Allergic rhinitis (AR) and asthma represent global health problems for all age groups. Asthma and rhinitis frequently coexist in the same subjects. Allergic Rhinitis and its Impact on Asthma (ARIA) was initiated during a World Health Organization workshop in 1999 (published in 2001). ARIA has reclassified AR as mild/moderate-severe and intermittent/persistent. This classification closely reflects patients' needs and underlines the close relationship between rhinitis and asthma. Patients, clinicians, and other health care professionals are confronted with various treatment choices for the management of AR. This contributes to considerable variation in clinical practice, and worldwide, patients, clinicians, and other health care professionals are faced with uncertainty about the relative merits and downsides of the various treatment options. In its 2010 Revision, ARIA developed clinical practice guidelines for the management of AR and asthma comorbidities based on the Grading of Recommendation, Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) system. ARIA is disseminated and implemented in more than 50 countries of the world. Ten years after the publication of the ARIA World Health Organization workshop report, it is important to make a summary of its achievements and identify the still unmet clinical, research, and implementation needs to strengthen the 2011 European Union Priority on allergy and asthma in children.
This document provides healthcare practitioners with information regarding the management of acute rhinosinusitis (ARS) and chronic rhinosinusitis (CRS) to enable them to better meet the needs of this patient population. These guidelines describe controversies in the management of acute bacterial rhinosinusitis (ABRS) and include recommendations that take into account changes in the bacteriologic landscape. Recent guidelines in ABRS have been released by American and European groups as recently as 2007, but these are either limited in their coverage of the subject of CRS, do not follow an evidence-based strategy, or omit relevant stakeholders in guidelines development, and do not address the particulars of the Canadian healthcare environment.Advances in understanding the pathophysiology of CRS, along with the development of appropriate therapeutic strategies, have improved outcomes for patients with CRS. CRS now affects large numbers of patients globally and primary care practitioners are confronted by this disease on a daily basis. Although initially considered a chronic bacterial infection, CRS is now recognized as having multiple distinct components (eg, infection, inflammation), which have led to changes in therapeutic approaches (eg, increased use of corticosteroids). The role of bacteria in the persistence of chronic infections, and the roles of surgical and medical management are evolving. Although evidence is limited, guidance for managing patients with CRS would help practitioners less experienced in this area offer rational care. It is no longer reasonable to manage CRS as a prolonged version of ARS, but rather, specific therapeutic strategies adapted to pathogenesis must be developed and diffused.Guidelines must take into account all available evidence and incorporate these in an unbiased fashion into management recommendations based on the quality of evidence, therapeutic benefit, and risks incurred. This document is focused on readability rather than completeness, yet covers relevant information, offers summaries of areas where considerable evidence exists, and provides recommendations with an assessment of strength of the evidence base and degree of endorsement by the multidisciplinary expert group preparing the document.These guidelines have been copublished in both Allergy, Asthma & Clinical Immunology and the Journal of Otolaryngology-Head and Neck Surgery.
Selection of pharmacotherapy for patients with allergic rhinitis aims to control the disease and depends on (1) patient empowerment, preferences, and age; (2) prominent symptoms, symptom severity, and multimorbidity; (3) efficacy and safety of treatment 1 ; (4) speed of onset of action of treatment; (5) current treatment; (6) historic response to treatment; (7) effect on sleep and work productivity 2,3 ; (8) self-management strategies; and (9) resource use. 4,5 An algorithm was devised 5 and digitalized 6 to step up or step down allergic rhinitis treatment based on control. However, its
A novel strain of human coronaviruses, named by the International Committee on Taxonomy of Viruses (ICTV) 1 as the severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2), has emerged and
Substantial gaps between recommended and current care exist in the management of COPD patients in primary care practice. Undertreatment of patients with severe COPD has potential clinical implications, including loss of autonomy and hospitalization.
The Allergic Rhinitis and its Impact on Asthma (ARIA) initiative commenced during a World Health Organization workshop in 1999. The initial goals were (1) to propose a new allergic rhinitis classification, (2) to promote the concept of multi-morbidity in asthma and rhinitis and (3) to develop guidelines with all stakeholders that could be used globally for all countries and populations. ARIA—disseminated and implemented in over 70 countries globally—is now focusing on the implementation of emerging technologies for individualized and predictive medicine. MASK [MACVIA (Contre les Maladies Chroniques pour un Vieillissement Actif)-ARIA Sentinel NetworK] uses mobile technology to develop care pathways for the management of rhinitis and asthma by a multi-disciplinary group and by patients themselves. An app (Android and iOS) is available in 20 countries and 15 languages. It uses a visual analogue scale to assess symptom control and work productivity as well as a clinical decision support system. It is associated with an inter-operable tablet for physicians and other health care professionals. The scaling up strategy uses the recommendations of the European Innovation Partnership on Active and Healthy Ageing. The aim of the novel ARIA approach is to provide an active and healthy life to rhinitis sufferers, whatever their age, sex or socio-economic status, in order to reduce health and social inequalities incurred by the disease.
Allergic rhinitis often impairs social life and performance. The aim of this cross‐sectional study was to use cell phone data to assess the impact on work productivity of uncontrolled rhinitis assessed by visual analogue scale (VAS). A mobile phone app (Allergy Diary, Google Play Store and Apple App Store) collects data from daily visual analogue scales (VAS) for overall allergic symptoms (VAS‐global measured), nasal (VAS‐nasal), ocular (VAS‐ocular) and asthma symptoms (VAS‐asthma) as well as work (VAS‐work). A combined nasal‐ocular score is calculated. The Allergy Diary is available in 21 countries. The app includes the Work Productivity and Activity Impairment Allergic Specific Questionnaire (WPAI:AS) in six EU countries. All consecutive users who completed the VAS‐work from 1 June to 31 October 2016 were included in the study. A total of 1136 users filled in 5818 days of VAS‐work. Symptoms of allergic rhinitis were controlled (VAS‐global <20) in approximately 60% of the days. In users with uncontrolled rhinitis, approximately 90% had some work impairment and over 50% had severe work impairment (VAS‐work >50). There was a significant correlation between VAS‐global calculated and VAS‐work (Rho=0.83, P<0.00001, Spearman's rank test). In 144 users, there was a significant correlation between VAS‐work and WPAI:AS (Rho=0.53, P<0.0001). This pilot study provides not only proof‐of‐concept data on the work impairment collected with the app but also data on the app itself, especially the distribution of responses for the VAS. This supports the interpretation that persons with rhinitis report both the presence and the absence of symptoms.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.