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.

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.

Comorbidities Modify the Phenotype but Not the Treatment Effectiveness to Mepolizumab in Severe Eosinophilic Asthma.

BACKGROUND: Comorbidities in severe asthma are common and contribute to disease burden. The severe asthma phenotype and treatment response can be impacted by comorbid conditions. Real-world data on the use of mepolizumab in severe eosinophilic asthma (SEA) in the presence of comorbidities are needed to inform clinical practice. OBJECTIVE: To investigate the impact of comorbid conditions on baseline phenotype in patients with SEA and assess the mepolizumab treatment effect by comorbidity status in SEA. METHODS: Patients enrolled in the Australian Mepolizumab Registry (n = 309) were classified into subgroups defined by the presence or absence of comorbidities, including nasal polyps, aspirin-exacerbated airway disease, asthma-chronic obstructive pulmonary disease overlap (ACO), fungal sensitization, and obesity. Patient baseline characteristics were compared, and the impacts of comorbidity on phenotype, identified by differences in patient age and/or baseline biomarker levels and/or asthma severity, were assessed. The mepolizumab treatment effects on clinical and biological outcomes at 12 months were assessed. RESULTS: Across comorbidity subgroups, mepolizumab reduced the rate of clinically significant exacerbations (range: 47%-77%), maintenance oral corticosteroid use (dose reduction: 4.2-13.3 mg/d), and improved symptom control (Asthma Control Questionnaire-5 score: 1.9-2.4 point reduction) and lung function (mean: 3.4-9.3 post-bronchodilator percent predicted forced expiratory volume in 1 second). Peripheral blood eosinophils were reduced (mean: 480-780 cells/µL). Comorbidities (nasal polyps, obesity, ACO, and fungal sensitization) modified the baseline phenotype. CONCLUSIONS: Mepolizumab treatment is associated with comparable clinical improvements in patients with SEA and comorbidities. Mepolizumab effectively minimizes the disease impact and corticosteroid burden in patients with SEA.

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.

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.

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.

Have we got the right focus in asthma care in general practice? A qualitative study.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: Asthma presentations are common in general practice, but opportunities to control asthma are often missed. The aim of this study was to explore how general practitioners (GPs) and practice nurses (PNs) deliver asthma care, with particular attention to perceived roles and challenges, and ways to improve management. METHOD: Using a qualitative approach, semi-structured interviews were conducted with GPs and PNs working in an area of cultural diversity and socioeconomic disadvantage in western Sydney. Inductive thematic analysis was undertaken. RESULTS: Nineteen interviews were conducted, with nine GPs and 10 PNs. The main focus of asthma care was on acute presentations, with less emphasis on follow-up and preventive care and underuse of general practice chronic disease models of care. PN roles were generally limited to acute asthma assessment and triage. GPs did not commonly use spirometry or access non-GP specialist input. DISCUSSION: Asthma care in general practice may be improved by a greater focus on prevention and control, including through follow-up after acute presentations, enhanced collaboration between GPs and PNs, and supportive practice models.

Understanding the Influences Behind Parents' Asthma Decision-Making: A Qualitative Exploration of the Asthma Network of Parents with Children with Asthma.

INTRODUCTION: Interventions aimed at optimizing parents' ability to manage their children's asthma could be strengthened by better understanding the networks that influence these parents' choices when managing asthma. This study aimed to explore the asthma networks of parents of children with asthma-specifically to gain insights into whom parents select to be within their networks and why; how individuals within parents' networks influence the way in which they manage their children's asthma medications, and factors driving the development of these networks. METHODS: A qualitative research methodology utilizing semi-structured interviews with parents of children with asthma was employed to fulfil the objectives of this study. RESULTS: Twenty-six face-to-face interviews with parents of children with asthma were conducted, recorded, and transcribed. Transcriptions were independently coded for concepts and themes by the research team. Asthma medications was a dominant theme identified, and revealed that parents actively sought advice and support from a series of complex and multidimensional relationships with people and resources in their health network. These not only included health care professionals (HCPs) but also personal connections, lay individuals, and resources. The composition and development of these asthma networks occurred over time and were determined by several key factors: satisfaction with their HCP provider; need for information; convenience; trust and support; self-confidence in management; and parents' perceptions of their children's asthma severity. CONCLUSIONS: By exploring parents' asthma network, this study uncovers the complex relationship between HCPs, family and friends of parents of children with asthma, and provides new insight into the intimate and parallel influence they have on parent's decision-making.

Mepolizumab and Oral Corticosteroid Stewardship: Data from the Australian Mepolizumab Registry.

BACKGROUND: Oral corticosteroids (OCS) carry serious health risks. Innovative treatment options are required to reduce excessive exposure and promote OCS stewardship. OBJECTIVES: This study evaluated the trajectories of OCS exposure (prednisolone-equivalent) in patients with severe eosinophilic asthma before and after starting mepolizumab and the predictors of becoming OCS free after 6 months of mepolizumab therapy. METHODS: This real-world observational study included 309 patients from the Australian Mepolizumab Registry who were followed up for 1 year (n = 225). RESULTS: Patients had a median age of 60 (interquartile range: 50, 68) years, and 58% were female. At baseline, 48% used maintenance OCS, 96% had ≥1 OCS burst, and 68% had received ≥1 g of OCS in the previous year. After commencing mepolizumab, only 55% of those initially on maintenance OCS remained on this treatment by 12 months. Maintenance OCS dose reduced from median 10 (5.0, 12.5) mg/day at baseline to 2 (0, 7.0) mg/day at 12 months (P < .001). Likewise, proportions of patients receiving OCS bursts in the previous year reduced from 96% at baseline to 50% at 12 months (P < .001). Overall, 137 (48%) patients required OCS (maintenance/burst) after 6 months' mepolizumab therapy. Becoming OCS free was predicted by a lower body mass index (odds ratio: 0.925; 95% confidence interval: 0.872-0.981), late-onset asthma (1.027; 1.006-1.048), a lower Asthma Control Test score (1.111; 0.011-1.220), and not receiving maintenance OCS therapy at baseline (0.095; 0.040-0.227). CONCLUSION: Mepolizumab led to a significant and sustained reduction in OCS dependence in patients with severe eosinophilic asthma. This study supports the OCS-sparing effect of mepolizumab and highlights the pivotal role of mepolizumab in OCS stewardship initiatives.

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.

The Burden of Self-Reported Rhinitis and Associated Risk for Exacerbations with Moderate-Severe Asthma in Primary Care Patients.

PURPOSE: There is a dearth of research regarding the prevalence and nature of patient-reported rhinitis and its relationship with risk of asthma exacerbations. The aim of this study was to (i) determine the prevalence, severity and treatment of self-reported rhinitis symptoms among adults aged ≥18 years with asthma treated at Global Initiative for Asthma (GINA) Step 3 and above and (ii) compare the demographics, clinical characteristics, medication use, side-effects and healthcare practitioner review between patients who report rhinitis symptoms and those who do not and (iii) determine whether patient-reported rhinitis is associated with risk of asthma exacerbations in the total patient sample. PATIENTS AND METHODS: This analysis used data from the iHARP (Initiative Helping Asthma in Real-life Patients) asthma review service - a cross-sectional observational study (2011 and 2014) in seven countries that captured data on patient demographics, rhinitis symptoms, asthma symptoms, indicators of exacerbations, medication use, oropharyngeal effects and side-effects, using practitioner- and patient-reported questionnaires. Comparisons between patients with and without rhinitis were tested. Univariate logistic regression was used to identify variables associated with risk of exacerbations for entry into multivariable logistic regression. RESULTS: This report contains data from 4274 patients: 67.4% (2881/4274) reported rhinitis symptoms and of which 65.7% (1894/2881) had not received a doctor diagnosis; 36.5% (1052/2881) had moderate-severe rhinitis, 12.4% (358/2881) had used intranasal corticosteroids and 19.8% (569/2881) oral antihistamines. Patients with coexisting moderate-severe rhinitis were more likely to have GINA-defined uncontrolled asthma than those with mild rhinitis or no rhinitis. Moderate-severe rhinitis was associated with 40% increased risk of asthma exacerbations (OR=1.40, 95% CI: 1.02-1.90). CONCLUSION: This study identified a major gap in the diagnosis and management of rhinitis in a cohort of people with asthma treated at GINA Step 3 and above who are managed in general practice. It highlights the need for practitioners to identify, evaluate and optimally treat rhinitis in adults with asthma, which is a significant factor associated with exacerbation risk.

General Practitioner Use of Generically Substitutable Inhaler Devices and the Impact of Training on Device Mastery and Maintenance of Correct Inhaler Technique.

INTRODUCTION: Generic substitution of inhaler devices is a relatively new phenomenon. The best patient outcomes associated with generic substitution occur when prescribers obtain consent from their patients to prescribe a generic inhaler and also teach their patient how to correctly use the new device. To date, no prospective observational study has assessed the level of training required for general practitioners (GPs) to demonstrate correct inhaler technique using two dry powder inhaler devices delivering fixed-dose combination budesonide/formoterol therapy. This study aims to (1) determine the level of training required for GPs to master and maintain correct IT when using two different dry powder inhalers that are able to be substituted in clinical practice and (2) determine the number and types of errors made by GPs on each device and inhaler device preference at each training visit. METHOD: A randomized, parallel-group cross-over study design was used to compare the inhaler technique of participants with a Spiromax® placebo device and a Turbuhaler® placebo device. This study consisted of two visits with each participant over a period of 4 ± 1 weeks (visit 1 and visit 2). A total of six levels of assessment and five levels of training were implemented as required. Level 1, no instruction; level 2, following use of written instruction; level 3, following viewing of instructional video; level 4, expert tuition from the researcher; level 5/level 6, repeats of expert tuition from the researcher when required. Participants progressed through each level and stopped at the point at which they demonstrated device mastery. At each level, trained researchers assessed the inhaler technique of the participants. Participants were also surveyed about their previous inhaler use and training. RESULTS: In total, 228 GPs participated in this study by demonstrating their ability to use a Turbuhaler® and a Spiromax® device. There was no significant difference between the proportion of participants who demonstrated device mastery with the Turbuhaler® compared with the Spiromax® at level 1, (no instruction), (119/228 (52%) versus 131/228 (57%), respectively, n = 228, p = 0.323 (McNemar's test of paired data). All but one participant had demonstrated correct inhaler technique for both devices by level 3(instructional video). There was a significant difference between the proportion of participants who demonstrated maintenance of device mastery with the Turbuhaler® compared with the Spiromax® at visit 2, level 1 (127/177 (72%) versus 151/177 (85%) respectively, p = 0.003; McNemar's test of paired data). All but two participants achieved device mastery by level 3, visit 2. More participants reported previous training with the Turbuhaler® than with Spiromax®. DISCUSSION: This study demonstrates that GPs are able to equally demonstrate correct use of the Turbuhaler® and Spiromax® devices, even though most had not received training on a Spiromax® device prior to this study. The significance of being able to demonstrate correct technique on these two devices equally has ramifications on practice and supported generic substitution of inhaler devices at the point of prescribing, as the most impactful measure a GP can take to ensure effective use of inhaled medicine is the correct demonstration of inhaler technique.

Managing Allergic Rhinitis in the Pharmacy: An ARIA Guide for Implementation in Practice.

The paradigm of how we manage allergic rhinitis is shifting with a growing understanding that it is a complex process, requiring 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. Community pharmacists are the most accessible healthcare professionals to the public and allergic rhinitis is one of the most common diseases managed by pharmacists. Allergic Rhinitis and its Impact on Asthma (ARIA) guidelines developed over the past 20 years have improved the care of allergic rhinitis patients through an evidence-based, integrated care approach. In this paper, we propose an integrated approach to allergic rhinitis management in community pharmacy following the 2019 ARIA in the pharmacy guidelines.

Qualitative Exploration of Pharmacists' Feedback Following the Implementation of an "Allergic Rhinitis Clinical Management Pathway (AR-CMaP)" in Australian Community Pharmacies.

Allergic Rhinitis (AR) is both a common and high burden disease, with the majority of AR sufferers purchasing suboptimal/inappropriate AR medication from community pharmacies. Unfortunately, it is still a challenge to translate the AR management guidelines that are available at both a global and national level into practice. This study aimed to explore the experiences and perceptions of community pharmacists with regards to the implementation of AR management guidelines in real-life everyday practice. This exploration took the form of a qualitative research study in which pharmacists were interviewed following the implementation of a guideline-driven AR management pathway in their pharmacies. Fifteen pharmacists from six pharmacies agreed to participate in a telephone interview. Five themes were identified that encompassed the sentiment of the pharmacists during the interviews: 1) impact of training on pharmacists' approach to patients and AR management recommendations; 2) patient engagement and the importance of appropriate tools; 3) patient barriers to change in practice; 4) physical, logistical, and inter-professional barriers to change within the pharmacy environment; and 5) recommendations for improvement. The results of this study indicate that, following the implementation of an AR management pathway, pharmacists believe that their interactions with patients around their AR were enhanced through the use of appropriate tools and education. However, if optimal AR management is to be delivered within the community pharmacy setting, the undertaking needs to be collaborative with both pharmacy assistants and general practitioners.

Interventions Delivered in the Community Pharmacy to Manage Allergic Rhinitis- A Systematic Review of the Literature.

Pharmacists have a valuable role in the management of allergic rhinitis (AR) at the community pharmacy level. This role has been reported extensively in numerous papers. However, a systematic review of the available literature and a comprehensive analysis of the outcomes has not been published. This systematic review aimed to evaluate the impact of interventions developed by pharmacists on clinical AR outcomes. A thorough search was performed in three electronic databases, including studies published between January 2000 and June 2019. After the selection process, only three articles met the inclusion criteria and were further analysed. Despite the scarcity of the available studies, in all of them was clear that the pharmacist plays a pivotal role in the management of AR, significantly improving the patients' quality of life and symptom control. This systematic review also stresses the utmost importance to investigate and report practices and interventions developed by pharmacists using measurable outcomes.

Mepolizumab effectiveness and identification of super-responders in severe asthma.

Severe asthma is a high-burden disease. Real-world data on mepolizumab in patients with severe eosinophilic asthma is needed to assess whether the data from randomised controlled trials are applicable in a broader population.The Australian Mepolizumab Registry (AMR) was established with an aim to assess the use, effectiveness and safety of mepolizumab for severe eosinophilic asthma in Australia.Patients (n=309) with severe eosinophilic asthma (median age 60 years, 58% female) commenced mepolizumab. They had poor symptom control (median Asthma Control Questionnaire (ACQ)-5 score of 3.4), frequent exacerbations (median three courses of oral corticosteroids (OCS) in the previous 12 months), and 47% required daily OCS. Median baseline peripheral blood eosinophil level was 590 cells·µL-1 Comorbidities were common: allergic rhinitis 63%, gastro-oesophageal reflux disease 52%, obesity 46%, nasal polyps 34%.Mepolizumab treatment reduced exacerbations requiring OCS compared with the previous year (annualised rate ratio 0.34 (95% CI 0.29-0.41); p<0.001) and hospitalisations (rate ratio 0.46 (95% CI 0.33-0.63); p<0.001). Treatment improved symptom control (median ACQ-5 reduced by 2.0 at 6 months), quality of life and lung function. Higher blood eosinophil levels (p=0.003) and later age of asthma onset (p=0.028) predicted a better ACQ-5 response to mepolizumab, whilst being male (p=0.031) or having body mass index ≥30 (p=0.043) predicted a lesser response. Super-responders (upper 25% of ACQ-5 responders, n=61, 24%) had a higher T2 disease burden and fewer comorbidities at baseline.Mepolizumab therapy effectively reduces the significant and long-standing disease burden faced by patients with severe eosinophilic asthma in a real-world setting.

The evolving algorithm of biological selection in severe asthma.

New therapeutic options for severe asthma have recently emerged, mostly in the form of monoclonal antibodies ("biologicals") targeting relevant inflammatory pathways. Currently available agents target different aspects of "Type 2" immunity, and their indications often include overlapping patient groups. We present a round-table discussion that took place during the Annual Meeting of the Respiratory Effectiveness Group (REG), on the reasoning behind the use of different add-on medications for severe asthma, and crucially, on selection strategies. The proposed rational is based on current evidence, including real-life studies, as well as on the appreciation of the relevant complexities. Direct head-to-head comparisons of biologicals are lacking; therefore, algorithms for initial choice and potential switch between agents should be based on understanding the key characteristics of different options and the development of a clear plan with predefined targets and shared decision-making, in a structured way.

Study protocol: Development, implementation, evaluation and refinement of a translational allergic rhinitis clinical management pathway (AR-CMaP) for community pharmacies.

BACKGROUND: Allergic Rhinitis (AR) is a highly burdened chronic respiratory disease1-4, which affects about 40% of the world's population5. Research shows that only 15% of people with AR, in the community pharmacy setting are using optimal AR medication6. There is a clear need to better implement AR management guidelines so that more effective medication selection and an evidence-based approach to the management of AR is implemented. OBJECTIVE: This paper describes the methods that will be used to develop, implement, evaluate and refine an evidence-based, guideline informed allergic rhinitis clinical management pathway, Allergic Rhinitis Clinical Management Pathway (AR-CMaP) for community pharmacy. METHODS: AR-CMaP was developed based on the latest AR management guidelines for pharmacy7 and empirical evidence associated with patient self-management behaviours in community pharmacy15, utilising the Promoting Action on Research Implementation in Health Services implementation framework (Phase 1). AR-CMaP was then implemented in six pharmacies in the Australian Capital Territory (ACT), Australia (Phase 2). The impact of AR-CMaP on AR management in the pharmacy (AR medication management and pharmacy practice) will be evaluated in a pre-post intervention study design (Phase 3). Phase 4 will involve the refinement of AR-CMaP to ensure its generalisability and scalability; readiness for large-scale dissemination across different pharmacy locations (e.g. rural, remote, metropolitan) and different pharmacy business models. CONCLUSIONS: There is an urgent need to develop a translational AR clinical pathway, to address the wide-spread challenge of suboptimal AR management and burden of AR on individuals and society. This protocol paper describes the methods underpinning the development, implementation, evaluation and refinement of an evidence-based AR clinical pathway for community pharmacy setting, which is in line with current clinical evidence and feasible for effective implementation into the community pharmacy setting.

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.