific patient evaluation survey upon completion of the final consultation. The survey included a mix of 5-point Likert-type scale items, multiple-choice questions, and free-text response questions. Overall satisfaction was determined by a single 5-point Likert-type scale question. Satisfaction with service delivery and overall impact were assessed using a 4-item and 8-item Likert-type scale, respectively, and a summative score computed for each section. Patient PAS data including demographics and management outcomes were then cross tabulated against overall satisfaction, satisfaction with PAS delivery, and impact. RESULTS: Feedback was received from 71% (n = 101) of patients who completed the PAS. The results indicated high overall patient satisfaction, with 86% of respondents very satisfied with the service. Patients identified positive impacts of the PAS including improved understanding and management of asthma and allergic rhinitis. Similarly, almost all patients were satisfied with service delivery including the pharmacist's knowledge and their ability to assist (98%) and the privacy of the pharmacy setting (91%). Patients who had controlled asthma at the end of the trial had higher levels of overall satisfaction (χ2 = 9.584, df = 5, P = 0.048) and reported greater overall impact on asthma and allergic rhinitis management (U = 1593.5, P = 0.004). CONCLUSION: The diffusion of health services within community pharmacy practice is dependent upon patient receptivity and how the services align with patient needs. The positive satisfaction received indicates that the PAS would be welcomed by patients with asthma in future.

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.

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 patients at risk of poor asthma outcomes associated with making inhaler technique errors.

OBJECTIVES: Correct inhaler technique is essential to optimal clinical outcomes in asthma patients. The study aim was to use real-life data from the iHARP database to determine patient factors associated with the performance of inhaler technique errors associated with poor asthma outcomes (as identified in the Critikal study) in patients with asthma prescribed the Turbuhaler (TH), Metered Dose Inhaler (MDI), and Accuhaler (AH) device. METHODS: This was a retrospective cross-sectional study using the iHARP database, a multinational initiative including questionnaires and technique review. Identification of inhaler technique errors specifically associated with poor asthma outcomes was performed by reference to the Critikal study. Multivariable logistic regression was used to identify demographic and clinical factors associated with ≥ 1 of these errors. RESULTS: Factors significantly associated with ≥ 1 inhaler technique error and worsening asthma outcomes for the TH cohort include female gender, very poor to average self-assessment of inhaler technique; for the MDI cohort, female gender, secondary education, and current smoking status; and, in the AH cohort, lack of inhaler technique review by a trained healthcare professional in the previous twelve months and very poor to average self-assessment of inhaler technique. CONCLUSIONS: Numerous specific patient demographic and clinical factors associated with the performance of these errors have been identified, differing according to device. Inhaler technique error associated with poor asthma outcomes is further widespread across devices. Knowledge of these factors and the frequency of their occurence may assist in optimizing device selection and training.

Treatment patterns among non-active users of maintenance asthma medication in the United Kingdom: a retrospective cohort study in the Clinical Practice Research Datalink.

Objective: To describe patient characteristics, treatment patterns and healthcare utilization (HCU) of non-active users of maintenance asthma medications in the United Kingdom.Methods: Retrospective, cohort analysis of patients with asthma, aged ≥ 6 years who were non-active users of maintenance therapy (no prescription for inhaled corticosteroids (ICS), combined ICS/long-acting beta agonists (ICS/LABA) or 'other' bronchodilatory therapies in last 12 months) were identified in the Clinical Practice Research Datalink (2012-2015) and followed-up for 2 years after a new prescription for an asthma maintenance medication (index date). Patient characteristics, most common maintenance treatment sequences and HCU were described.Results: 55,293 patients were identified (ICS: 46,297, ICS/LABA: 8,367; Other: 629). Mean age was 37 years and 56% were female. During follow-up, the most common treatment sequences across groups implied intermittent use, comprising periods of maintenance therapy interspersed with maintenance-free periods. During year 1 and year 2 of follow-up, the proportion of patients prescribed OCS was 19% and 13%, prescribed ≥ 4 short-acting bronchodilators (SABD) was 24% and 19%, having ≥ 3 asthma-related primary care consultations/year was 59% and 36% and experiencing ≥ 1 exacerbation/year was 15% and 11%, respectively.Conclusions: In previously non-active users of asthma maintenance medication subsequently commenced on maintenance therapy, intermittent use was common during the 2-year follow-up despite the potential need for regular use as evidenced by patient HCU and SABD usage patterns. This highlights the need for regular patient assessment and education on medication adherence to ensure appropriateness of prescribing to maintain asthma control.

Oral corticosteroids stewardship for asthma in adults and adolescents: A position paper from the Thoracic Society of Australia and New Zealand.

Oral corticosteroids (OCS) are frequently used for asthma treatment. This medication is highly effective for both acute and chronic diseases, but evidence indicates that indiscriminate OCS use is common, posing a risk of serious side effects and irreversible harm. There is now an urgent need to introduce OCS stewardship approaches, akin to successful initiatives that optimized appropriate antibiotic usage. The aim of this TSANZ (Thoracic Society of Australia and New Zealand) position paper is to review current knowledge pertaining to OCS use in asthma and then delineate principles of OCS stewardship. Recent evidence indicates overuse and over-reliance on OCS for asthma and that doses >1000 mg prednisolone-equivalent cumulatively are likely to have serious side effects and adverse outcomes. Patient perspectives emphasize the detrimental impacts of OCS-related side effects such as weight gain, insomnia, mood disturbances and skin changes. Improvements in asthma control and prevention of exacerbations can be achieved by improved inhaler technique, adherence to therapy, asthma education, smoking cessation, multidisciplinary review, optimized medications and other strategies. Recently, add-on therapies including novel biological agents and macrolide antibiotics have demonstrated reductions in OCS requirements. Harm reduction may also be achieved through identification and mitigation of predictable adverse effects. OCS stewardship should entail greater awareness of appropriate indications for OCS prescription, risk-benefits of OCS medications, side effects, effective add-on therapies and multidisciplinary review. If implemented, OCS stewardship can ensure that clinicians and patients with asthma are aware that OCS should not be used lightly, while providing reassurance that asthma can be controlled in most people without frequent use of OCS.

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.

Correlation between work impairment, scores of rhinitis severity and asthma using the MASK-air® App.

BACKGROUND: In allergic rhinitis, a relevant outcome providing information on the effectiveness of interventions is needed. In MASK-air (Mobile Airways Sentinel Network), a visual analogue scale (VAS) for work is used as a relevant outcome. This study aimed to assess the performance of the work VAS work by comparing VAS work with other VAS measurements and symptom-medication scores obtained concurrently. METHODS: All consecutive MASK-air users in 23 countries from 1 June 2016 to 31 October 2018 were included (14 189 users; 205 904 days). Geolocalized users self-assessed daily symptom control using the touchscreen functionality on their smart phone to click on VAS scores (ranging from 0 to 100) for overall symptoms (global), nose, eyes, asthma and work. Two symptom-medication scores were used: the modified EAACI CSMS score and the MASK control score for rhinitis. To assess data quality, the intra-individual response variability (IRV) index was calculated. RESULTS: A strong correlation was observed between VAS work and other VAS. The highest levels for correlation with VAS work and variance explained in VAS work were found with VAS global, followed by VAS nose, eye and asthma. In comparison with VAS global, the mCSMS and MASK control score showed a lower correlation with VAS work. Results are unlikely to be explained by a low quality of data arising from repeated VAS measures. CONCLUSIONS: VAS work correlates with other outcomes (VAS global, nose, eye and asthma) but less well with a symptom-medication score. VAS work should be considered as a potentially useful AR outcome in intervention studies.

It takes a village - asthma networks utilized by parents when managing childhood asthma medications.

Objective: We are yet to understand how widely parents seek asthma medication management information for their children, how they are used for health information, how parents engage with them and their influence on parent's decision-making. This study aimed to gauge the current level of asthma knowledge and skills of parents of children with asthma and gain insight into who and what influences their child's asthma medication management decisions. Method: Social network theory was used to map parents' asthma networks and identify the level of influence of each individual/resource nominated. Parents of children with asthma (aged 4-18 years) were interviewed, completed an asthma network map, questionnaires and an inhaler technique assessment. Results: Twenty-six parents participated and had significant gaps in asthma knowledge and inhaler technique skills. The asthma networks of participants ranged from two to ten individuals/resources, with an average number of five. The most commonly nominated individual/resource was general practitioners followed by family members and the internet. Professional connections represented 44% of individuals/resources in networks, personal connections 42% and impersonal connections 14%. When parents were asked about how influential individuals/resources were, professional connections represented 53% of parents influences, personal connections 36% and impersonal connections 11%. Conclusion: This study highlights the priority and co-influence of non-medical sources of information/support on parent's behaviors and decision-making with regards to their child's asthma medicine taking. In further understanding the complexities surrounding these connections and relationships, HCPs are better positioned to assist parents in addressing their needs and better supporting them in the management of their child's asthma.

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.