mHealth, such as apps running on consumer smart devices is becoming increasingly popular and has the potential to profoundly affect healthcare and health outcomes. However, it may be disruptive and results achieved are not always reaching the goals. Allergic Rhinitis and its Impact on Asthma (ARIA) has evolved from a guideline using the best evidence-based approach to care pathways suited to real-life using mobile technology in allergic rhinitis (AR) and asthma multimorbidity. Patients largely use over-the-counter medications dispensed in pharmacies. Shared decision making centered around the patient and based on self-management should be the norm. Mobile Airways Sentinel networK (MASK), the Phase 3 ARIA initiative, is based on the freely available MASK app (the Allergy Diary, Android and iOS platforms). MASK is available in 16 languages and deployed in 23 countries. The present paper provides an overview of the methods used in MASK and the key results obtained to date. These include a novel phenotypic characterization of the patients, confirmation of the impact of allergic rhinitis on work productivity and treatment patterns in real life. Most patients appear to self-medicate, are often non-adherent and do not follow guidelines. Moreover, the Allergy Diary is able to distinguish between AR medications. The potential usefulness of MASK will be further explored by POLLAR (Impact of Air Pollution on Asthma and Rhinitis), a new Horizon 2020 project using the Allergy Diary.

No abstract

AimsMobile Airways Sentinel NetworK (MASK) belongs to the Fondation Partenariale MACVIA-LR of Montpellier, France and aims to provide an active and healthy life to rhinitis sufferers and to those with asthma multimorbidity across the life cycle, whatever their gender or socio-economic status, in order to reduce health and social inequities incurred by the disease and to improve the digital transformation of health and care. The ultimate goal is to change the management strategy in chronic diseases.MethodsMASK implements ICT technologies for individualized and predictive medicine to develop novel care pathways by a multi-disciplinary group centred around the patients.StakeholdersInclude patients, health care professionals (pharmacists and physicians), authorities, patient’s associations, private and public sectors.ResultsMASK is deployed in 23 countries and 17 languages. 26,000 users have registered.EU grants (2018)MASK is participating in EU projects (POLLAR: impact of air POLLution in Asthma and Rhinitis, EIT Health, DigitalHealthEurope, Euriphi and Vigour).Lessons learnt(i) Adherence to treatment is the major problem of allergic disease, (ii) Self-management strategies should be considerably expanded (behavioural), (iii) Change management is essential in allergic diseases, (iv) Education strategies should be reconsidered using a patient-centred approach and (v) Lessons learnt for allergic diseases can be expanded to chronic diseases.

Background: Mobile technology may help to better understand the adherence to treatment. MASK-rhinitis (Mobile Airways Sentinel NetworK for allergic rhinitis) is a patient-centred ICT system. A mobile phone app (the Allergy Diary) central to MASK is available in 22 countries. Objectives:To assess the adherence to treatment in allergic rhinitis patients using the Allergy Diary App. Methods:An observational cross-sectional study was carried out on all users who filled in the Allergy Diary from 1 January 2016 to 1 August 2017. Secondary adherence was assessed by using the modified Medication Possession Ratio (MPR) and the Proportion of days covered (PDC) approach.Results: A total of 12 143 users were registered. A total of 6 949 users reported at least one VAS data recording. Among them, 1 887 users reported ≥7 VAS data.About 1 195 subjects were included in the analysis of adherence. One hundred and thirty-six (11.28%) users were adherent (MPR ≥70% and PDC ≤1.25), 51 (4.23%) were partly adherent (MPR ≥70% and PDC = 1.50) and 176 (14.60%) were switchers. On the other hand, 832 (69.05%) users were non-adherent to medications (MPR <70%). Of those, the largest group was non-adherent to medications and the time interval was increased in 442 (36.68%) users. Conclusion and clinical relevance:Adherence to treatment is low. The relative efficacy of continuous vs on-demand treatment for allergic rhinitis symptoms is still a matter of debate. This study shows an approach for measuring retrospective adherence based on a mobile app. This also represents a novel approach for analysing medication-taking behaviour in a real-world setting. K E Y W O R D S adherence, mHealth, mobile technology, observational study, rhinitis, treatment S U P P O R T I N G I N F O R M A T I O N Additional supporting information may be found online in the Supporting Information section at the end of the article. How to cite this article: Menditto E, Costa E, Midão L, et al. the MASK group. Adherence to treatment in allergic rhinitis using mobile technology. The MASK Study. Clin Exp Allergy.

Background The analysis of mobile health (mHealth) data has generated innovative insights into improving allergic rhinitis control, but additive information is needed. A cross-sectional real-world observational study was undertaken in 17 European countries during and outside the estimated pollen season. The aim was to collect novel information including the phenotypic characteristics of the users. Methods The Allergy Diary–MASK-air–mobile phone app, freely available via Google Play and App, was used to collect the data of daily visual analogue scales (VASs) for overall allergic symptoms and medication use. Fluticasone Furoate (FF), Mometasone Furoate (MF), Azelastine Fluticasone Proprionate combination (MPAzeFlu) and eight oral H1-antihistamines were studied. Phenotypic characteristics were recorded at entry. The ARIA severity score was derived from entry data. This was an a priori planned analysis. Results 9037 users filled in 70,286 days of VAS in 2016, 2017 and 2018. The ARIA severity score was lower outside than during the pollen season. Severity was similar for all treatment groups during the pollen season, and lower in the MPAzeFlu group outside the pollen season. Days with MPAzeFlu had lower VAS levels and a higher frequency of monotherapy than the other treatments during the season. Outside the season, days with MPAzeFlu also had a higher frequency of monotherapy. The number of reported days was significantly higher with MPAzeFlu during and outside the season than with MF, FF or oral H1-antihistamines. Conclusions This study shows that the overall efficacy of treatments is similar during and outside the pollen season and indicates that medications are similarly effective during the year.