Allergic Rhinitis And Its Impact On Asthma Guidelines Research Articles

Insufficiency of Laboratory Data in Reflecting Allergic Rhinitis Severity Based on the Allergic Rhinitis and Its Impact on Asthma Guideline in Korean Patients

Background and Objectives: This retrospective study, conducted at a single tertiary medical center, aimed to investigate the correlation between the severity of allergic rhinitis (AR) based on subjective symptoms and the severity assessed through laboratory data.Methods: In total, 584 patients who were diagnosed with AR by a multiple-allergen simultaneous test were included. Patients were classified into four groups according to the Allergic Rhinitis and its Impact on Asthma (ARIA) classification guideline. The visual analog scale (VAS) score for overall discomfort and laboratory parameters, including the serum total immunoglobulin E (IgE) level and peripheral blood eosinophil count, were evaluated in all patients. An analysis was conducted to examine the differences in VAS scores and laboratory findings among the four groups. Additionally, the correlations between the laboratory findings and VAS score were analyzed.Results: The serum total IgE level and the percentage and count of peripheral blood eosinophils showed no significant differences among the groups. However, the VAS score for overall discomfort exhibited notable between-group differences. The average VAS score was 6.14 (95% confidence interval 5.94–6.34) in the overall group. The mean scores of each group showed a noticeable increasing trend from the mild intermittent group to the mild persistent, moderate to severe intermittent, and moderate to severe persistent groups (p<0.001), although there was no clear correlation between the increase in VAS scores and laboratory parameters.Conclusion: Neither the symptom-based ARIA guideline nor the VAS score correlated with the AR laboratory test measurements. The current laboratory data alone may not be sufficient to reflect the severity of AR based on subjective symptoms.

Mechanisms and Comparative Treatments of Allergic Rhinitis including Phototherapy

The treatment of allergic conditions presents a challenge for both seasonal allergic rhinitis and perennial rhinitis sufferers. The increasing prevalence of both of these types of allergic responses requires the use of a range of treatments which can provide relief. The treatment of allergic rhinitis has been considered under the ARIA (Allergic Rhinitis and its Impact on Asthma) guidelines. Current treatment options include medication and avoidance for those with reduced responses, but more expensive treatments include immunotherapy and the use of monoclonal antibodies (mAb). All treatments target specific parts of the inflammatory response which includes mast cells, eosinophils and basophils. Phototherapy can be a useful addition to these treatments, and combinations of UV-B (5%), UV-A (25%) and visible light (70%) in phototherapy treatments have been shown to reduce the severity of symptoms. Phototherapy consisting of visible wavelengths and infrared light (660 nm 940 nm) was shown to be particularly effective in treating perennial rhinitis. The use of a range of wavelengths in the control of allergic responses is described in this paper. Phototherapy can form part of an effective treatment regime for allergic rhinitis sufferers which can exploit synergies in the control of the condition elicited through several pathways.

Asthma is associated with increased severity and duration of rhinitis: A study with the Allergic Rhinitis and its Impact on Asthma classes in the Constances cohort.

Few population-based studies have described allergic rhinitis (AR) according to the Allergic Rhinitis and its Impact on Asthma (ARIA) classification, and none have assessed the impact of asthma on this classification. Our aims were to 1) describe AR according to four ARIA classes and 2) within each of the four ARIA classes, compare participants with AR alone versus those with AR and asthma. Cross-sectional analyses were performed using data from the 2014 annual follow-up questionnaire of the French adult population-based cohort Constances. Current AR was defined by the report of sneezing, runny, or blocked nose in the last 12months and the report of nasal allergies. Following ARIA recommendations, rhinitis was classified according to its severity (mild or moderate-severe) and duration (intermittent or persistent). Ever asthma was also defined by a questionnaire. Among the 4675 participants with AR (57% women, mean age 50.2±12.7years), 44% were classified as mild/intermittent, 16% mild/persistent, 25% moderate-severe/intermittent, and 15% moderate-severe/persistent. Within each of the four ARIA classes, compared to participants with rhinitis alone, participants with rhinitis and asthma had significantly more severe symptoms, more conjunctivitis, a higher mean eosinophil count and more treatments with intra-nasal corticosteroids and oral antihistamines co-medication. This is a paradigm shift study as for the first time this large population-based study in adults showed that asthma status has a profound effect on the ARIA classification. Rhinitis alone and rhinitis with asthma represent two distinct phenotypes. These results reinforce the need to include asthma status in the ARIA classification and guidelines.

Development and validation of a pharmacist-led education model in allergic rhinitis management: a multi-phase study

BackgroundPatient education is identified as one of the core and fundamental management strategies in the management of allergic rhinitis. The Allergic Rhinitis and its Impact on Asthma (ARIA) guidelines developed guidance for the management of allergic respiratory disease, and the guidelines are applicable to the international context. The ARIA guidelines for the pharmacy have specifically encouraged the creation of local pharmacist-led intervention in allergic rhinitis management. This study aims to develop a pharmacist-led educational model using a multi-phase study approach.MethodIn phase one, we conducted a literature review using four databases to extract relevant articles and clinical practice guidelines published between 2017 and 2022. The information was structured into a questionnaire consisting of patient education material (10 domains with 130 items) and pharmacist counseling scopes (15 domains with 43 items), with each item having a rating scale ranging from 1 (lowest) to 9 (highest) level of agreement. Fifty-two panellists, including otorhinolaryngologists and pharmacists, were invited to complete the questionnaire. A consensus agreement was considered when at least 70% of panellists scored 7 to 9 (critically important). A two-round survey was conducted, and descriptive analysis, inter-rater reliability (≥ 0.5–1 indicate moderate to excellent reliability), variation in the relative interquartile (VRIR < 0.3 indicate good stability), and variation in the coefficient of variation (VCV < 40% considered consensus achieved) were performed. In phase two, patient education material was developed into audio-visual format, and in phase three, patients rated its understandability and actionability using a validated Patient Education Materials Assessment Tool.ResultsIn the round one Delphi survey, 43 panellists responded, with 171 out of 173 items achieving “consensus agreement” (75.4–100%). In the second survey, 32 out of 43 panellists responded, with most items (171 out of 173 items) stable across rounds and all items had acceptable internal consistency (VCV: − 12.21–15.81). Two items did not achieve “consensus agreement” (64%) but improved in round two (92.9%), however, instability was observed (VRIR: 0.36). These two items were retained in the model due to achieving the minimum level of agreement and internal consistency (VCV = 15.81). Inter-rater reliability was 0.608 and 0.970 in the respective rounds. Patients rated the educational material as understandable (81.8–100%) and actionable (100%).ConclusionThe validated pharmacist-led education model, with its educational materials tested on end-users, provides structured patient education and pharmaceutical care in assisting patients with allergic rhinitis. The educational material allows the delivery of standardized information by the healthcare providers to the patients. Further research on the effectiveness of this model in improving patients’ symptom control and quality of life is warranted.

Allergic rhinitis guidelines knowledge, attitudes, and practices among primary health care physicians: A national multicentre cross-sectional study.

Allergic rhinitis (AR) is considered one of the most common reasons for patients visiting primary health care clinics. Physicians' adherence to management guidelines for AR results in better patient outcomes. Therefore, the present study aimed to assess the knowledge, attitudes, and practices of primary health care practitioners (PHCPs) towards allergic rhinitis guidelines in Saudi Arabia. This observational cross-sectional study conducted from August 2021 to November 2021 included 282 primary care physicians across all regions of Saudi Arabia. We used a two-part, validated, self-administered Perception Attitude and Practice of Primary Care Practitioners questionnaire. The first part was demographics, and the second part comprised three domains (perception, attitude, and practice) including 48 items. Statistical Package for the Social Sciences (SPSS), version 21 was used to analyze the data. Most of the 282 physicians were Saudis (79%). Allergic rhinitis and its impact on asthma (ARIA) guidelines were recognized by 71% of the physicians. Second-generation oral antihistamines were considered the safest drug by the majority (82%), followed by intranasal corticosteroids (75.2%). Most physicians diagnosed AR based on clinical history (95%), while (43%) utilized allergy testing. Intranasal corticosteroids were the most preferred treatment option (70%) followed by second-generation and first-generation oral antihistamines (66% and 55%, respectively). Our study demonstrates the importance of education and awareness for PHCPs managing AR. ARIA guidelines should be implemented as a standard of care for AR, as PHCPs are the first ones to encounter patients with AR, to improve outcomes and avoid undertreatment and complications.

Closing the knowledge gap in Malaysian pharmacists: a virtual Allergic Rhinitis Boot Camp initiative.

BackgroundIn primary care, general practitioners (GPs) and pharmacists are at the frontline to identify, classify and manage patients suffering from allergic rhinitis (AR). The Allergic Rhinitis and its impact on Asthma (ARIA) guidelines aid clinicians in disease management by providing evidence-based recommendations. A recently published ASEAN primary care survey demonstrated that the awareness of ARIA guidelines was high among GPs but notably lower in pharmacists. Hence, this study seeks to evaluate the effectiveness of a Boot Camp education initiative in bridging the unmet needs in pharmacist awareness and education.MethodsThe boot camp was organised as a virtual event. The participants answered the same questionnaire before (pre-assessment) and immediately after (post-assessment) the boot camp session. Statistical analysis was performed on the data paired between the pre- and post- assessments using SPSS v. 25.0 software.ResultsThe boot camp survey results showed that second-generation oral antihistamines and allergen avoidance are the most preferred options for AR treatment in pharmacy practice, irrespective of the disease severity. In both pre- and post-assessments, efficacy was ranked as the most important factor considered for choosing an antihistamine and which affects patient adherence. With the boot camp initiative, there was a statistically significant increase in awareness about the patient profiling tool (from 31.6% to 88.2%) and ARIA guidelines (from 40.4% to 91.2%) among the pharmacists (p<0.05). The proportion of pharmacists who were able to identify, classify and refer AR patients was significantly increased in post-assessment (p<0.05). Post the boot camp, among the proportion of pharmacists (91.2%) who were already aware of ARIA, a high percentage of them further agreed that ARIA guidelines were useful in identifying and treating patients with AR, as well as classifying AR, respectively (97.6%, 95.2%, and 93.5%).ConclusionsBased on improvements in knowledge and understanding of disease management post assessment, the Allergic Rhinitis Boot Camp initiative is effective and relevant to pharmacy practice. Outreach programs like this reiterate the emphasis on patient compliance and importance of utilizing ARIA guidelines in pharmacy practice that facilitates better management of AR in primary care.

Pharmacotherapy in allergy medicine: from 'ipse dixit' to the evidence-based medicine.

The aim of the article is to examine the contributions made in recent years by evidence-based medicine to the understanding, positioning, and use of drugs for the treatment of the main allergic conditions. Several antiasthmatic drugs have been reappraised for their efficacy characteristics and drug interactions in Cochrane reviews. The Allergic Rhinitis and its Impact on Asthma (ARIA) guidelines have been reformulated in evidence-based medicine (EBM) terms in 2017; over these years, new point of care instruments contributed to the approximation of the guidelines to real life by drawing from the patients themselves information that allows to finely modeling the pharmacological suggestions. Last, at the time of the emergence of new drugs for the treatment of peanut allergy, new systematic reviews have helped to focus on the most suitable reference outcomes with the aim to respond promptly and adherently to patients' needs. EBM has contributed to changes in the GINA guidelines in the last two years. It has been instrumental in translating the ARIA guidelines in real life. It has also contributed to profiling the potential and limitations of oral peanut immunotherapy. In allergy medicine, EBM is a formidable aid for the advancement of knowledge.

Application of allergic rhinitis and its impact on asthma guidelines in terms of classification, risk factors, quality of life and co-morbidities in allergic rhinitis patients in Northern India

&lt;p class="abstract"&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Background:&lt;/strong&gt; Despite the high prevalence of allergic rhinitis, there are only few studies on application of ARIA (allergic rhinitis and its impact on asthma) guidelines.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p class="abstract"&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Methods:&lt;/strong&gt; It was a prospective study of 164 patients. Based on ARIA guidelines; patients were graded for severity, risk factors studied, co morbidities documented and quality of life assessed using rhinoconjunctivitis quality of life questionnaire (RQLQ). &lt;/p&gt;&lt;p class="abstract"&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Results:&lt;/strong&gt; A total of 164 cases were studied between the age group 10-72 years of which 56.1% were males. Most common trigger observed was dust (56.1%). Allergic conjunctivitis was most common co-morbidity associated. Using RQLQ it was observed that ARIA.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p class="abstract"&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Conclusions:&lt;/strong&gt; ARIA guidelines appropriately classify allergic rhinitis, determines risk factors and associated co-morbidities. RQLQ can be used to determine quality of life in allergic rhinitis.&lt;/p&gt;

ARIA guideline 2019: treatment of allergic rhinitis in the German health system

AbstractBackgroundThe number of patients affected by allergies is increasing worldwide. The resulting allergic diseases are leading to significant costs for health care and social systems. Integrated care pathways are needed to enable comprehensive care within the national health systems. The ARIA (Allergic Rhinitis and its Impact on Asthma) initiative develops internationally applicable guidelines for allergic respiratory diseases.MethodsARIA serves to improve the care of patients with allergies and chronic respiratory diseases. In collaboration with other international initiatives, national associations and patient organizations in the field of allergies and respiratory diseases, real-life integrated care pathways have been developed for a digitally assisted, integrative, individualized treatment of allergic rhinitis (AR) with comorbid asthma. In the present work, these integrated care pathways have been adapted to the German situation and health system.ResultsThe present ICP (integrated care pathways) guideline covers key areas of the care of AR patients with and without asthma. It includes the views of patients and other healthcare providers.DiscussionA comprehensive ICP guideline can reflect real-life care better than traditional guideline models.

The Characteristics of Severe Chronic Upper-Airway Disease (SCUAD) in Patients with Allergic Rhinitis: A Real-Life Multicenter Cross-Sectional Italian Study

Background: There are few studies regarding severe chronic upper-airway disease (SCUAD) that represents an important socioeconomic problem for the treatment of rhinitis and associated comorbidities, particularly asthma. Objectives: The aim of our study is to evaluate the prevalence of this pathology in patients with allergic rhinitis (AR) in real life, to phenotype allergic patients with SCUAD, and to identify which factors are related to the severity of the disease. Methods: We studied 113 patients with uncontrolled AR despite optimal adherence to therapy according to the Allergic Rhinitis and its Impact on Asthma (ARIA) guidelines in a multicenter Italian study, analyzing comorbidity, use of additional drugs, not scheduled visits, and the number of emergency room admissions. Results: Our data suggest that polysensitization is the only statistically significant factor correlating with SCUAD. Asthma does not seem to represent a correlating factor. An important finding is the poor use (20%) of allergy immunotherapy (AIT), although patients were suffering from AR and the ARIA guidelines recommend the use of AIT in moderate/severe AR. Conclusions: The SCUAD population seems not to have a specific phenotype; there is a greater presence of SCUAD in polysensibilized patients, perhaps a sign of greater inflammation.

ARIA guideline 2019: treatment of allergic rhinitis in the German health system.

Background: The number of patients affected by allergies is increasing worldwide. The resulting allergic diseases are leading to significant costs for health care and social systems. Integrated care pathways are needed to enable comprehensive care within the national health systems. The ARIA (Allergic Rhinitis and its Impact on Asthma) initiative develops internationally applicable guidelines for allergic respiratory diseases. Methods: ARIA serves to improve the care of patients with allergies and chronic respiratory diseases. In collaboration with other international initiatives, national associations and patient organizations in the field of allergies and respiratory diseases, real-life integrated care pathways have been developed for a digitally assisted, integrative, individualized treatment of allergic rhinitis (AR) with comorbid asthma. In the present work, these integrated care pathways have been adapted to the German situation and health system. Results: The present ICP (integrated care pathway) guideline covers key areas of the care of AR patients with and without asthma. It includes the views of patients and other healthcare providers. Discussion: A comprehensive ICP guideline can reflect real-life care better than traditional guideline models.

Insights on Allergic Rhinitis Management from a Northern Cyprus Perspective and Evaluation of the Impact of Pharmacist-Led Educational Intervention on Patients' Outcomes.

Background and objective: the global prevalence of allergic rhinitis (AR) is rising and yet there is scarce information concerning the diagnosis, management and treatment patterns of AR in Northern Cyprus (NC). This study aims to provide a unique perspective on AR management as well as assessing the effectiveness of the pharmacist-led educational intervention for improving care of AR patients. Methods: across-sectional survey was carried out with community pharmacists (n = 70), patients (n = 138) and ear, nose and throat (ENT) specialists (n = 12) in NC. For a controlled interventional trial, trained pharmacists provided a brief education on management of AR and nasal spray technique for patients while other pharmacists provided the usual care. Quality of life (QoL) and other outcome measures on the perceived symptom severity of the two groups were compared after a 6-week period. Results: only 33.3% of the ear, nose and throat (ENT) specialists and 15.7% of the community pharmacists are aware of the Allergic Rhinitis and its Impact on Asthma (ARIA) guidelines. The majority of patients (63%) self-managed with over-the-counter medications. Nasal congestion (96.4%) is the most bothersome symptom and oral antihistamines are the most commonly purchased medications (51.4%), indicating a pattern of suboptimal management. The pharmacists-led educational intervention has resulted in statistically more significant improvement in regards to nasal congestion and QoL for the intervention group patients (p < 0.05). Conclusion: the current management of AR has not been in accordance with the ARIA guidelines in NC. An educational intervention of the pharmacists can enhance the symptom management and improve the QoL in patients with AR.

ARIA 2017: a Review of Major Changes and Innovations

Allergic rhinitis is a disease underestimated by patients, and underdiagnosed and thus undertreated by physicians since most of the patients present with symptoms of moderate-to-severe disease, overall diminished quality of life, impairing sleep quality and cognitive function, and a substantial impact on work productivity, school absenteeism, and costs. The relationship between treating physician and patients is crucial in all chronic diseases. Review the main changes and innovations of recent years in the ARIA guidelines. The most recent publications of the ARIA (Allergic Rhinitis and its Impact on Asthma) guidelines were reviewed. ARIA 2016 strengthens the role of patients in the control and treatment of their symptoms by the use of technology, which improves physician-patient communication. The selection of pharmacotherapy for patients with allergic rhinitis (AR) depends on several factors, including age, prominent symptoms, symptom severity, control of AR, patient preferences, and cost. It confirms that inhaled corticosteroids are the most effective drugs for the management of seasonal or perennial allergic rhinitis, not surpassed by combination therapies with oral or topical antihistamines. On the other hand, no significant differences between the use of oral or topical antihistamines are evidenced. Allergen exposure and the resulting symptoms vary, and treatment adjustment is required. A step-up/step-down individualized approach to AR pharmacotherapy might hold the potential for optimal control of AR symptoms while minimizing side effects and costs. After choosing the best pharmacological therapy, compliance is a critical issue in the management of all chronic diseases. In order to improve compliance, it is important to consider patient preferences and views of patients and their caregivers, as ARIA guidelines remarks in the 2016 update. ARIA guideline has evolved to a technology-based implementation strategy to help rhinitis sufferers to have an active and healthy life and to reduce health and social inequalities caused by this very common disease, irrespective of their age, sex, or socio-economic status.

Allergic Rhinitis and its Impact on Asthma (ARIA) guidelines—2016 revision

Allergic rhinitis (AR) affects 10% to 40% of the population. It reduces quality of life and school and work performance and is a frequent reason for office visits in general practice. Medical costs are large, but avoidable costs associated with lost work productivity are even larger than those incurred by asthma. New evidence has accumulated since the last revision of the Allergic Rhinitis and its Impact on Asthma (ARIA) guidelines in 2010, prompting its update. We sought to provide a targeted update of the ARIA guidelines. The ARIA guideline panel identified new clinical questions and selected questions requiring an update. We performed systematic reviews of health effects and the evidence about patients' values and preferences and resource requirements (up to June 2016). We followed the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation (GRADE) evidence-to-decision frameworks to develop recommendations. The 2016 revision of the ARIA guidelines provides both updated and new recommendations about the pharmacologic treatment of AR. Specifically, it addresses the relative merits of using oral H1-antihistamines, intranasal H1-antihistamines, intranasal corticosteroids, and leukotriene receptor antagonists either alone or in combination. The ARIA guideline panel provides specific recommendations for the choice of treatment and the rationale for the choice and discusses specific considerations that clinicians and patients might want to review to choose the management most appropriate for an individual patient. Appropriate treatment of AR might improve patients' quality of life and school and work productivity. ARIA recommendations support patients, their caregivers, and health care providers in choosing the optimal treatment.

Impact of rhinitis on lung function in children and adolescents without asthma

BackgroundSubclinical spirometric abnormalities may be detected in patients with rhinitis without asthma, proportional to the severity established by ARIA (Allergic Rhinitis and Its Impact on Asthma) guidelines. New criteria of rhinitis classification were recently validated according to the ARIA modified (m-ARIA), which allow the discrimination between moderate to severe grades. The impact of rhinitis on lung function according to frequency and severity is unknown. ObjectivesTo investigate subclinical spirometric impairment in children and adolescents with allergic and non-allergic rhinitis without overt symptoms of asthma, according to the frequency and severity criteria of rhinitis classified by m-ARIA. MethodsAn observational cross-sectional study, including children and adolescents aged 5–18 years with allergic and non-allergic rhinitis without asthma. We analysed the functional abnormalities and bronchodilator response with spirometry in relation to the grade of rhinitis established by m-ARIA using an adjusted logistic model. A value of p<0.05 was considered statistically significant. ResultsWe studied 189 patients; 22.2% showed spirometric abnormalities. Patients with persistent rhinitis had greater impairment of lung function compared to intermittent grade (p=0.026). Lung functional impairment was more frequent in severe and moderate rhinitis than mild grade (p=0.005) and was independent of the atopic status to both frequency (p=0.157) and severity (p=0.538). There was no difference in bronchodilator reversibility between groups (p>0.05). ConclusionsImpaired lung function was associated with persistence and severity of rhinitis and there was no significant difference between patients with moderate and severe rhinitis. The spirometric abnormality was demonstrated in patients with allergic and non-allergic rhinitis.

360 degree perspective on allergic rhinitis management in Italy: a survey of GPs, pharmacists and patients.

BackgroundGeneral practitioners (GPs), community pharmacists and allergic rhinitis (AR) patients in Italy were surveyed in order to gain insight from all three perspectives into the diagnosis, management and burden of AR in Italy.MethodsGeneral practitioners and pharmacists (n = 100 for each) were surveyed by telephone; questions related to overall practice and to last AR patient seen. Patients (n = 552) completed a questionnaire after visiting specialist allergy centres. Questions related to diagnosis and treatment, degree of everyday limitation from AR, and satisfaction with treatment. The data were analysed descriptively.ResultsAllergic rhinitis was managed mainly by GPs, who reported making the diagnosis themselves in 68 % of cases; rhinorrhea (64 %), sneezing (57 %) and congestion (49 %) were the symptoms most frequently taken into account. Limitation from AR on everyday life was rated 6.2 out of 10 by GPs. Pharmacists most often considered eye tearing (54 %) in their diagnosis. Almost half of GPs (49 %) and 87 % of pharmacists were unaware of the Allergic Rhinitis and its Impact on Asthma (ARIA) guidelines. The most commonly reported prescribed treatments by GPs were branded mometasone furoate, desloratadine, ebastine and generic mometasone; 21 % prescribed homeopathic products occasionally. On average, GPs remembered that their last patient case had moderate/severe disease, was prescribed anti-histamine monotherapy (37 % of cases), and did not change prescription (78 %). Pharmacists recommended an antihistamine for 56 % of clients who asked for advice, and a nasal decongestant for 21 %. Patients rated limitation from AR on everyday life as 5.7/10. 55 % reported using multiple therapies, and 43 % were not satisfied or weakly satisfied with their current treatment. Patients’ main expectation for the future was to succeed in managing their AR symptoms (45 %), while 22 % hoped for a definitive cure. Many patients (61 %) were concerned their health would deteriorate.ConclusionsAllergic rhinitis is largely managed by GPs in Italy, with pharmacists also playing a role, yet awareness of the ARIA guidelines among these groups is low. Patient satisfaction with treatment is moderate or low. New more effective treatments are needed to improve AR management in Italy. Allergy education programs need to be better targeted to GPs and pharmacists, and communication with patients regarding symptom control must be improved.Electronic supplementary materialThe online version of this article (doi:10.1186/s12948-015-0029-5) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

Allergic Rhinitis: an Overview

Allergic rhinitis is an inflammatory disorder of the nasal mucosa induced by allergen exposure triggering IgE-mediated inflammation. Clinically, it is characterized by four major symptoms-rhinorrhea, sneezing, nasal itching, and nasal congestion. It can also be associated with co-morbid conditions as Asthma, Atopic Dermatitis & Nasal polyps. Around 20-30% of the Indian population suffers from allergic rhinitis and that 15% develop asthma. The diagnosis & treatment of allergic rhinitis should follow ARIA (Allergic Rhinitis and its Impact on Asthma) guidelines while of asthma should follow the GINA (Global Initiative for Asthma) guidelines. The treatment of allergic rhinitis should combine allergen avoidance (whenever possible), pharmacotherapy, and allergen immunotherapy. Intranasal corticosteroids are the most effective modality for treating allergic rhinitis and their sensory attributes are important in patient compliance.

How an online survey on the treatment of allergic rhinitis and its impact on asthma (ARIA) detected specialty-specific knowledge-gaps

Background To enhance the dissemination of the ARIA document (Allergic rhinitis (AR) and its impact on asthma) in Mexico, a Working Group composed of 35 specialists of 8 professional medical societies developed a transculturized ARIA México 2014 guideline. The ARIA guidelines use the GRADE system, which builds recommendations and suggestions around clinical questions (CQ).Methods As part of the dissemination strategy and to detect the physicians’ view and knowledge-gaps concerning the treatment of AR an online survey was sent out to members of participating societies containing the CQ of ARIA México. Replies were analyzed per specialty against the ARIA México 2014 experts’ recommendations/suggestions; differences between specialties were analyzed with Pearson’s Chi-squares.Results 807 surveys were returned, 657 completed (81%). We analyze replies from 158 alergists, 188 ENTs, 64 pulmonologists, 220 pediatricians and 177 GPs/family doctors. More than half of the surveyed physicians of all specialties would give an allergen reduced diet to pregnant/lactating women and avoid pets at home, which is against ARIA experts’ suggestions. ARIA experts suggest intranasal antihistamines can be part of the AR treatment: 46-63% of the ENTs, pulmonologists and pediatricians disagree; and experts prefer oral H1-antihistamines over leukotriene receptor antagonists (LTRA) for the treatment of AR: 52-36% of the pulmonologists, pediatricians and GPs prefer LTRAs. Concerning glucocorticosteroids (GCS): GPs are more reluctant to use intranasal GCS (p < 0.001) and 47% prefers oral H1-antihistamines. As for the treatment of recalcitrant AR ARIA experts suggest the use of oral, but not intramuscular, GCS: a quarter of pulmonologists, pediatricians and GPs considers they should not be used. Contrarily, 40% of ENTs favors intramuscular GCS. In patients with AR and comorbid asthma several physicians of all specialties –except pulmonologists- erroneously considers antihistamines, intranasal GCS and LTRAs useful for the treatment of asthma, while first-line recommended asthma treatment is inhaled GCS.Conclusion On certain issues in the treatment of AR the physicians’ opinion diverges from the recommendations/suggestions of ARIA experts. Moreover, physicians’ opinions depend on their specialty. As such, an online survey can help to detect knowledge-gaps and guide the development of more focused and specialty-specific postgraduate learning tools.

PRS56 - Impact of Allergen Immunotherapy on Quality of Life and Health Care Costs in Adults and Children With Grass Pollen-Induced Allergic Rhinitis in Germany

• According to the World Health Organization (WHO), allergic respiratory diseases have been recognized as the fourth most important chronic disease in the world and represent a major public health problem with significant quality of life (QoL) impairment. Approximately 90 million Europeans are affected by allergic respiratory diseases. • In Germany, 25% of the adult population and 21% of the paediatric population suffer from allergic rhinoconjunctivitis (AR). • According to the ARIA (Allergic Rhinitis and its Impact on Asthma) guidelines, 10–40% of patients suffer from co-existing allergic asthma. A health economic assessment, reflective of German clinical practice, was conducted to determine the relative impact of treatment with Oralair, Grazax, ALK Depot SQ or SDT on clinical effects and healthcare costs in adults and children with moderate-to-severe grass pollen-induced allergic rhinoconjunctivitis.

PRS52 - Impact of Allergen Immunotherapy on Symptom-Free Days and Health Care Costs in Patients With Grass Pollen-Induced Allergic Rhinitis in Germany

• According to the World Health Organization (WHO), allergic respiratory diseases respiratory diseases have been recognized as the fourth most important chronic disease in the world and represent a major public health problem with significant quality of life (QoL) impairment. Approximately 90 million Europeans are affected by allergic respiratory diseases. • In Germany, 25% of the adult population and 21% of children suffer from allergic rhinoconjunctivitis (AR). • According to the ARIA (Allergic Rhinitis and its Impact on Asthma) guidelines, 10–40% of patients suffer from co-existing allergic asthma. • Treatment of AR mainly consists of symptom control achieved by allergen avoidance or use of symptomatic drug treatment (SDT). In poorly controlled AR patients in Germany, causal treatments such as allergen immunotherapy (AIT) may be required. A health economic assessment, reflective of German clinical practice, was conducted to determine the relative impact on clinical effects, expressed as SFD, and healthcare costs when treating patients with moderate-to-severe grass polleninduced allergic rhinoconjunctivitis with Oralair® or Grazax®.