Pilot study of mobile phone technology in allergic rhinitis in European countries: the MASK-rhinitis study

BACKGROUND

The use of Apps running on smartphones and tablets profoundly affects medicine. The MASK-rhinitis (MACVIA-ARIA Sentinel NetworK for allergic rhinitis) App (Allergy Diary) assesses allergic rhinitis symptoms, disease control and impact on patients' lives. It is freely available in 20 countries (iOS and Android platforms).

AIMS

To assess in a pilot study whether (i) Allergy Diary users were able to properly provide baseline characteristics (ii) simple phenotypic characteristics based upon data captured by the Allergy Diary could be identified and (iii) information gathered by this study could suggest novel research questions.

METHODS

The Allergy Diary users were classified into six groups according to the baseline data that they entered into the App: (i) asymptomatic; (ii) nasal symptoms excluding rhinorrhea; (iii) rhinorrhea; (iv) rhinorrhea plus 1-2 nasal/ocular symptoms; (v) rhinorrhea plus ≥3 nasal/ocular symptoms; and (vi) rhinorrhea plus all nasal/ocular symptoms.

RESULTS

By 1 June 2016, 3260 users had registered with the Allergy Diary and 2710 had completed the baseline questionnaire. Troublesome symptoms were found mainly in the users with the most symptoms. Around 50% of users with troublesome rhinitis and/or ocular symptoms suffered work impairment. Sleep was impaired by troublesome symptoms and nasal obstruction.

CONCLUSIONS

This is the first App (iOS and Android) to have tested for allergic rhinitis and conjunctivitis. A simple questionnaire administered by cell phones enables the identification of phenotypic differences between a priori defined rhinitis groups. The results suggest novel concepts and research questions in allergic rhinitis that may not be identified using classical methods.

Eye movements of stuttering and nonstuttering children during silent reading

During the silent reading of a 320-word passage, the eye movements of 22 grade school stutterers and 22 nonstutterers were recorded by means of a computer-controlled eye-marker. The recordings were made as a means of determining if the eye movements of the two groups differed and if the differences suggested that the young stutterers showed evidence of word-specific expectancy. Frame-by-frame analysis of the recordings revealed that the stuttering children displayed significantly more eye fixations and eye regressions than the nonstuttering children. The correlations among the different types of eye measures also varied between the subject groups. The differences observed were present despite the fact that the reading level of the two groups was age appropriate and the subjects sampled did not differ significantly in either reading errors or comprehension. These findings are like those previously found when stuttering and nonstuttering adults were similarly tested. They imply that expectancy is not the response province of older stutterers.