4.7 Article

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

期刊

JOURNAL OF ALLERGY AND CLINICAL IMMUNOLOGY
卷 140, 期 4, 页码 950-958

出版社

MOSBY-ELSEVIER
DOI: 10.1016/j.jaci.2017.03.050

关键词

Allergic rhinitis; practice guideline

资金

  1. ARIA Initiative
  2. Almirall
  3. Meda
  4. Merck
  5. MSD
  6. Novartis
  7. Sanofi-Aventis
  8. Takeda
  9. Teva
  10. Uriach
  11. Chiesi
  12. GlaxoSmithKline
  13. Menarini
  14. AstraZeneca
  15. Boehringer Ingelheim
  16. Eurofarma
  17. MEDA Pharma
  18. Hypermarcas-Ache
  19. ALK-Abello
  20. Stallergenes Greer
  21. Thermo Fisher Scientific
  22. Ysslab
  23. MacGRADE Centre
  24. MEDA/Mylan
  25. MAPI S.A.S.-RWE
  26. Allakos
  27. Sanofi
  28. A. Menarini
  29. FAES Farma (Lab. Vitoria)
  30. Allergopharma
  31. Bionorica
  32. Lofarma
  33. Biomay
  34. HAL
  35. LETI
  36. Roxall
  37. Bencard
  38. Adamed
  39. Bayer
  40. Berlin Chemie
  41. Faes
  42. HAL Allergy
  43. Lekam
  44. Polharma
  45. Pfizer
  46. Sandoz
  47. UCB
  48. Grunenthal
  49. Siegfried
  50. Armstrong
  51. Greer
  52. Mylan
  53. Kyorin
  54. Astellas
  55. Shire
  56. Stallergenes
  57. NESTEC
  58. AbbVie
  59. Omega Pharma
  60. Danone
  61. Japanese Ministry of Education
  62. Aerocrine
  63. AKL Research and Development
  64. British Lung Foundation
  65. Mundipharma
  66. Napp
  67. Respiratory Effectiveness Group
  68. Teva Pharmaceuticals
  69. Theravance
  70. UK National Health Service
  71. Zentiva
  72. Cipla
  73. Skyepharma
  74. National Science Center
  75. Ministry of Health
  76. Polfarma
  77. European Academy of Allergy and Clinical Immunology
  78. Pfizer Canada
  79. CSL Behring
  80. Pediapharm
  81. Aralez
  82. Bayer Health Care
  83. Henkel
  84. Kryolan
  85. L'Oreal
  86. Asthma UK [MRC-Asthma UK Centre, AUK-AC-2012-01, MRC-AsthmaUKCentre] Funding Source: researchfish
  87. Medical Research Council [G1000758, G1000758B] Funding Source: researchfish

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Background: 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. Objective: We sought to provide a targeted update of the ARIA guidelines. Methods: 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. Results: 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 H-1-antihistamines, intranasal H-1-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. Conclusions: 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.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.7
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据