International consensus statement on allergy and rhinology: Allergic rhinitis - 2023.

BACKGROUND: In the 5 years that have passed since the publication of the 2018 International Consensus Statement on Allergy and Rhinology: Allergic Rhinitis (ICAR-Allergic Rhinitis 2018), the literature has expanded substantially. The ICAR-Allergic Rhinitis 2023 update presents 144 individual topics on allergic rhinitis (AR), expanded by over 40 topics from the 2018 document. Originally presented topics from 2018 have also been reviewed and updated. The executive summary highlights key evidence-based findings and recommendation from the full document. METHODS: ICAR-Allergic Rhinitis 2023 employed established evidence-based review with recommendation (EBRR) methodology to individually evaluate each topic. Stepwise iterative peer review and consensus was performed for each topic. The final document was then collated and includes the results of this work. RESULTS: ICAR-Allergic Rhinitis 2023 includes 10 major content areas and 144 individual topics related to AR. For a substantial proportion of topics included, an aggregate grade of evidence is presented, which is determined by collating the levels of evidence for each available study identified in the literature. For topics in which a diagnostic or therapeutic intervention is considered, a recommendation summary is presented, which considers the aggregate grade of evidence, benefit, harm, and cost. CONCLUSION: The ICAR-Allergic Rhinitis 2023 update provides a comprehensive evaluation of AR and the currently available evidence. It is this evidence that contributes to our current knowledge base and recommendations for patient evaluation and treatment.

COVID-19 Disparities and Vaccine Hesitancy in Black Americans: What Ethical Lessons Can Be Learned?

OBJECTIVE: This state of the art review focuses on bioethical questions and considerations from research findings and methodological issues, including design and recruitment of participants, in studies related to COVID-19 vaccine hesitation in Black individuals. Ethical concerns identified were applied to otolaryngology with recommendations for improving health inequities within subspecialties. DATA SOURCES: An internet search through PubMed, CINAHL, and socINDEX was conducted to identify articles on COVID-19 vaccine hesitation among the Black population between 2020 and 2021. REVIEW METHODS: A systematic review approach was taken to search and analyze the research on this topic, which was coupled with expert analysis in identifying and classifying vital ethical considerations. CONCLUSIONS: The most common COVID-19 vaccine hesitation factors were related to the development of the vaccine, mistrust toward government agencies, and misconceptions about safety and side effects. These findings raised bioethical concerns around mistrust of information, low health literacy, insufficient numbers of Black participants in medical research, and the unique positions of health professionals as trusted sources. These bioethical considerations can be applied in otolaryngology and other health-related areas to aid the public in making informed medical decisions regarding treatments, which may reduce health inequalities among Black Americans and other racial and ethnic minority groups. IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE: Addressing ethical questions by decreasing mistrust, tailoring information for specific populations, increasing minority representation in research, and using health professionals as primary sources for communicating health information and recommendations may improve relationships with Black communities and increase acceptance of new knowledge and therapies such as COVID-19 vaccination.

The power of interdependence: Linking health systems, communities, and health professions educational programs to better meet the needs of patients and populations.

Promoting optimal health outcomes for diverse patients and populations requires the acknowledgement and strengthening of interdependent relationships between health professions education programs, health systems, and the communities they serve. Educational programs must recognize their role as integral components of a larger system. Educators must strive to break down silos and synergize efforts to foster a health care workforce positioned for collaborative, equitable, community-oriented practice. Sharing interprofessional and interinstitutional strategies can foster wide propagation of educational innovation while accommodating local contexts. This paper outlines how member schools of the American Medical Association Accelerating Change in Medical Education Consortium leveraged interdependence to accomplish transformative innovations catalyzed by systems thinking and a community of innovation.

Whatever Happened to Evidence-Based Practice During COVID-19?

Contemporary medical practice is grounded in rigorous scientific evidence in concert with best clinical practices and informed shared decision making with patients. During these times of uncertainty, disruption, and even anxiety, it becomes critical that we engage with our patients and communities in thoughtful dialogue and realistic expectations regarding treatments surrounding COVID-19. The hope for a "miracle" cure and urgency to return back to normal times can stimulate irrational thought and behavior and even desperate measures by individuals or groups. It becomes especially important that we continue to use reasonable, informed clinical judgment in discussing the various options with patients.

COVID-19 and the Widening Gap in Health Inequity.

The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic has brought to light significant health inequities that have existed in our society for decades. Blacks, Hispanics, Native Americans, and immigrants are the populations most likely to experience disparities related to burden of disease, health care, and health outcomes. Increasingly, national and state statistics on COVID-19 report disproportionately higher mortality rates in blacks. There has never been a more pressing time for us to enact progressive and far-reaching changes in social, economic, and political policies that will shape programs aimed at improving the health of all people living in the United States.

Plain Language Summary: Hoarseness (Dysphonia).

This plain language summary for patients serves as an overview in explaining hoarseness (dysphonia). The summary applies to patients in all age groups and is based on the 2018 "Clinical Practice Guideline: Hoarseness (Dysphonia) (Update)." The evidence-based guideline includes research to support more effective identification and management of patients with hoarseness (dysphonia). The primary purpose of the guideline is to improve the quality of care for patients with hoarseness (dysphonia) based on current best evidence.

Clinical Practice Guideline: Hoarseness (Dysphonia) (Update) Executive Summary.

Objective This guideline provides evidence-based recommendations on treating patients presenting with dysphonia, which is characterized by altered vocal quality, pitch, loudness, or vocal effort that impairs communication and/or quality of life. Dysphonia affects nearly one-third of the population at some point in its life. This guideline applies to all age groups evaluated in a setting where dysphonia would be identified or managed. It is intended for all clinicians who are likely to diagnose and treat patients with dysphonia. Purpose The primary purpose of this guideline is to improve the quality of care for patients with dysphonia, based on current best evidence. Expert consensus to fill evidence gaps, when used, is explicitly stated and supported with a detailed evidence profile for transparency. Specific objectives of the guideline are to reduce inappropriate variations in care, produce optimal health outcomes, and minimize harm. For this guideline update, the American Academy of Otolaryngology-Head and Neck Surgery Foundation selected a panel representing the fields of advanced practice nursing, bronchoesophagology, consumer advocacy, family medicine, geriatric medicine, internal medicine, laryngology, neurology, otolaryngology-head and neck surgery, pediatrics, professional voice, pulmonology, and speech-language pathology. Action Statements The guideline update group made strong recommendations for the following key action statements (KASs): (1) Clinicians should assess the patient with dysphonia by history and physical examination to identify factors where expedited laryngeal evaluation is indicated. These include but are not limited to recent surgical procedures involving the head, neck, or chest; recent endotracheal intubation; presence of concomitant neck mass; respiratory distress or stridor; history of tobacco abuse; and whether the patient is a professional voice user. (2) Clinicians should advocate voice therapy for patients with dysphonia from a cause amenable to voice therapy. The guideline update group made recommendations for the following KASs: (1) Clinicians should identify dysphonia in a patient with altered voice quality, pitch, loudness, or vocal effort that impairs communication or reduces quality of life (QOL). (2) Clinicians should assess the patient with dysphonia by history and physical examination for underlying causes of dysphonia and factors that modify management. (3) Clinicians should perform laryngoscopy, or refer to a clinician who can perform laryngoscopy, when dysphonia fails to resolve or improve within 4 weeks or irrespective of duration if a serious underlying cause is suspected. (4) Clinicians should perform diagnostic laryngoscopy, or refer to a clinician who can perform diagnostic laryngoscopy, before prescribing voice therapy and document/communicate the results to the speech-language pathologist (SLP). (5) Clinicians should advocate for surgery as a therapeutic option for patients with dysphonia with conditions amenable to surgical intervention, such as suspected malignancy, symptomatic benign vocal fold lesions that do not respond to conservative management, or glottic insufficiency. (6) Clinicians should offer, or refer to a clinician who can offer, botulinum toxin injections for the treatment of dysphonia caused by spasmodic dysphonia and other types of laryngeal dystonia. (7) Clinicians should inform patients with dysphonia about control/preventive measures. (8) Clinicians should document resolution, improvement or worsened symptoms of dysphonia, or change in QOL of patients with dysphonia after treatment or observation. The guideline update group made a strong recommendation against 1 action: (1) Clinicians should not routinely prescribe antibiotics to treat dysphonia. The guideline update group made recommendations against other actions: (1) Clinicians should not obtain computed tomography (CT) or magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) for patients with a primary voice complaint prior to visualization of the larynx. (2) Clinicians should not prescribe antireflux medications to treat isolated dysphonia, based on symptoms alone attributed to suspected gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD) or laryngopharyngeal reflux (LPR), without visualization of the larynx. (3) Clinicians should not routinely prescribe corticosteroids in patients with dysphonia prior to visualization of the larynx. The policy level for the following recommendation about laryngoscopy at any time was an option: (1) Clinicians may perform diagnostic laryngoscopy at any time in a patient with dysphonia. Differences from Prior Guideline (1) Incorporating new evidence profiles to include the role of patient preferences, confidence in the evidence, differences of opinion, quality improvement opportunities, and any exclusion to which the action statement does not apply (2) Inclusion of 3 new guidelines, 16 new systematic reviews, and 4 new randomized controlled trials (3) Inclusion of a consumer advocate on the guideline update group (4) Changes to 9 KASs from the original guideline (5) New KAS 3 (escalation of care) and KAS 13 (outcomes) (6) Addition of an algorithm outlining KASs for patients with dysphonia.

Clinical Practice Guideline: Hoarseness (Dysphonia) (Update).

Objective This guideline provides evidence-based recommendations on treating patients who present with dysphonia, which is characterized by altered vocal quality, pitch, loudness, or vocal effort that impairs communication and/or quality of life. Dysphonia affects nearly one-third of the population at some point in its life. This guideline applies to all age groups evaluated in a setting where dysphonia would be identified or managed. It is intended for all clinicians who are likely to diagnose and treat patients with dysphonia. Purpose The primary purpose of this guideline is to improve the quality of care for patients with dysphonia, based on current best evidence. Expert consensus to fill evidence gaps, when used, is explicitly stated and supported with a detailed evidence profile for transparency. Specific objectives of the guideline are to reduce inappropriate variations in care, produce optimal health outcomes, and minimize harm. For this guideline update, the American Academy of Otolaryngology-Head and Neck Surgery Foundation selected a panel representing the fields of advanced practice nursing, bronchoesophagology, consumer advocacy, family medicine, geriatric medicine, internal medicine, laryngology, neurology, otolaryngology-head and neck surgery, pediatrics, professional voice, pulmonology, and speech-language pathology. Action Statements The guideline update group made strong recommendations for the following key action statements (KASs): (1) Clinicians should assess the patient with dysphonia by history and physical examination to identify factors where expedited laryngeal evaluation is indicated. These include, but are not limited to, recent surgical procedures involving the head, neck, or chest; recent endotracheal intubation; presence of concomitant neck mass; respiratory distress or stridor; history of tobacco abuse; and whether the patient is a professional voice user. (2) Clinicians should advocate voice therapy for patients with dysphonia from a cause amenable to voice therapy. The guideline update group made recommendations for the following KASs: (1) Clinicians should identify dysphonia in a patient with altered voice quality, pitch, loudness, or vocal effort that impairs communication or reduces quality of life (QOL). (2) Clinicians should assess the patient with dysphonia by history and physical examination for underlying causes of dysphonia and factors that modify management. (3) Clinicians should perform laryngoscopy, or refer to a clinician who can perform laryngoscopy, when dysphonia fails to resolve or improve within 4 weeks or irrespective of duration if a serious underlying cause is suspected. (4) Clinicians should perform diagnostic laryngoscopy, or refer to a clinician who can perform diagnostic laryngoscopy, before prescribing voice therapy and document/communicate the results to the speech-language pathologist (SLP). (5) Clinicians should advocate for surgery as a therapeutic option for patients with dysphonia with conditions amenable to surgical intervention, such as suspected malignancy, symptomatic benign vocal fold lesions that do not respond to conservative management, or glottic insufficiency. (6) Clinicians should offer, or refer to a clinician who can offer, botulinum toxin injections for the treatment of dysphonia caused by spasmodic dysphonia and other types of laryngeal dystonia. (7) Clinicians should inform patients with dysphonia about control/preventive measures. (8) Clinicians should document resolution, improvement or worsened symptoms of dysphonia, or change in QOL of patients with dysphonia after treatment or observation. The guideline update group made a strong recommendation against 1 action: (1) Clinicians should not routinely prescribe antibiotics to treat dysphonia. The guideline update group made recommendations against other actions: (1) Clinicians should not obtain computed tomography (CT) or magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) for patients with a primary voice complaint prior to visualization of the larynx. (2) Clinicians should not prescribe antireflux medications to treat isolated dysphonia, based on symptoms alone attributed to suspected gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD) or laryngopharyngeal reflux (LPR), without visualization of the larynx. (3) Clinicians should not routinely prescribe corticosteroids for patients with dysphonia prior to visualization of the larynx. The policy level for the following recommendation about laryngoscopy at any time was an option: (1) Clinicians may perform diagnostic laryngoscopy at any time in a patient with dysphonia. Disclaimer This clinical practice guideline is not intended as an exhaustive source of guidance for managing dysphonia (hoarseness). Rather, it is designed to assist clinicians by providing an evidence-based framework for decision-making strategies. The guideline is not intended to replace clinical judgment or establish a protocol for all individuals with this condition, and it may not provide the only appropriate approach to diagnosing and managing this problem. Differences from Prior Guideline (1) Incorporation of new evidence profiles to include the role of patient preferences, confidence in the evidence, differences of opinion, quality improvement opportunities, and any exclusion to which the action statement does not apply (2) Inclusion of 3 new guidelines, 16 new systematic reviews, and 4 new randomized controlled trials (3) Inclusion of a consumer advocate on the guideline update group (4) Changes to 9 KASs from the original guideline (5) New KAS 3 (escalation of care) and KAS 13 (outcomes) (6) Addition of an algorithm outlining KASs for patients with dysphonia.

Obstacles to preventive care for individuals with disability: Implications for nurse practitioners.

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: Individuals with disabilities have been identified as a population with a significantly lower usage of preventive services. Nurse practitioners (NPs) provide a key access point in the healthcare delivery system for preventive services for vulnerable populations such as those with disabilities. It is essential to understand existing barriers that prohibit access to effective preventive care for this vulnerable population. METHODS: Systematic search and review of Cumulative Index of Nursing and Allied Health Literature (CINAHL), Medline, PubMed, Google Scholar, and government reports and World Health Organizations reports. Twenty-six articles were included in the review. CONCLUSIONS: This literature review confirmed previous notions that people with disabilities are receiving much fewer preventive services than the general population. The studies reviewed identified four major barriers that contributed to the lack of preventive care. These barriers included physical environment and system, transportation, provider knowledge and attitude, and financial. Recognition of the obstacles that this subpopulation faces in accessing preventive care services is the first step to effectively remedying this problem. IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE: Preventive services have been identified as one of the cornerstones to improving health and quality of life. By understanding the circumstances that restrict those with disabilities from accessing preventive services, NPs can provide meaningful and effective solutions.

Clinical Practice Guideline (Update): Earwax (Cerumen Impaction)

Objective This update of the 2008 American Academy of Otolaryngology-Head and Neck Surgery Foundation cerumen impaction clinical practice guideline provides evidence-based recommendations on managing cerumen impaction. Cerumen impaction is defined as an accumulation of cerumen that causes symptoms, prevents assessment of the ear, or both. Changes from the prior guideline include a consumer added to the development group; new evidence (3 guidelines, 5 systematic reviews, and 6 randomized controlled trials); enhanced information on patient education and counseling; a new algorithm to clarify action statement relationships; expanded action statement profiles to explicitly state quality improvement opportunities, confidence in the evidence, intentional vagueness, and differences of opinion; an enhanced external review process to include public comment and journal peer review; and 3 new key action statements on managing cerumen impaction that focus on primary prevention, contraindicated intervention, and referral and coordination of care. Purpose The primary purpose of this guideline is to help clinicians identify patients with cerumen impaction who may benefit from intervention and to promote evidence-based management. Another purpose of the guideline is to highlight needs and management options in special populations or in patients who have modifying factors. The guideline is intended for all clinicians who are likely to diagnose and manage patients with cerumen impaction, and it applies to any setting in which cerumen impaction would be identified, monitored, or managed. The guideline does not apply to patients with cerumen impaction associated with the following conditions: dermatologic diseases of the ear canal; recurrent otitis externa; keratosis obturans; prior radiation therapy affecting the ear; previous tympanoplasty/myringoplasty, canal wall down mastoidectomy, or other surgery affecting the ear canal. Key Action Statements The panel made a strong recommendation that clinicians should treat, or refer to a clinician who can treat, cerumen impaction, defined as an accumulation of cerumen that is associated with symptoms, prevents needed assessment of the ear, or both. The panel made the following recommendations: (1) Clinicians should explain proper ear hygiene to prevent cerumen impaction when patients have an accumulation of cerumen. (2) Clinicians should diagnose cerumen impaction when an accumulation of cerumen, as seen on otoscopy, is associated with symptoms, prevents needed assessment of the ear, or both. (3) Clinicians should assess the patient with cerumen impaction by history and/or physical examination for factors that modify management, such as ≥1 of the following: anticoagulant therapy, immunocompromised state, diabetes mellitus, prior radiation therapy to the head and neck, ear canal stenosis, exostoses, and nonintact tympanic membrane. (4) Clinicians should not routinely treat cerumen in patients who are asymptomatic and whose ears can be adequately examined. (5) Clinicians should identify patients with obstructing cerumen in the ear canal who may not be able to express symptoms (young children and cognitively impaired children and adults), and they should promptly evaluate the need for intervention. (6) Clinicians should perform otoscopy to detect the presence of cerumen in patients with hearing aids during a health care encounter. (7) Clinicians should treat, or refer to a clinician who can treat, the patient with cerumen impaction with an appropriate intervention, which may include ≥1 of the following: cerumenolytic agents, irrigation, or manual removal requiring instrumentation. (8) Clinicians should recommend against ear candling for treating or preventing cerumen impaction. (9) Clinicians should assess patients at the conclusion of in-office treatment of cerumen impaction and document the resolution of impaction. If the impaction is not resolved, the clinician should use additional treatment. If full or partial symptoms persist despite resolution of impaction, the clinician should evaluate the patient for alternative diagnoses. (10) Finally, if initial management is unsuccessful, clinicians should refer patients with persistent cerumen impaction to clinicians who have specialized equipment and training to clean and evaluate ear canals and tympanic membranes. The panel offered the following as options: (1) Clinicians may use cerumenolytic agents (including water or saline solution) in the management of cerumen impaction. (2) Clinicians may use irrigation in the management of cerumen impaction. (3) Clinicians may use manual removal requiring instrumentation in the management of cerumen impaction. (4) Last, clinicians may educate/counsel patients with cerumen impaction or excessive cerumen regarding control measures.

Clinical Practice Guideline (Update): Earwax (Cerumen Impaction) Executive Summary

The American Academy of Otolaryngology-Head and Neck Surgery Foundation (AAO-HNSF) has published a supplement to this issue of Otolaryngology-Head and Neck Surgery featuring the updated Clinical Practice Guideline: Earwax (Cerumen Impaction). To assist in implementing the guideline recommendations, this article summarizes the rationale, purpose, and key action statements. The 11 recommendations emphasize proper ear hygiene, diagnosis of cerumen impaction, factors that modify management, evaluating the need for intervention, and proper treatment. An updated guideline is needed due to new evidence (3 guidelines, 5 systematic reviews, and 6 randomized controlled trials) and the need to add statements on managing cerumen impaction that focus on primary prevention, contraindicated intervention, and referral and coordination of care.

Plain Language Summary: Earwax (Cerumen Impaction)

This plain language summary serves as an overview in explaining earwax (cerumen). The summary applies to patients older than 6 months with a clinical diagnosis of earwax impaction and is based on the 2017 update of the Clinical Practice Guideline: Earwax (Cerumen Impaction). The evidence-based guideline includes research that supports diagnosis and treatment of earwax impaction. The guideline was developed to improve care by health care providers for managing earwax impaction by creating clear recommendations to use in medical practice.

Otolaryngology Nurses' Awareness of Clinical Practice Guidelines.

Clinical practice guidelines (CPG) are developed to inform clinical decision-making and standardize care based on scientific evidence, benefits and harms of treatment, and patient preferences to achieve optimal health outcomes. This survey study explored the level of awareness of otorhinolaryngology (ORL) nurses in using CPGs in clinical practice. The study sought to answer the following: (1) How aware are ORL nurses of CPGs developed by the American Academy of Otolaryngology-Head and Neck Surgery Foundation (AAO-HNSF)? (2) Which CPGs are most widely identified by ORL nurses? and (3) Do ORL nurses perceive that AAO-HNSF guidelines can benefit their practice? An online survey was developed, piloted, and launched to all eligible registered nurse SOHN members in October 2015. A total of 146 nurses (29%) completed the survey. Over 60% of respondents were in nursing for more than 20 years, 20% were in ORL for 5 years or less, and 40% worked in the hospital, 25% were aware of one or less of the guidelines, with 75% aware of 2 or more specialty guidelines. Nurses were most aware of the tracheostomy care (64%), tonsillectomy in children (47%), and tympanostomy tubes in children (46%) guidelines. The majority of ORL nurses was aware of specialty CPGs and used them to help guide their clinical practice on a regular basis. They also perceived support by their organizations to engage in evidence-based practice. Increasing nurses' awareness and knowledge of CPGs will likely increase guideline use and advance clinical practices based on these recommendations. Strategies to enhance evidence-based guideline recommendations into practice will also be discussed.

Can the use of urgent care clinics improve access to care without undermining continuity in primary care?

PURPOSE: There is a niche for urgent care clinics as an alternate source of health care in the United States. This systematic review examines whether the use of urgent care clinics can improve access to care or if these facilities undermine continuity of primary care. DATA SOURCES: Databases used were Cumulative Index for Nursing and Allied Health (CINAHL) and Medical Literature Analysis and Retrieval System Online (MEDLINE). Articles from 2004 to 2014 were searched using keywords-access, barriers, continuity of care, nurse practitioner (NP), urgent care, retail clinic, emergency, and primary care. CONCLUSIONS: Urgent care clinics can improve access to care, but may also negatively impact continuity of care, preventative services, and ongoing management of chronic conditions. Barriers to primary care and benefits of urgent care are inversely related. Insufficient knowledge regarding navigation of the healthcare system, perceived urgency of medical need, and deflection of care contribute to use of urgent care over primary care. IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE: NPs are frontline healthcare providers essential to developing and maintaining successful communication and collaboration among providers across healthcare settings. In both primary care and urgent care facilities, NPs can ensure continuity of care, decreased healthcare costs, and optimized health outcomes for patients.

Asthma Self-Management Goals, Beliefs and Behaviors of Urban African American Adolescents Prior to Transitioning to Adult Health Care.

UNLABELLED: Adolescence is a unique time of development incorporating a transition from child centered to adult centered health care. This transition period can be particularly challenging for individuals with a chronic disease such as asthma. Inadequate transition planning during adolescence may place an already vulnerable population such as African American adolescents with known health disparities in asthma prevalence, morbidity and mortality at risk for a continuation of poor health outcomes across the lifespan. Central to transition planning for these youth is the core element of developing and prioritizing goals. The purpose of this qualitative study was to explore the asthma self-management goals, beliefs and behaviors of urban African American adolescents prior to transitioning from pediatric to adult health care. METHODS: A focus group composed of 13 African American adolescents with asthma ages 14-18 years from an urban population was conducted. Responses from transcripts and field notes were reviewed using an iterative process to best characterize asthma self-management goals and beliefs that emerged. RESULTS: Four core themes were identified: 1) medication self-management, 2) social support, 3) independence vs. interdependence, and 4) self-advocacy. Medication self-management included subthemes of rescue medications, controller medications and medication avoidance. The social support theme included three subthemes: peer support, caregiver support and healthcare provider support. CONCLUSION: Findings suggest that adolescents with asthma form both short term and long term goals. Their goals indicated a need for guided support to facilitate a successful health care transition.

Clinical practice guideline: allergic rhinitis executive summary.

The American Academy of Otolaryngology-Head and Neck Surgery Foundation (AAO-HNSF) has published a supplement to this issue featuring the new Clinical Practice Guideline: Allergic Rhinitis. To assist in implementing the guideline recommendations, this article summarizes the rationale, purpose, and key action statements. The 14 recommendations developed address the evaluation of patients with allergic rhinitis, including performing and interpretation of diagnostic testing and assessment and documentation of chronic conditions and comorbidities. It will then focus on the recommendations to guide the evaluation and treatment of patients with allergic rhinitis, to determine the most appropriate interventions to improve symptoms and quality of life for patients with allergic rhinitis.

Clinical practice guideline: Allergic rhinitis.

OBJECTIVE: Allergic rhinitis (AR) is one of the most common diseases affecting adults. It is the most common chronic disease in children in the United States today and the fifth most common chronic disease in the United States overall. AR is estimated to affect nearly 1 in every 6 Americans and generates $2 to $5 billion in direct health expenditures annually. It can impair quality of life and, through loss of work and school attendance, is responsible for as much as $2 to $4 billion in lost productivity annually. Not surprisingly, myriad diagnostic tests and treatments are used in managing this disorder, yet there is considerable variation in their use. This clinical practice guideline was undertaken to optimize the care of patients with AR by addressing quality improvement opportunities through an evaluation of the available evidence and an assessment of the harm-benefit balance of various diagnostic and management options. PURPOSE: The primary purpose of this guideline is to address quality improvement opportunities for all clinicians, in any setting, who are likely to manage patients with AR as well as to optimize patient care, promote effective diagnosis and therapy, and reduce harmful or unnecessary variations in care. The guideline is intended to be applicable for both pediatric and adult patients with AR. Children under the age of 2 years were excluded from the clinical practice guideline because rhinitis in this population may be different than in older patients and is not informed by the same evidence base. The guideline is intended to focus on a limited number of quality improvement opportunities deemed most important by the working group and is not intended to be a comprehensive reference for diagnosing and managing AR. The recommendations outlined in the guideline are not intended to represent the standard of care for patient management, nor are the recommendations intended to limit treatment or care provided to individual patients. ACTION STATEMENTS: The development group made a strong recommendation that clinicians recommend intranasal steroids for patients with a clinical diagnosis of AR whose symptoms affect their quality of life. The development group also made a strong recommendation that clinicians recommend oral second-generation/less sedating antihistamines for patients with AR and primary complaints of sneezing and itching. The panel made the following recommendations: (1) Clinicians should make the clinical diagnosis of AR when patients present with a history and physical examination consistent with an allergic cause and 1 or more of the following symptoms: nasal congestion, runny nose, itchy nose, or sneezing. Findings of AR consistent with an allergic cause include, but are not limited to, clear rhinorrhea, nasal congestion, pale discoloration of the nasal mucosa, and red and watery eyes. (2) Clinicians should perform and interpret, or refer to a clinician who can perform and interpret, specific IgE (skin or blood) allergy testing for patients with a clinical diagnosis of AR who do not respond to empiric treatment, or when the diagnosis is uncertain, or when knowledge of the specific causative allergen is needed to target therapy. (3) Clinicians should assess patients with a clinical diagnosis of AR for, and document in the medical record, the presence of associated conditions such as asthma, atopic dermatitis, sleep-disordered breathing, conjunctivitis, rhinosinusitis, and otitis media. (4) Clinicians should offer, or refer to a clinician who can offer, immunotherapy (sublingual or subcutaneous) for patients with AR who have inadequate response to symptoms with pharmacologic therapy with or without environmental controls. The panel recommended against (1) clinicians routinely performing sinonasal imaging in patients presenting with symptoms consistent with a diagnosis of AR and (2) clinicians offering oral leukotriene receptor antagonists as primary therapy for patients with AR. The panel group made the following options: (1) Clinicians may advise avoidance of known allergens or may advise environmental controls (ie, removal of pets; the use of air filtration systems, bed covers, and acaricides [chemical agents formulated to kill dust mites]) in patients with AR who have identified allergens that correlate with clinical symptoms. (2) Clinicians may offer intranasal antihistamines for patients with seasonal, perennial, or episodic AR. (3) Clinicians may offer combination pharmacologic therapy in patients with AR who have inadequate response to pharmacologic monotherapy. (4) Clinicians may offer, or refer to a surgeon who can offer, inferior turbinate reduction in patients with AR with nasal airway obstruction and enlarged inferior turbinates who have failed medical management. (5) Clinicians may offer acupuncture, or refer to a clinician who can offer acupuncture, for patients with AR who are interested in nonpharmacologic therapy. The development group provided no recommendation regarding the use of herbal therapy for patients with AR.