Global expert views on the diagnosis, classification and pharmacotherapy of allergic rhinitis in clinical practice using a modified Delphi panel technique

Background

Diagnosis, classification, and treatment of allergic rhinitis (AR) varies considerably despite the availability of treatment guidelines.

Objectives

We aimed to carry out a two-part modified Delphi panel study to elucidate global expert management of AR in real life.

Methods

The modified Delphi panel study was composed of two ten-minute online questionnaires sent to global AR experts, aiming to identify areas of consensus (defined as >75% respondent agreement) on aspects of their real-world daily practice related to AR diagnosis, classification, and pharmacotherapy. A workshop discussion with respondents held after the first-round questionnaire informed the development of the second-round questionnaire.

Results

Eighteen experts (from 7 countries across 3 continents) completed both questionnaires in September-October 2021 and January 2022, respectively. The majority of respondents agreed that diagnosis of AR is best confirmed using a mixture of observation and testing (n = 15) and collaborating with colleagues across other specialties (n = 14). Experts agreed that severity (n = 18), upper/lower respiratory tract involvement (n = 15) and symptom frequency (n = 14) are important factors when classifying AR, however consensus was not reached on which classification tool should be used. Although there were mixed opinions on the preferred pharmacotherapy treatment in the presented case studies, respondents largely agreed on which treatments require less monitoring (intranasal corticosteroid therapies [INCS]) and when treatments should be stepped down (≤3 months). Although opinions varied across respondents, some respondents considered as-needed INCS treatment and surgery to be viable treatment options.

Conclusion

We identified clear differences between real-world practice and treatment guidelines related to the management of AR. Furthermore, we recognized differences among physicians concerning their clinical practice in the pharmacological treatment of AR. These findings highlight the need for greater research into the management of AR and further indicate there is still a major gap between treatment guidelines and daily practice, even among specialists, suggesting a need for local guideline adaptation and implementation plans.

[The counseling of nursing decreases symptomatology and relapses in pediatric patients with allergic rhinitis]

BACKGROUND

Allergic rhinitis (AR) is considered to be a public health problem, therefore it is essential to test health education strategies such as nursing counseling (NC) aimed at population groups such as children with allergic rhinitis and their tutors. This study aimed to measure the health benefits of children with this disease for a year.

METHODS

Longitudinal, randomized, comparative study with a sample of 100 pediatric patients of both sexes, aged 6 to 12 years, with diagnosis of allergic rhinitis, with counseling (study group) and without counseling (control group). In both groups, an informed consent letter signed by both tutors was obtained, in addition to knowledge and assessment papers; the latter included a scale of symptomatology and Morisky Green (adherence to treatment). The children in the study group received intervention based on personalized education, didactic material, support of the multidisciplinary group if necessary (doctor, dermatologist and psychologist). The control group received usual care. In both groups, telephone follow-up was performed, which allowed the number of relapses to be identified in one year.

RESULTS

The Wilcoxon rank-sum test (Mann-Whitney) was used to compare the results; the presence of relapses in the control group was statistically significant compared to the study group.

CONCLUSIONS

It was found that the infant population that receives NC, has as a better benefit the control of the symptomatology and decrease of relapses per year.