Allergic rhinitis is a symptomatic disorder of the nose induced after allergen exposure by an IgE-mediated inflammation of the membranes lining the nose. It is a global health problem that causes major illness and disability worldwide. Over 600 million patients from all countries, all ethnic groups and of all ages suffer from allergic rhinitis. It affects social life, sleep, school and work and its economic impact is substantial. Risk factors for allergic rhinitis are well identified. Indoor and outdoor allergens as well as occupational agents cause rhinitis and other allergic diseases. The role of indoor and outdoor pollution is probably very important, but has yet to be fully understood both for the occurrence of the disease and its manifestations.

In 1999, during the Allergic Rhinitis and its Impact on Asthma (ARIA) WHO workshop, the expert panel proposed a new classification for allergic rhinitis which was subdivided into 'intermittent' or 'persistent' disease.

This classification is now validated. The diagnosis of allergic rhinitis is often quite easy, but in some cases it may cause problems and many patients are still under-diagnosed, often because they do not perceive the symptoms of rhinitis as a disease impairing their social life, school and work.

The management of allergic rhinitis is well established and the ARIA expert panel based its recommendations on evidence using an extensive review of the literature available up to December 1999. The statements of evidence for the development of these guidelines followed WHO rules and were based on those of Shekelle et al. A large number of papers have been published since 2000 and are extensively reviewed in the 2008 Update using the same evidence-based system. Recommendations for the management of allergic rhinitis are similar in both the ARIA workshop report and the 2008 Update. In the future, the GRADE approach will be used, but is not yet available.

Another important aspect of the ARIA guidelines was to consider co-morbidities. Both allergic rhinitis and asthma are systemic inflammatory conditions and often co-exist in the same patients. In the 2008 Update, these links have been confirmed.

The ARIA document is not intended to be a standard-of-care document for individual countries. It is provided as a basis for physicians, health care professionals and organizations involved in the treatment of allergic rhinitis and asthma in various countries to facilitate the development of relevant local standard-of-care documents for patients.

/pdf/allergic-rhinitis-and-its-impact-on-asthma-aria-2008-update-13eqfzaw4u.pdf

Allergic rhinitis and its impact on asthma (ARIA) 2008 update (in collaboration with the World Health Organization, GA(2)LEN and AllerGen)

Expert Panel Report 3: Guidelines for the Diagnosis and Management of Asthma

Asthma is a serious health problem throughout the world During the past two decades, many scientific advances have improved our understanding of asthma and ability to manage and control it effectively However, recommendations for asthma care need to be adapted to local conditions, resources and services Since it was formed in 1993, the Global Initiative for Asthma, a network of individuals, organisations and public health officials, has played a leading role in disseminating information about the care of patients with asthma based on a process of continuous review of published scientific investigations A comprehensive workshop report entitled "A Global Strategy for Asthma Management and Prevention", first published in 1995, has been widely adopted, translated and reproduced, and forms the basis for many national guidelines The 2006 report contains important new themes First, it asserts that "it is reasonable to expect that in most patients with asthma, control of the disease can and should be achieved and maintained," and recommends a change in approach to asthma management, with asthma control, rather than asthma severity, being the focus of treatment decisions The importance of the patient-care giver partnership and guided self-management, along with setting goals for treatment, are also emphasised

https://erj.ersjournals.com/content/erj/31/1/143.full.pdf

Global strategy for asthma management and prevention: GINA executive summary.

Background: The assessment of asthma control is pivotal to the evaluation of treatment response in individuals and in clinical trials. Previously, asthma control, severity, and exacerbations were defined and assessed in many different ways.Purpose: The Task Force was established to provide recommendations about standardization of outcomes relating to asthma control, severity, and exacerbations in clinical trials and clinical practice, for adults and children aged 6 years or older.Methods: A narrative literature review was conducted to evaluate the measurement properties and strengths/weaknesses of outcome measures relevant to asthma control and exacerbations. The review focused on diary variables, physiologic measurements, composite scores, biomarkers, quality of life questionnaires, and indirect measures.Results: The Task Force developed new definitions for asthma control, severity, and exacerbations, based on current treatment principles and clinical and research relevance. In view of current knowledge ...

/pdf/an-official-american-thoracic-society-european-respiratory-18b801porh.pdf

An official American Thoracic Society/European Respiratory Society statement: asthma control and exacerbations: standardizing endpoints for clinical asthma trials and clinical practice.

These guidelines have been replaced by British Guideline on the Management of Asthma. A national clinical guideline. Superseded By 2012 Revision Of 2008 Guideline: British Guideline on the Management of Asthma. Thorax 2008 May; 63(Suppl 4): 1–121.

/pdf/british-guideline-on-the-management-of-asthma-a-national-3q1wreyszl.pdf

British guideline on the management of asthma: A national clinical guideline

Background Asthma guidelines indicate that the goal of treatment should be optimum asthma control In a busy clinic practice with limited time and resources, there is need for a simple method for assessing asthma control with or without lung function testing Objectives The objective of this article was to describe the development of the Asthma Control Test (ACT), a patient-based tool for identifying patients with poorly controlled asthma Methods A 22-item survey was administered to 471 patients with asthma in the offices of asthma specialists The specialist's rating of asthma control after spirometry was also collected Stepwise regression methods were used to select a subset of items that showed the greatest discriminant validity in relation to the specialist's rating of asthma control Internal consistency reliability was computed, and discriminant validity tests were conducted for ACT scale scores The performance of ACT was investigated by using logistic regression methods and receiver operating characteristic analyses Results Five items were selected from regression analyses The internal consistency reliability of the 5-item ACT scale was 084 ACT scale scores discriminated between groups of patients differing in the specialist's rating of asthma control (F = 345, P P 1 (F = 43, P = 0052) As a screening tool, the overall agreement between ACT and the specialist's rating ranged from 71% to 78% depending on the cut points used, and the area under the receiver operating characteristic curve was 077 Conclusion Results reinforce the usefulness of a brief, easy to administer, patient-based index of asthma control

Development of the asthma control test: A survey for assessing asthma control

Background The development of the Asthma Control Test (ACT), a short, simple, patient-based tool for identifying patients with poorly controlled asthma, was recently described in patients under the routine care of an asthma specialist. Objectives We sought to evaluate the reliability and validity of the ACT in a longitudinal study of asthmatic patients new to the care of an asthma specialist. Methods Patients (n = 313) completed the ACT and the Asthma Control Questionnaire (ACQ) at 2 physician visits (4-12 weeks apart). Pulmonary function was measured, and asthma specialists rated asthma control. Results Internal consistency reliability of the ACT was 0.85 (baseline) and 0.79 (follow-up). Test-retest reliability was 0.77. Criterion validity was demonstrated by significant correlations between baseline ACT scores and baseline specialists' ratings of asthma control ( r = 0.52, P r = −0.89, P P r = 0.44, P r = −0.69, P 1 values ( r = 0.29, P Conclusions The ACT is reliable, valid, and responsive to changes in asthma control over time in patients new to the care of asthma specialists. A cutoff score of 19 or less identifies patients with poorly controlled asthma. Clinical implications In a clinical setting the ACT should be a useful tool to help physicians identify patients with uncontrolled asthma and facilitate their ability to follow patients' progress with treatment.

Asthma Control Test: Reliability, validity, and responsiveness in patients not previously followed by asthma specialists

The comprehensive survey of healthcare professionals and asthma patients offering insight on current treatment gaps and emerging device options (c.h.o.i.c.e.): suboptimal inhaler technique

Philip Marcus

Papers

Development of the asthma control test: A survey for assessing asthma control

Asthma Control Test: Reliability, validity, and responsiveness in patients not previously followed by asthma specialists

The comprehensive survey of healthcare professionals and asthma patients offering insight on current treatment gaps and emerging device options (c.h.o.i.c.e.): suboptimal inhaler technique