Displaying all 6 publications

Abstract:
Sort:
  1. Abdullah B, Snidvongs K, Recto M, Poerbonegoro NL, Wang Y
    Multidiscip Respir Med, 2020 Jan 28;15(1):726.
    PMID: 33376593 DOI: 10.4081/mrm.2020.726
    Background: In primary care, general practitioners (GPs) and pharmacists are tasked with the frontline responsibility of identifying and managing allergic rhinitis (AR) patients. There are currently no consolidated data on current treatment practices, patient compliance, and usage of guidelines within Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN). Objective: To assess the attitudes and practices on AR of GPs and pharmacists in 4 ASEAN countries (Philippines, Indonesia, Thailand, and Malaysia).

    Methods: A cross-sectional survey of 329 GPs and 548 pharmacists was conducted from May to November 2019. Participants answered a questionnaire focused on their i) current practice in the management of AR, ii) views on patient compliance, iii) understanding and usage of guidelines.

    Results: Clinical history was the most preferred method to diagnose AR by 95.4% of GPs and 58.8% of pharmacists. Second-generation antihistamines were the most widely available treatment option in GP clinics and pharmacies (94.8% and 97.2%) and correspondingly the most preferred treatment for both mild (90.3%, 76.8%) to moderatesevere rhinitis (90.3%, 78.6%) by GPs and pharmacists, respectively. Loratadine was ranked as the most preferred 2nd generation antihistamines (GP vs pharmacists: 55.3% vs 58.9%). More than 90% of GPs and pharmacists ranked length and efficacy of treatment as important factors that increase patient compliance. Awareness of the ARIA guidelines was high among GPs (80%) and lower among pharmacists (48.4%). However, only 63.3% of GPs and 48.2% of pharmacists knew how to identify AR patients.

    Conclusions: The survey in the 4 ASEAN countries has identified a need to strengthen the awareness and use of ARIA guidelines among the primary care practitioners. Adherence to ARIA guidelines, choosing the appropriate treatment option and prioritizing factors that increases patient compliance may contribute to better management outcomes of AR at the primary care practice.

  2. Pawankar R, Thong BY, Tiongco-Recto M, Wang JY, Abdul Latiff AH, Thien F, et al.
    Allergy, 2021 09;76(9):2998-2901.
    PMID: 33948966 DOI: 10.1111/all.14894
  3. Shao S, Zheng M, Wang X, Latiff AH, Kim DY, Wang JY, et al.
    PMID: 35598189 DOI: 10.12932/AP-130122-1302
    BACKGROUND: The diagnosis and management of patients with chronic rhinosinusitis (CRS) may vary between otolaryngologists and allergists. Moreover, the adherence of different practitioners to European Position Paper on Rhinosinusitis and Nasal Polyps (EPOS) 2020 guideline recommendations has not been previously ascertained in Asia-Pacific regions.

    OBJECTIVE: Different specialists' perceptions and managements of CRS in Asia-Pacific regions were assessed in an attempt to gauge these practices against EPOS 2020 guidelines.

    METHODS: A transregional, cross-sectional survey was conducted to assess otolaryngologists' and allergists' perceptions and managements of CRS with regard to diagnosis, management and adherence to EPOS 2020 guidelines.

    RESULTS: Sixteen physicians in Asia-Pacific regions responded to the questionnaire. A total of 71.4% of otolaryngologists preferred to diagnose CRS with a combination of positive nasal symptoms and nasal endoscopy plus sinus CT, whereas 22.2% of allergists took such criterion to diagnose CRS. Compared to allergists, otolaryngologists more often considered the endotype classification (85.8% versus 55.5%). For the preferred first-line treatment, in addition to intranasal corticosteroids recommended by all respondents, 66.7% of allergists preferred antihistamines, whereas 71.4% of otolaryngologists preferred nasal saline irrigation. Regarding the proper timing of surgery, 71.5% of otolaryngologists reported 8-12 weeks of treatment after the initiation of medication, while more than half of the allergists recommended 4-6 weeks of medical treatment.

    CONCLUSIONS: This survey shows that variable perceptions and practices for CRS may exist between physicians with different specialties and highlights the need for increased communication and awareness between otolaryngologists and allergists to improve the diagnosis and treatment of CRS.

  4. Zheng M, Wang X, Latiff AHA, Shah A, Pham DL, Kim DY, et al.
    PMID: 36278781 DOI: 10.12932/AP-310322-1361
    BACKGROUND: Physicians' knowledge and practice which are consistent with evidence-based guidelines can improve allergic rhinitis (AR) patients' care. Compared with western countries, the available literature about Asian doctors' perceptions and clinical practices regarding Allergic Rhinitis and its Impacts on Asthma (ARIA) guidelines is limited.

    OBJECTIVE: To collect detailed information about the practical management patterns specific for AR patients and investigate compliance with ARIA in the clinical practice of Asian physicians and elucidate the possible inadequacy in the existing ARIA guidelines.

    METHODS: An e-mail with a structured questionnaire was sent to members of the Asia-Pacific Association of Allergy, Asthma and Clinical Immunology. The questionnaire consisted of doctors' characteristics, environment of medical practice, routine clinical practice following ARIA guidelines and patients' adherence to the prescription.

    RESULTS: Physicians from 14 countries and regions sent valid questionnaires back, 94.12% of whom were senior doctors with more than 10 years of experience. 88.24% of doctors diagnosed AR depending on the history combined with allergy tests. 82.35% of participants employed the classification criteria by ARIA. 94.12%, 88.24% and 41.8% of respondents recommended intranasal corticosteroids, oral antihistamines and leukotriene receptor antagonists as first-line medications. 5.88% treated perennial AR by intranasal corticosteroids alone. 11.76% of clinicians recommended no allergen immunotherapy (AIT) or biologics and 58.82% of interviewees reported AR patients occasionally or sometimes agreed with the recommendation of AIT.

    CONCLUSIONS: There was high compliance with ARIA guidelines in Asian senior physicians' actual notion and practice in the management of AR. New-generation ARIA guidelines are imperative for unmet needs.

  5. Leung ASY, Pawankar R, Pacharn P, Wong LSY, Le Pham D, Chan G, et al.
    J Allergy Clin Immunol Glob, 2024 May;3(2):100202.
    PMID: 38283085 DOI: 10.1016/j.jacig.2023.100202
    BACKGROUND: Food allergy (FA), which is a condition that has no effective cure and can result in severe life-threatening allergic reactions, remains a global public health concern; however, little is known about how FAs are currently managed in the Asia-Pacific region.

    OBJECTIVE: The main objective of this survey was to evaluate the epidemiology of FA, as well as the availability of resources and practices for management of FA and anaphylaxis by health care providers across Asia.

    METHODS: From June 2022 to September 2022, a questionnaire-based survey comprising 66 questions was electronically sent to member societies of the Asia Pacific Association of Allergy Asthma and Clinical Immunology by using Survey Monkey.

    RESULTS: A total of 20 responses were received from 15 member countries and territories. Compared with the pediatric data, there was a lack of prevalence data for FA in adults. Except for Australia and Japan, most regions had between 0.1 and 0.5 allergists per 100,000 population and some had fewer than 0.1 allergists per 100,000 population. The perceived rate of FA in regions with a short supply of allergists was high. Although specific IgE tests and oral food challenges were available in all regions, the median wait time for oral food challenges at government facilities was 37 days (interquartile range = 10.5-60 days). Seven regions still relied on prescriptions of ampules and syringes of injectable adrenaline, and adrenaline autoinjectors were not accessible in 4 regions. Oral immunotherapy as FA treatment was available in half of the surveyed countries and territories.

    CONCLUSIONS: Our study offers a cross-sectional evaluation of the management practices for FA in each Asia Pacific Association of Allergy Asthma and Clinical Immunology member country or territory. Urgent actions are required to enhance allergy services, improve the accessibility and affordability of adrenaline autoinjectors, and conduct robust epidemiologic studies.

  6. Bousquet J, Melén E, Haahtela T, Koppelman GH, Togias A, Valenta R, et al.
    Allergy, 2023 Feb 17.
    PMID: 36799120 DOI: 10.1111/all.15679
    Asthma, rhinitis, and atopic dermatitis (AD) are interrelated clinical phenotypes that partly overlap in the human interactome. The concept of "one-airway-one-disease," coined over 20 years ago, is a simplistic approach of the links between upper- and lower-airway allergic diseases. With new data, it is time to reassess the concept. This article reviews (i) the clinical observations that led to Allergic Rhinitis and its Impact on Asthma (ARIA), (ii) new insights into polysensitization and multimorbidity, (iii) advances in mHealth for novel phenotype definitions, (iv) confirmation in canonical epidemiologic studies, (v) genomic findings, (vi) treatment approaches, and (vii) novel concepts on the onset of rhinitis and multimorbidity. One recent concept, bringing together upper- and lower-airway allergic diseases with skin, gut, and neuropsychiatric multimorbidities, is the "Epithelial Barrier Hypothesis." This review determined that the "one-airway-one-disease" concept does not always hold true and that several phenotypes of disease can be defined. These phenotypes include an extreme "allergic" (asthma) phenotype combining asthma, rhinitis, and conjunctivitis. Rhinitis alone and rhinitis and asthma multimorbidity represent two distinct diseases with the following differences: (i) genomic and transcriptomic background (Toll-Like Receptors and IL-17 for rhinitis alone as a local disease; IL-33 and IL-5 for allergic and non-allergic multimorbidity as a systemic disease), (ii) allergen sensitization patterns (mono- or pauci-sensitization versus polysensitization), (iii) severity of symptoms, and (iv) treatment response. In conclusion, rhinitis alone (local disease) and rhinitis with asthma multimorbidity (systemic disease) should be considered as two distinct diseases, possibly modulated by the microbiome, and may be a model for understanding the epidemics of chronic and autoimmune diseases.
Related Terms
Filters
Contact Us

Please provide feedback to Administrator (afdal@afpm.org.my)

External Links