Search

Mariana Romão,1 Carolina Bulhosa,1 Zilda Mendes,1 Catarina Sousa,2 Graça Silva,2 Mariana Pereira,3 Filipa Bernardo,2 António Teixeira Rodrigues,1,4 João A Fonseca,3,5,6 Jaime Correia de Sousa4 1Centre for Health Evaluation & Research/Infosaude (CEFAR/IS), National Association of Pharmacies (ANF), Lisbon, Portugal; 2Medical Department, AstraZeneca, Barcarena, Portugal; 3MEDIDA – Medicina, Educação, Investigação, Desenvolvimento e Avaliação, Porto, Portugal; 4Life and Health Sciences Research Institute (ICVS), PT Government Associate Laboratory, School of Medicine, University of Minho, Braga, Portugal; 5Center for Health Technology and Services Research (CINTESIS), Faculty of Medicine, University of Porto, Porto, Portugal; 6CUF Allergy Unit, Porto Hospital and Institute, Porto, PortugalCorrespondence: Mariana Romão, Centre for Health Evaluation & Research/Infosaude (CEFAR/IS), National Association of Pharmacies (ANF), Rua Marechal Saldanha 1, Lisboa, 1249-069, Portugal, Email mariana.romao@anf.ptPurpose: Oral corticosteroids (OCS) are frequently used in asthma management but have an important risk-profile. The aim of the study is to characterize and compare the sociodemographic and clinical characteristics, treatment regimen and asthma control between OCS users and non-users among the population of asthma patients (≥ 18 years) at GINA step 3 and above treated with a fixed combination of an inhaled corticosteroid and a long-acting beta-agonist (ICS/LABA).Methods: Cross-sectional study in Portuguese community pharmacies. Data was collected via paper-based interview delivered at the pharmacy (sociodemographic characteristics and asthma treatment regimen, namely ICS/LABA and OCS utilization), followed by a telephonic interview collecting smoking history, comorbidities, body mass index (BMI), history of exacerbations and asthma-related healthcare resource utilization (HCRU) in the previous 12 months, as well as asthma control using the Control of Allergic Rhinitis and Asthma Test (CARAT®).Results: A total of 347 patients recruited in 98 pharmacies were included in the analysis. Of those, 328 had completed both questionnaires. A quarter of the individuals reported OCS use in the previous 12 months (OCS users), either as add-on therapy (6%) or exacerbation treatment (19%). Patients were mostly females (72%), with an average age of 59.5 years (SD=15.4). OCS users were significantly older and reported more frequently having conjunctivitis (25.9% vs 15.0%), osteoporosis (25.9% vs 13.4%), arthritis (14.6% vs 6.9%), and gastrointestinal disease (16.1% vs 8.1%). OCS users also reported greater urgent HCRU: unscheduled consultations (33.3% vs 9.3%) and emergency department (ED) visits (32.1% vs 12.1%). Both groups presented poor disease control (85.2% of OCS users vs 72.9% of non-OCS users).Conclusion: These results highlight the burden of OCS therapy to asthma patients and the need to improve asthma management, by adopting OCS sparing strategies in this subgroup of patients.Keywords: asthma, ICS/LABA, oral corticosteroids, asthma control, CARAT, COVID-19

Catarina João1 *, Cristina Jácome1,2 *, Dinis Brito,3 Pedro Teixeira,3,4 Janete Quelhas-Santos,1 Liliana Amorim,4 Maria João Barbosa,3,5 Cláudia Bulhões,3,6 Filipa Lopes,7 Marisa Pardal,8 Filipa Bernardo,9 João Almeida Fonseca,1,2,7,9 Jaime Correia de Sousa3 1Center for Health Technology and Services Research (CINTESIS), Faculty of Medicine, University of Porto, Porto, Portugal; 2Department of Community Medicine, Information and Health Decision Sciences (MEDCIDS), Faculty of Medicine, University of Porto, Porto, Portugal; 3Life and Health Sciences Research Institute (ICVS), School of Medicine, University of Minho, ICVS/3Bs, PT Government Associate Laboratory, Braga, PortugaI; 4Association P5 Digital Medical Center (ACMP5), Braga, Portugal; 5Gualtar Family Health Unit, Braga, Portugal; 6Vila Verde (VIDA+) Family Health Unit, Braga, Portugal; 7MEDIDA Lda, Porto, Portugal; 8AstraZeneca, Lisboa, Portugal; 9Allergy Unit, Hospital and Institute CUF, Porto, Portugal*These authors contributed equally to this workCorrespondence: Cristina Jácome, Center for Health Technology and Services Research, Faculty of Medicine, University of Porto, Rua Dr. Plácido da Costa, Porto, 4200-450, Portugal, Email cjacome@med.up.ptObjective: To assess the feasibility of the procedures of EPI-ASTHMA. EPI-ASTHMA is a population-based multicentre stepwise study about the prevalence and characterisation of patients with asthma based on disease severity in Portugal.Methods: A pilot study of EPI-ASTHMA was conducted with adults from three primary care centres. We followed a stepwise approach comprising 4 stages: stage 0—invitation phone call (n ~1316); stage 1—telephone interview (n ~658); stage 2—clinical assessment with physical examination, diagnostic tests, and patient-reported outcome measures, to confirm the diagnosis of those with possible asthma at stage 1 (n ~160); stage 3—characterization of a subgroup of asthma patients by collecting data through a telephone interview, patient file review and CARATm app (n ~40), after 3-months. The frequency of asthma was calculated in relation to the entire study population (stage 1) and the frequency of difficult-to-treat/severe asthma in relation to the number of asthma patients (stage 3).Results: From 1305 adults invited, 892 (68%) accepted to participate (stage 0) and 574 (64%; 53[42– 67] y; 43% male) were interviewed (stage 1). From those, 148 (26%; 60[46– 68] y; 43% male) were assessed at stage 2, and 46 (31%; 51[39– 67] y; 44% male) were diagnosed with asthma. Half of these patients (n = 23) accepted to install the app. Stage 3 was completed by 41 (93%) patients, of whom 31 (83%) had asthma confirmed by their file review. A total of 8% of participants had asthma, of those 17% had difficult-to-treat and 5% severe asthma.Conclusion: Attained recruitment rates and the quality of the results confirmed the feasibility of the EPI-ASTHMA stepwise approach. This pilot study provided insight into the improvement of the procedures to be generalized across the country.Keywords: asthma, prevalence, epidemiology, severe asthma, difficult-to-treat asthma

Hospitalization; Influenza; Prevention Hospitalització; Grip; Prevenció Hospitalización; Gripe; Prevención Having a proper understanding of the impact of influenza is a fundamental step towards improved preventive action. This paper reviews findings from the Burden of Acute Respiratory Infections study on the burden of influenza in Iberia, and its potential underestimation, and proposes specific measures to lessen influenza’s impact. The BARI study was funded by Sanofi.

Despite being a leading cause of death worldwide, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) is underdiagnosed and underprioritized within healthcare systems. Existing healthcare policies should be revisited to include COPD prevention and management as a global priority. Here, we propose and describe health system quality standard position statements that should be implemented as a consistent standard of care for patients with COPD.A multidisciplinary group of clinicians with expertise in COPD management together with patient advocates from eight countries participated in a quality standards review meeting convened in April 2021. The principal objective was to achieve consensus on global health system priorities to ensure consistent standards of care for COPD. These quality standard position statements were either evidence-based or reflected the combined views of the panel.On the basis of discussions, the experts adopted five quality standard position statements, including the rationale for their inclusion, supporting clinical evidence, and essential criteria for quality metrics. These quality standard position statements emphasize the core elements of COPD care, including (1) diagnosis, (2) adequate patient and caregiver education, (3) access to medical and nonmedical treatments aligned with the latest evidence-based recommendations and appropriate management by a respiratory specialist when required, (4) appropriate management of acute COPD exacerbations, and (5) regular patient and caregiver follow-up for care plan reviews.These practical quality standards may be applicable to and implemented at both local and national levels. While universally applicable to the core elements of appropriate COPD care, they can be adapted to consider differences in healthcare resources and priorities, organizational structure, and care delivery capabilities of individual healthcare systems. We encourage the adoption of these global quality standards by policymakers and healthcare practitioners alike to inform national and regional health system policy revisions to improve the quality and consistency of COPD care worldwide.

Despite the implementation of effective paediatric vaccination programmes, pertussis remains a global health problem. Disease epidemiology has changed over time, shifting towards the adolescent and adult populations. In adults, the true burden of pertussis is greatly underestimated and pertussis vaccine coverage rates are suboptimal, including individuals with chronic conditions. Here, we report the outcomes of a virtual international scientific workshop to assess the evidence on the burden of pertussis in older adults and identify potential solutions to improve uptake of pertussis vaccines. In adults, pertussis is underdiagnosed in part due to atypical or milder clinical presentation and the lack of testing and case confirmation. However, contemporary epidemiological data denoted an increase in the burden of pertussis among adolescents and adults. This might be related to a variety of reasons including the waning of immunity over time, the lack of booster vaccination, and the improved diagnostic methods that led to increased recognition of the disease in adults. Pertussis sequelae can be severe in older adults, particularly those with existing chronic medical conditions, and the vulnerability of these groups is further enhanced by low pertussis vaccine coverage. Possible measures to increase vaccine uptake include strengthening and harmonisation of immunisation guidelines, healthcare professionals taking a more active role in recommending pertussis vaccination, involvement of vaccination centres and pharmacies in the vaccination process, and improving knowledge of pertussis burden and vaccine efficacy among the general population.

The COVID-19 pandemic mandated a substantial switch in primary health care delivery from an in-person to a mainly remote telephone or video service. As the COVID-19 pandemic approaches its third year, limited progress appears to have been made in terms of policy development around consultation methods for the post-acute phase of the pandemic. In September 2020, the International Primary Care Respiratory Group convened a global panel of primary care clinicians – including family physicians, paediatricians, pharmacists, academics and patients – to consider the policy and health management implications of the move to remote consultations in the primary care setting. The group gave special consideration to how and how far remote consultations should be integrated into routine primary health care delivery. Remote consultations can be a useful alternative to in-person consultations in primary care not only in situations where there is a need for viral infection control but also for the routine delivery of chronic disease management. However, they may not be more time efficient for the clinician, and they can add to the workload and work-related stress for primary care practitioners if they remain the dominant consultation mode. Remote consultations are also less appropriate than in-person consultations for new disease diagnosis, dealing with multiple issues and providing complex care. Ensuring health care professionals have the appropriate skill set to effectively deliver remote consultations, administrative and/or IT support and appropriate reimbursement will be key to achieving optimal integration of remote consultations into routine clinical practice. Addressing digital access and digital literacy issues at a societal level will also be essential to ensure individuals have fair and equitable access to the internet and sufficient security for exchange of personal and health-related data.

Over 1400 patients using dry powder inhalers (DPIs) to deliver COPD maintenance therapies were recruited across Europe and Australia. Their peak inspiratory flow (PIF) was measured, inhaler technique was observed, and adherence to treatment assessed. From relating the findings with patient health status, and thereby identifying critical errors, key clinical recommendations for primary care clinicians were determined, namely – measure PIF before prescribing a DPI to ensure inhalation manoeuvre ability is well-matched with the device. Some patients could benefit from inhalation training whereas others should have their DPI changed for one better suited to their inspiratory ability or alternatively be prescribed an active device (such as a soft mist inhaler or pressurized metered dose inhaler). Observing the inhalation technique was valuable however this misses suboptimal PIF (approaching one fourth of patients with a satisfactory observed manoeuvre had a suboptimal PIF for their DPI). Assess adherence as deliberate non-adherence can point to a mismatch between a patient and their inhaler (deliberate non-adherence was significantly associated with PIFs below the minimum for the DPI). In-person observation of inhalation technique was found to be inferior to video rating based on device-specific checklists. Where video assessments are not possible, observation training for healthcare professionals would therefore be valuable particularly to improve the ability to identify the critical errors associated with health status namely ‘teeth and lips sealed around mouthpiece’, ‘breathe in’ and ‘breathing out calmly after inhalation’. However, it is recommended that observation alone should not replace PIF measurement in the DPI selection process.Trial registration:https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT04532853.

Marika T Leving,1 Job FM van Boven,2– 4 Sinthia Z Bosnic-Anticevich,5,6 Joyce van Cooten,1 Jaime Correia de Sousa,7 Biljana Cvetkovski,5 Richard Dekhuijzen,8 Lars Dijk,1 Marina García Pardo,9 Asparuh Gardev,10 Rados&lstrok;aw Gawlik,11 Iris van der Ham,1 Elisabeth Sophia Hartgers-Gubbels,10 Ymke Janse,1 Federico Lavorini,12 Tiago Maricoto,13 Jiska Meijer,1 Boyd Metz,1 David B Price,14,15 Miguel Roman-Rodríguez,9 Kirsten Schuttel,1 Nilouq Stoker,1 Ioanna Tsiligianni,16 Omar S Usmani,17 Janwillem H Kocks1,2,15,18 1General Practitioners Research Institute, Groningen, the Netherlands; 2University Medical Centre Groningen, Groningen Research Institute for Asthma and COPD (GRIAC), University of Groningen, Groningen, the Netherlands; 3University Medical Centre Groningen, Department of Clinical Pharmacy & Pharmacology, University of Groningen, Groningen, the Netherlands; 4Medication Adherence Expertise Centre of the Northern Netherlands (MAECON), Groningen, the Netherlands; 5Woolcock Institute of Medical Research, University of Sydney, Sydney, Australia; 6Sydney Local Health District, Sydney, Australia; 7Life and Health Sciences Research Institute (ICVS), PT Government Associate Laboratory, School of Medicine, University of Minho, Braga, Portugal; 8Radboud University Medical Centre, Nijmegen, Netherlands; 9Primary Care Respiratory Research Unit, Instituto De Investigación Sanitaria De Baleares (IdISBa), Palma de Mallorca, Spain; 10Boehringer Ingelheim International GmbH, Ingelheim am Rhein, Germany; 11Department of Internal Medicine, Allergology, Clinical Immunology, Medical University of Silesia, Katowice, Poland; 12Department of Experimental and Clinical Medicine, Careggi University Hospital, Florence, Italy; 13Faculty of Health Sciences, University of Beira Interior, Covilha, Portugal; 14Centre of Academic Primary Care, Division of Applied Health Sciences, University of Aberdeen, Aberdeen, UK; 15Observational and Pragmatic Research Institute, Singapore; 16Department of Social Medicine, Health Planning Unit, Faculty of Medicine, University of Crete, Rethymno, Greece; 17Airway Disease, National Heart and Lung Institute (NHLI), Imperial College London and Royal Brompton Hospital, London, UK; 18Department of Pulmonology, University of Groningen, University Medical Centre Groningen, Groningen, the NetherlandsCorrespondence: Janwillem H Kocks, General Practitioners Research Institute, Professor Enno Dirk Wiersmastraat 5, Groningen, 9713 GH, the Netherlands, Tel +31 50 211 3898, Email janwillem@gpri.nlPurpose: To assess the relationship between suboptimal Peak Inspiratory Flow (sPIF), inhalation technique errors, and non-adherence, with Healthcare Resource Utilisation (HCRU) in Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease (COPD) patients receiving maintenance therapy via a Dry Powder Inhaler (DPI).Patients and methods: The cross-sectional, multi-country PIFotal study included 1434 COPD patients (≥ 40 years) using a DPI for maintenance therapy. PIF was measured with the In-Check DIAL G16, and sPIF was defined as a typical PIF lower than required for the device. Inhalation technique was assessed by standardised evaluation of video recordings and grouped into 10 steps. Patients completed the “Test of Adherence to Inhalers” questionnaire. HCRU was operationalised as COPD-related costs for primary healthcare, secondary healthcare, medication, and total COPD-related costs in a 1-year period.Results: Participants with sPIF had higher medication costs compared with those with optimal PIF (cost ratio [CR]: 1.07, 95% CI [1.01, 1.14]). Multiple inhalation technique errors were associated with increased HCRU. Specifically, “insufficient inspiratory effort” with higher secondary healthcare costs (CR: 2.20, 95% CI [1.37, 3.54]) and higher total COPD-related costs (CR: 1.16, 95% CI 1.03– 1.31). “no breath-hold following the inhalation manoeuvre (< 6 s)” with higher medication costs (CR: 1.08, 95% CI [1.02, 1.15]) and total COPD-related costs (CR 1.17, 95% CI [1.07, 1.28]), and “not breathing out calmly after inhalation” with higher medication costs (CR: 1.19, 95% CI [1.04, 1.37]). Non-adherence was not significantly associated with HCRU.Conclusion: sPIF and inhalation technique errors were associated with higher COPD-related healthcare utilisation and costs in COPD patients on DPI maintenance therapy.Keywords: chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, Dry Powder Inhaler, health economics, cost analysis, healthcare resource utilisation

Randomized controlled trials together with systematic reviews and meta-analyses have been the cornerstone of clinical research. Some studies, because of the size of the sample, the use of randomization and well-defined measurements, the participation of multiple institutions, or long-term follow-up, are able to give a significant level of evidence. We chronologically describe and comment on a group of trials on chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) that have significantly influenced the scientific and medical community in understanding and managing the disease in the first years of the XXI century. They contributed to the different versions of the GOLD strategy.

The study aimed to determine the associations of Peak Inspiratory Flow (PIF), inhalation technique and adherence with health status and exacerbations in participants with COPD using DPI maintenance therapy. This cross-sectional multi-country observational real-world study included COPD participants aged ≥40 years using a DPI for maintenance therapy. PIF was measured three times with the In-Check DIAL G16: (1) typical PIF at resistance of participant’s inhaler, (2) maximal PIF at resistance of participant’s inhaler, (3) maximal PIF at low resistance. Suboptimal PIF (sPIF) was defined as PIF lower than required for the device. Participants completed questionnaires on health status (Clinical COPD Questionnaire (CCQ)), adherence (Test of Adherence to Inhalers (TAI)) and exacerbations. Inhalation technique was assessed by standardised evaluation of video recordings. Complete data were available from 1434 participants (50.1% female, mean age 69.2 years). GOLD stage was available for 801 participants: GOLD stage I (23.6%), II (54.9%), III (17.4%) and IV (4.1%)). Of all participants, 29% had a sPIF, and 16% were shown able to generate an optimal PIF but failed to do so. sPIF was significantly associated with worse health status (0.226 (95% CI 0.107–0.346), worse units on CCQ; p = 0.001). The errors ‘teeth and lips sealed around mouthpiece’, ‘breathe in’, and ‘breathe out calmly after inhalation’ were related to health status. Adherence was not associated with health status. After correcting for multiple testing, no significant association was found with moderate or severe exacerbations in the last 12 months. To conclude, sPIF is associated with poorer health status. This study demonstrates the importance of PIF assessment in DPI inhalation therapy. Healthcare professionals should consider selecting appropriate inhalers in cases of sPIF.

Funding Information: The BARI study was funded by Sanofi. Funding Information: CG, MM, HB, and CDC are Sanofi employees. MC, HL, and GB are IQVIA employees. FF, JCDS, CR, JFR, and CRC have received fees from Sanofi. JCDS reports Advisory Board from Boehringer Ingelheim; personal fees and Advisory Board from GSK; grants, personal fees, and Advisory Board from AstraZeneca; personal fees and Advisory Board from Bial; non-financial support from Mundipharma; personal fees from Sanofi; Advisory Board from Novartis, outside the submitted work. FF reports Advisory Board and personal fees from Sanofi, Pfizer, MSD, Gilead and personal fees or non-financial support from Bial, AstraZeneca, GSK, Novartis, Boehringer Ingelheim, Tecnifar, Lilly, Bayer, and Roche outside the submitted work. Publisher Copyright: © 2022, The Author(s). Background: Influenza can have a domino effect, triggering severe conditions and leading to hospitalization or even death. Since influenza testing is not routinely performed, statistical modeling techniques are increasingly being used to estimate annual hospitalizations and deaths associated with influenza, to overcome the known underestimation from registers coded with influenza-specific diagnosis. The aim of this study was to estimate the clinical and economic burden of severe influenza in Portugal. Methods: The study comprised ten epidemic seasons (2008/09–2017/18) and used two approaches: (i) a direct method of estimating the seasonal influenza hospitalization incidence, based on the number of National Health Service hospitalizations with influenza-specific International Classification of Diseases (ICD) codes (ICD-9: 487–488; ICD-10: J09-J11), as primary or secondary diagnosis; (ii) an indirect method of estimating excess hospitalizations and deaths using broader groups of ICD codes in time-series models, computed for six age groups and four groups of diagnoses: pneumonia or influenza (ICD-9: 480–488, 517.1; ICD-10: J09–J18), respiratory (ICD-9: 460–519; ICD-10: J00–J99), respiratory or cardiovascular (R&C, ICD-9: 390–459, 460–519; ICD-10: I00–I99, J00–J99), and all-cause. Means are reported excluding the H1N1pdm09 pandemic (2009/10). Results: The mean number of hospitalizations coded as due to influenza per season was 1,207, resulting in 11.6 cases per 100,000 people. The mean direct annual cost of these hospitalizations was €3.9 million, of which 78.6% was generated by patients with comorbidities. Mean annual influenza-associated R&C hospitalizations were estimated at 5356 (min: 456; max: 8776), corresponding to 51.5 cases per 100,000 (95% CI: 40.9–62.0) for all age groups and 199.6 (95% CI: 163.9–235.8) for the population aged ≥ 65 years. The mean direct annual cost of the estimated excess R&C hospitalizations was €15.2 million for all age groups and €12.8 million for the population aged ≥ 65 years. Mean annual influenza-associated all-cause deaths per 100,000 people were estimated at 22.7 for all age groups. Conclusions: The study findings suggest that there is an under-detection of influenza in the Portuguese population. A high burden of severe influenza remains to be addressed, not only in the elderly population but also in younger people. publishersversion published

The large amount of evidence and the renewed interest in upper and lower airways involvement in infectious and inflammatory diseases has led Interasma (Global Asthma Association) to take a position on United Airways Diseases (UAD).Starting from an extensive literature review, Interasma executive committee discussed and approved this Manifesto developed by Interasma scientific network (INES) members.The manifesto describes the evidence gathered to date and defines, states, advocates, and proposes issues on UAD (rhinitis, rhinosinusitis and nasal polyposis), and concomitant/comorbid lower airways disorders (asthma, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, bronchiectasis, cystic fibrosis, obstructive sleep apnoea) with the aim of challenging assumptions, fostering commitment, and bringing about change. UAD refers to clinical pictures characterized by the coexistence of upper and lower airways involvement, driven by a common pathophysiological mechanism, leading to a greater burden on patient's health status and requiring an integrated diagnostic and therapeutic plan. The high prevalence of UAD must be taken into account. Upper and lower airways diseases influence disease control and patient's quality of life.Patients with UAD need to have a timely and adequate diagnosis, treatment, and, when recommended, referral for management in a specialized center. Diagnostic testing including skin prick or serum specific IgE, lung function, fractional exhaled nitric oxide (FeNO), polysomnography, allergen-specific immunotherapies, biological therapies and home based continuous positive airway pressure (CPAP) whenever these are recommended, should be part of the management plan for UAD. Education of medical students, physicians, health professionals, patients and caregivers on the UAD is needed.

A iniciativa Allergic Rhinitis and Its Impact on Asthma (ARIA) teve início há mais de 20 anos e tem elaborado e disseminado orientações baseadas em evidência, e desenvolvido projetos na área da rinite alérgica. Esta iniciativa está atualmente focada em proporcionar orientações centradas no doente que contribuam para um percurso integrado entre os vários níveis de cuidados e que tirem partido de soluções digitais, tendo sido recomendada a introdução na prática clínica de percursos assistenciais integrados. Neste artigo descrevemos a adaptação para Portugal do documento ARIA Integrated Care Pathways. Após breve revisão sobre a epidemiologia e o impacto da rinite alérgica em Portugal e das atividades realizadas em Portugal no âmbito da iniciativa ARIA, é descrito o conjunto alargado de conhecimento utilizado para o desenvolvimento das recomendações para o tratamento farmacológico da rinite alérgica, recomendações essas baseadas na metodologia GRADE, evidência do mundo real adquirida por tecnologia móvel (mHealth) e resultante de estudos de câmara de exposição alergénica. Em seguida, são resumidos os percursos assistenciais integrados para imunoterapia com alergénios produzidas em 2019. Considera-se a imunoterapia com alergénios um exemplo de medicina de precisão e em que a utilização de tecnologias mHealth permitirá melhorar a estratificação para seleção dos doentes e monitorização da resposta. Estas recomendações foram consideradas como ‘boas práticas’ dos cuidados integrados centrados no doente apoiados por sistemas digitais da DG Santé (Direção Geral de Saúde e de Segurança Alimentar da União Europeia) e representam a estratégia de gestão da mudança da fase 4 do ARIA., The Allergic Rhinitis and Its Impact on Asthma (ARIA) initiative started more than 20 years ago and has developed and disseminated evidence-based guidelines and projects in the field of allergic rhinitis. This initiative is currently focused on providing patient-centred guidelines that contribute to an integrated care pathway between the various levels of care and take advantage of digital solutions, and the introduction of integrated care pathways in clinical practice has been recommended. In this article we describe the adaptation for Portugal of the ARIA Integrated Care Pathways document. After a brief review of the epidemiology and impact of allergic rhinitis in Portugal and the activities carried out in Portugal within the ARIA initiative, we describe the broad knowledge base used for the development of recommendations for the pharmacological treatment of allergic rhinitis, and these recommendations are based on the GRADE methodology, real world evidence acquired by mobile technology (mHealth) and resulting from allergenic exposure chamber studies. What follows is a summary of integrated care pathways for allergen immunotherapy produced in 2019. Allergen immunotherapy is considered an example of precision medicine where the use of mHealth technologies will improve stratification for patient selection and response monitoring. These recommendations were considered as best practices of integrated patient-centred care supported by digital systems from Directorate General for Health and Food Safety of the European Union (DG Santé) and represent the ARIA Phase 4 Change Management strategy.

Asthma brings considerable challenges for family doctors because of its variety of shapes, different levels of severity, a wide age range, and the fact that in the last decades clinicians are able to offer much better treatment options with a better level of disease control and a higher quality of life. The objectives of the current review article are to provide an up-to-date review by primary care respiratory leaders from different countries of the most significant challenges regarding asthma diagnosis and management, the importance of team work and the problems in recognizing and dealing with difficult-to-manage and severe asthma in primary care. The article provides a short review of the main challenges faced by family physicians and other primary health care professionals in supporting their patients in the management of asthma, such as asthma diagnosis, promoting access to spirometry, the importance of a multiprofessional team for the management of asthma, how to organize an asthma review, the promotion of patient autonomy and shared decision-making, improving the use of inhalers, the importance of the personalized asthma action plan, dealing with difficult-to-manage and severe asthma in primary care and choosing when, where and how to refer patients with severe asthma. The article also discusses the development of an integrated approach to asthma care in the community and the promotion of Asthma Right Care.

Mariana Romão,1 Ana Rita Godinho,1 Pedro M Teixeira,2 Zilda Mendes,1 Filipa Bernardo,3 António Teixeira Rodrigues,1 Jaime Correia de Sousa2,4 1Centre for Health Evaluation & Research/Infosaude – National Association of Pharmacies (CEFAR/IS-ANF), Lisbon, Portugal; 2Life and Health Sciences Research Institute (ICVS)/3B’s-PT Government Associate Laboratory, University of Minho, Braga, Portugal; 3AstraZeneca, Queluz, Lisboa, Portugal; 4Horizonte Family Health Unit, ULS Matosinhos, Matosinhos, PortugalCorrespondence: Mariana RomãoCentre for Health Evaluation & Research/Infosaude – National Association of Pharmacies (CEFAR/IS-ANF), Rua Marechal Saldanha 1, Lisboa, 1249-069, PortugalEmail mariana.romao@anf.ptPurpose: SABA overuse might indicate poorly managed or uncontrolled asthma and be responsible for poor health outcomes. The aim of this study integrated in new fourth multi-design SABINA+ pillar was to characterize the population using short-acting β2-agonists for asthma and examine the patterns of its use among community pharmacy customers in Portugal, as well as identify characteristics associated with disease control and explore potential differences between GINA treatment steps.Patients and Methods: This cross-sectional multicenter study was conducted in Portuguese community pharmacies between 29 May 2018 and 15 August 2018. Participants were adults (age ≥ 18 years) self-reporting asthma diagnosis recruited in the context of a short-acting β2-agonist dispense. A two-part questionnaire (pharmacist interview and self-administered) was used to collect information about sociodemographic characteristics, comorbidities, reliever inhaler use, healthcare resource consumption and self-reported disease control (assessed by the Control of Allergic Rhinitis and Asthma Test – CARAT®). Descriptive statistics was done to characterize the study sample. After categorizing patients according to GINA steps, based on their therapeutic regimen, we performed an exploratory subgroup analysis to evaluate if there were any differences between such groups in terms of the variables collected. A logistic regression was used to identify the potential determinants of overall disease control.Results: Around 50.8% of patients were male, and the average age was 52 years old. Half of the patients never smoked, and 51.9% were employed. More than half of the patients report inhaler overreliance – purchasing more than 1 pack in 3 months (65.0%) or using the inhaler on more than 8 days over the previous 4 weeks (50.2%). Of the total number of patients in the study, 79.1% had poorly controlled asthma symptoms, and 78.7% had overall poorly controlled respiratory symptoms. We found statistically significant differences between GINA treatment steps in all sociodemographic characteristics (sex, mean age, education level, employment status); maximum number of SABA uses in 24h, CARAT score (total an asthma sub-score); history of exacerbations requiring ED visits or treatment with OCS for at least 3 days in the previous 12 months. Logistic regression revealed that patients reporting SABA use in more than 8 days in the previous 4 weeks and patients with at least 1 exacerbation requiring treatment with OCS for at least 3 days in the previous 12 months have greater odds of poor disease control [adjusted OR (95% CI): 2.6 (1.3– 5.2) and 3.0 (1.3– 6.6)].Conclusion: Based on the results of this study, it can be inferred that the asthma population using SABA is largely uncontrolled and uses reliever inhalers excessively.Keywords: chronic disease, short-acting beta-2 adrenergic agonist, overuse, exacerbations, CARAT®

ObjectivesTo assess the feasibility of delivering a culturally tailored pulmonary rehabilitation (PR) programme and conducting a definitive randomised controlled trial (RCT).DesignA two-arm, randomised feasibility trial with a mixed-methods process evaluation.SettingSecondary care setting in Georgia, Europe.ParticipantsPeople with symptomatic spirometry-confirmed chronic obstructive pulmonary disease recruited from primary and secondary care.InterventionsParticipants were randomised in a 1:1 ratio to a control group or intervention comprising 16 twice-weekly group PR sessions tailored to the Georgian setting.Primary and secondary outcome measuresFeasibility of the intervention and RCT were assessed according to: study recruitment, consent and follow-up, intervention fidelity, adherence and acceptability, using questionnaires and measurements at baseline, programme end and 6 months, and through qualitative interviews.ResultsThe study recruited 60 participants (as planned): 54 (90%) were male, 10 (17%) had a forced expiratory volume in 1 second of ≤50% predicted. The mean MRC Dyspnoea Score was 3.3 (SD 0.5), and mean St George’s Respiratory Questionnaire (SGRQ) 50.9 (SD 17.6). The rehabilitation specialists delivered the PR with fidelity. Thirteen (43.0%) participants attended at least 75% of the 16 planned sessions. Participants and rehabilitation specialists in the qualitative interviews reported that the programme was acceptable, but dropout rates were high in participants who lived outside Tbilisi and had to travel large distances. Outcome data were collected on 63.3% participants at 8 weeks and 88.0% participants at 6 months. Mean change in SGRQ total was −24.9 (95% CI −40.3 to –9.6) at programme end and −4.4 (95% CI −12.3 to 3.4) at 6 months follow-up for the intervention group and −0.5 (95% CI −8.1 to 7.0) and −8.1 (95% CI −16.5 to 0.3) for the usual care group at programme end and 6 months, respectively.ConclusionsIt was feasible to deliver the tailored PR intervention. Approaches to improve uptake and adherence warrant further research.Trial registration numberISRCTN16184185.

IntroductionIn Portugal as in other countries, data on the epidemiology of asthma are mainly grounded in questionnaire studies. Additionally, the detailed characterisation of asthma in terms of disease severity, control and phenotypes remain scarce. Studies assessing the prevalence of asthma and its subgroups using accurate methods are needed. This study aims to determine the prevalence of asthma, difficult-to-treat asthma and severe asthma, and to evaluate sociodemographic and clinical characteristics of those patients, in mainland Portugal.Methods and analysisA population-based nationwide study with a multicentre stepwise approach will be conducted between 2021 and 2023 in 38 primary care centres of the Portuguese National Health Service. The stepwise approach will comprise four stages: Stage 0—telephone call invitation to adult subjects (≥18 years) randomly selected (n~15 000); stage 1—telephone screening interview assessing the participants’ respiratory symptoms (n~7500); stage 2—diagnostic visit, including physical examination, diagnostic tests (eg, spirometry, fraction of exhaled nitric oxide, blood eosinophil count) and patient-reported outcome measures for diagnostic confirmation of those identified with possible asthma at stage 1 (n~1800); stage 3—further evaluation of patients with asthma and of patients with difficult-to-treat asthma and severe asthma, after 3 months (n~460). At stage 3, data will be collected from a review of the patient’s electronic health records, a follow-up telephone call and the CARATm (Caracteristicas Auto-reportadas de Asma em Tecnologias Móveis) app database. The prevalence of asthma, difficult-to-treat asthma and severe asthma will be determined as the percentage of patients with asthma confirmed from the overall population (stage 1). For the analysis of factors associated with asthma, difficult-to-treat asthma and severe asthma, logistic regression models will be explored.Ethics and disseminationEthical approvals for the study were obtained from the ethics committee of the local health unit of Matosinhos, Porto (38/CES/JAS), Alto Minho (38/2021/CES) and the regional health administration of Lisbon-Vale do Tejo (035/CES/INV/2021). Results will be published in peer-reviewed journals.Trial registration numberNCT05169619.

Background and objectives: Inhalers mishandling remain an important clinical issue worldwide. The aim of this study was to evaluate inhalation technique in stable COPD out-patients. The variables under study were type of inhaler device (ID), patients' preference for an inhaler, number of IDs used by each patient, beliefs about inhaler medication and some demographic, clinical and functional patients' characteristics. We aim to assess how they are related to inhalation technique. Methods: A cross-sectional study was conducted in a hospital outpatient respiratory care. COPD patients over 40 years old, diagnosed according to GOLD criteria, and using IDs were included consecutively. The Beliefs about Medicines Questionnaire (BMQ), a demographic and a clinical survey were applied. The number of IDs used by each patient and the patients' preference for some IDs were recorded. Patients were asked to demonstrate the use of their prescribed inhalation devices, and inhaler technique was assessed by using previously defined checklists, including essential steps and critical errors. A statistics analysis was then performed. Results: We studied 300 subjects performing a total of 521 inhalation manoeuvers with 10 different IDs. At least one step incorrectly performed was found in 48.2% of demonstrations and in 29.9% critical errors were observed. Misuse was related to priming/loading in 6.9%, to inhalation manoeuver in 13.1% and to both in 10%. There was a statistically significant association between critical errors and type of ID (P

Objectives To evaluate the effect of inhaler education programs on clinical outcomes and exacerbation rates in older adults with asthma or chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD). Design Systematic review and meta‐analysis. Setting and Participants Older adults with asthma or COPD, either in primary or secondary health care and pharmacy setting. Measurements We searched the Medline, Embase, and Central databases according to the main eligibility criteria for inclusion: systematic reviews, meta‐analysis, clinical trials and quasi‐experimental studies; participants aged 65 and older; education on inhaler technique and reporting of disease control and exacerbation rates. We used the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluations scale for quality assessment and used a random‐effect model with Mantel–Haenszel adjustment to perform a meta‐analysis. Results We included 8 studies (4 randomized, 4 quasi‐experimental) with a total of 1,812 participants. The most frequent type of intervention was physical demonstration of inhaler technique, training with placebo devices. Five studies showed significant reduction in exacerbation rates (pooled risk ratio=0.71, 95% confidence interval=0.59–0.86; p

COPD is increasingly common in China but is poorly understood by patients, medications are not used as prescribed and there is no access to recommended non-pharmacological treatment. We explored COPD patients’ and general practitioners’ (GPs) knowledge of COPD, views on its management and the acceptability of a flexible lung health service (LHS) offering health education, exercise, self-management, smoking cessation and mental health support. Using a convergent mixed methods design, data were collected from patients and GPs using focus groups (FGs) in four Chinese cities, questionnaires were also used to collect data from patients. FGs were audio-recorded and transcribed. Quantitative data were analysed descriptively, thematic framework analysis was used for the qualitative data. Two-hundred fifty-one patients completed the questionnaire; 39 patients and 30 GPs participated in ten separate FGs. Three overarching themes were identified: patients’ lack of knowledge/understanding of COPD, current management of COPD not meeting patients’ needs and LHS design, which was well received by patients and GPs. Participants wanted COPD education, TaiChi, psychological support and WeChat for social support. 39% of survey responders did not know what to do when their breathing worsened and 24% did not know how to use their inhalers. 36% of survey respondents requested guided relaxation. Overall, participants did not fully understand the implications of COPD and current treatment was sub-optimal. There was support for developing a culturally appropriate intervention meeting Chinese patients’ needs, health beliefs, and local healthcare delivery. Further research should explore the feasibility of such a service.

Background Although there are many asymptomatic patients, one of the problems of COVID-19 is early recognition of the disease. COVID-19 symptoms are polymorphic and may include upper respiratory symptoms. However, COVID-19 symptoms may be mistaken with the common cold or allergic rhinitis. An ARIA-EAACI study group attempted to differentiate upper respiratory symptoms between the three diseases. Methods A modified Delphi process was used. The ARIA members who were seeing COVID-19 patients were asked to fill in a questionnaire on the upper airway symptoms of COVID-19, common cold and allergic rhinitis. Results Among the 192 ARIA members who were invited to respond to the questionnaire, 89 responded and 87 questionnaires were analysed. The consensus was then reported. A two-way ANOVA revealed significant differences in the symptom intensity between the three diseases (p < .001). Conclusions This modified Delphi approach enabled the differentiation of upper respiratory symptoms between COVID-19, the common cold and allergic rhinitis. An electronic algorithm will be devised using the questionnaire.

Introduction Widespread misuse of short-acting beta-agonists (SABAs) may contribute to asthma-related morbidity and mortality. Recognizing this, the Global Initiative for Asthma neither recommends SABA monotherapy nor regards this formulation as a preferred reliever. Many health systems and healthcare professionals (HCPs) experience practical issues in implementing guidelines. Clear quality standards can drive improvements in asthma care and encourage implementation of global and national medical guidelines. Methods A steering group of global asthma experts came together between May and September 2019 to develop quality statements codifying the minimum elements of good quality asthma care. These statements were either evidence based (when robust evidence was available) or reflected a consensus based on clinical expertise and experience of the group. Results The quality statements (and associated essential criteria) developed emphasize key elements concerning (1) objective diagnosis specific to individual symptoms, (2) treatment appropriate to the long-term management of asthma as an inflammatory disease, consistent with evidence-based recommendations, (3) controlled dispensing of SABA canisters and monitoring to prevent overuse, (4) regular review of patients after treatment initiation or change, and (5) follow-up of patients in primary care after treatment for an exacerbation in a hospital or an emergency department. Conclusions The steering group proposes quality statements that national and local clinical groups can implement as quantitative quality standards that are appropriate to their local circumstances, including during the coronavirus disease 2019 (Covid-19) pandemic. By translating these statements into locally relevant quality standards, primary care physicians and HCPs can encourage optimal management and reduce preventable healthcare interactions. The evidence-based evolution of care encapsulated in these statements will further engender high-quality, patient-centered holistic management that addresses asthma as an inflammatory disease. In particular, the statements empower self-management by patients and encourage health-promoting behaviors, which are essential to reduce exacerbations, the primary goal of asthma management. Graphic abstract

Guidelines aim to standardise and optimise asthma diagnosis and management. Nevertheless, adherence to guidelines is suboptimal and may vary across different healthcare professional (HCP) groups.Further to these concerns, this European Respiratory Society (ERS)/European Academy of Allergy and Clinical Immunology (EAACI) statement aims to: 1) evaluate the understanding of and adherence to international asthma guidelines by HCPs of different specialtiesviaan international online survey; and 2) assess strategies focused at improving implementation of guideline-recommended interventions, and compare process and clinical outcomes in patients managed by HCPs of different specialtiesviasystematic reviews.The online survey identified discrepancies between HCPs of different specialties which may be due to poor dissemination or lack of knowledge of the guidelines but also a reflection of the adaptations made in different clinical settings, based on available resources. The systematic reviews demonstrated that multifaceted quality improvement initiatives addressing multiple challenges to guidelines adherence are most effective in improving guidelines adherence. Differences in outcomes between patients managed by generalists or specialists should be further evaluated.Guidelines need to consider the heterogeneity of real-life settings for asthma management and tailor their recommendations accordingly. Continuous, multifaceted quality improvement processes are required to optimise and maintain guidelines adherence. Validated referral pathways for uncontrolled asthma or uncertain diagnosis are needed.

Effectiveness of health interventions can be substantially impaired by implementation failure. Context-driven implementation strategies are critical for successful implementation. However, there is no practical, evidence-based guidance on how to map the context in order to design context-driven strategies. Therefore, this practice paper describes the development and validation of a systematic context-mapping tool. The tool was cocreated with local end-users through a multistage approach. As proof of concept, the tool was used to map beliefs and behaviour related to chronic respiratory disease within the FRESH AIR project in Uganda, Kyrgyzstan, Vietnam and Greece. Feasibility and acceptability were evaluated using the modified Conceptual Framework for Implementation Fidelity. Effectiveness was assessed by the degree to which context-driven adjustments were made to implementation strategies of FRESH AIR health interventions. The resulting Setting-Exploration-Treasure-Trail-to-Inform-implementatioN-strateGies (SETTING-tool) consisted of six steps: (1) Coset study priorities with local stakeholders, (2) Combine a qualitative rapid assessment with a quantitative survey (a mixed-method design), (3) Use context-sensitive materials, (4) Collect data involving community researchers, (5) Analyse pragmatically and/or in-depth to ensure timely communication of findings and (6) Continuously disseminate findings to relevant stakeholders. Use of the tool proved highly feasible, acceptable and effective in each setting. To conclude, the SETTING-tool is validated to systematically map local contexts for (lung) health interventions in diverse low-resource settings. It can support policy-makers, non-governmental organisations and health workers in the design of context-driven implementation strategies. This can reduce the risk of implementation failure and the waste of resource potential. Ultimately, this could improve health outcomes.

Reported COVID-19 deaths in Germany are relatively low as compared to many European countries. Among the several explanations proposed, an early and large testing of the population was put forward. Most current debates on COVID-19 focus on the differences among countries, but little attention has been given to regional differences and diet. The low-death rate European countries (e.g. Austria, Baltic States, Czech Republic, Finland, Norway, Poland, Slovakia) have used different quarantine and/or confinement times and methods and none have performed as many early tests as Germany. Among other factors that may be significant are the dietary habits. It seems that some foods largely used in these countries may reduce angiotensin-converting enzyme activity or are anti-oxidants. Among the many possible areas of research, it might be important to understand diet and angiotensin-converting enzyme-2 (ACE2) levels in populations with different COVID-19 death rates since dietary interventions may be of great benefit.

There are large between- and within-country variations in COVID-19 death rates. Some very low death rate settings such as Eastern Asia, Central Europe, the Balkans and Africa have a common feature of eating large quantities of fermented foods whose intake is associated with the activation of the Nrf2 (Nuclear factor (erythroid-derived 2)-like 2) anti-oxidant transcription factor. There are many Nrf2-interacting nutrients (berberine, curcumin, epigallocatechin gallate, genistein, quercetin, resveratrol, sulforaphane) that all act similarly to reduce insulin resistance, endothelial damage, lung injury and cytokine storm. They also act on the same mechanisms (mTOR: Mammalian target of rapamycin, PPARγ:Peroxisome proliferator-activated receptor, NFκB: Nuclear factor kappa B, ERK: Extracellular signal-regulated kinases and eIF2α:Elongation initiation factor 2α). They may as a result be important in mitigating the severity of COVID-19, acting through the endoplasmic reticulum stress or ACE-Angiotensin-II-AT1R axis (AT1R) pathway. Many Nrf2-interacting nutrients are also interacting with TRPA1 and/or TRPV1. Interestingly, geographical areas with very low COVID-19 mortality are those with the lowest prevalence of obesity (Sub-Saharan Africa and Asia). It is tempting to propose that Nrf2-interacting foods and nutrients can re-balance insulin resistance and have a significant effect on COVID-19 severity. It is therefore possible that the intake of these foods may restore an optimal natural balance for the Nrf2 pathway and may be of interest in the mitigation of COVID-19 severity.

Vol. 34 No. 7-8 (2021): July-August

An update of the International Primary Care Respiratory Group (IPCRG) Research Needs Statement is currently being undertaken using an e-Delphi method. The aim of this analysis is to identify the main respiratory research themes from the perspective of primary care practitioners worldwide. Participants were recruited via the IPCRG network of 34 member countries. An initial open questionnaire elicited participants’ views on the most important respiratory conditions seen in their daily practice and invited suggestions of 5-10 relevant research questions within these conditions in the following domains: diagnosis, management, monitoring, self-management and prognosis. Using thematic qualitative analysis we identified the main cross-cutting research themes. 112 participants (69% physicians, 10% nurses, 21% other, 64% had special interest in respiratory) from 27 countries responded with 608 suggested research questions. Asthma was reported as the most clinically important condition (25.7%) followed by COPD (24.5%) and URTI (5.8%). Five themes emerged from the thematic analysis: uncertainties about diagnosis/management of respiratory conditions; need for contextually relevant and accessible guidance; need for methods to improve patient empowerment and self-management; role of the wider healthcare team; need for simple point-of-care tests. The eDelphi method is successful in identifying relevant research questions and the main themes pertinent to primary care worldwide. These research questions now need to be prioritised for investigation by the international community.

Older patients with asthma or chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) are particularly susceptible to inhaler technique errors and poor clinical outcomes. Several factors may influence their risk, but most studies are inconsistent and contradictory. We developed a tool for the major predictors of individual risk in these patients. In this multicentre, cross-sectional study, several demographic, socioeconomic and clinical characteristics were collected as potential predictors. Clinical features and inhaler technique performance were the main outcomes. Linear and logistic regression models were set up to identify significant variables. Subgroup analysis was performed according to age, cognitive performance and different types of inhalers. We included 130 participants, mean age of 74.4 (± 6.4) years. Mean years of device use were 5.8 (± 7.3). Inhaler errors affected 71.6% (95% CI 64–78.5) and critical mistakes 31.1% (95% CI 24–38.8). There were respiratory comorbidities in 82.3% of participants, and 56.2% had moderate to severe disease. A predictive score of misuse probability was developed for clinical practice, including points attributable to cognitive score, adherence and having received previous education on a placebo device. Other significant variables of individual risk were having respiratory allergies or comorbidities, smoking status, depression and educational level. Worse performance was detected in cognitively impaired patients older than 75 years who were using dry powder inhalers (DPI). Lung function was associated with smoking load, incorrect dose activation and absent end pause after inhalation. Individual risk assessment in older individuals should focus on inhaler technique performance (mainly on dose activation and end pause) and adherence, smoking, respiratory comorbidities and cognitive impairment. Placebo device training provided by doctors seems to best suit these patients.

Asthma imposes a substantial burden on individuals and societies. Patients with asthma need high-quality primary care management; however, evidence suggests the quality of this care can be highly variable. Here we identify and report factors contributing to high-quality management. Twelve primary care global asthma experts, representing nine countries, identified key factors. A literature review (past 10 years) was performed to validate or refute the expert viewpoint. Key driving factors identified were: policy, clinical guidelines, rewards for performance, practice organisation and workforce. Further analysis established the relevant factor components. Review evidence supported the validity of each driver; however, impact on patient outcomes was uncertain. Single interventions (e.g. healthcare practitioner education) showed little effect; interventions driven by national policy (e.g. incentive schemes and teamworking) were more effective. The panel's opinion, supported by literature review, concluded that multiple primary care interventions offer greater benefit than any single intervention in asthma management., The authors gratefully acknowledge the Expert Panel contributions of Tan Tze Lee (Singapore). Editorial support (in the form of writing assistance, collating author comments, assembling tables/figures, grammatical editing, fact checking, and referencing) was provided by Diana Jones, Ph.D., of Cambrian Clinical Associates Ltd. (UK) and was funded by GlaxoSmithKline plc. The expert panel meeting was funded by GlaxoSmithKline plc.

Background: Severe asthma is a serious condition with a significant burden on patients' morbidity, mortality, and quality of life. Some biological therapies targeting the IgE and interleukin-5 (IL5) mediated pathways are now available. Due to the lack of direct comparison studies, the choice of which medication to use varies. We aimed to explore the beliefs and practices in the use of biological therapies in severe asthma, hypothesizing that differences will occur depending on the prescribers’ specialty and experience. Methods: We conducted an online survey composed of 35 questions in English. The survey was circulated via the INterasma Scientific Network (INESNET) platform as well as through social media. Responses from allergists and pulmonologists, both those with experience of prescribing omalizumab with (OMA/IL5) and without (OMA) experience with anti-IL5 drugs, were compared. Results: Two hundred eighty-five (285) valid questionnaires from 37 countries were analyzed. Seventy-on percent (71%) of respondents prescribed biologics instead of oral glucocorticoids and believed that their side effects are inferior to those of Prednisone 5 mg daily. Agreement with ATS/ERS guidelines for identifying severe asthma patients was less than 50%. Specifically, significant differences were found comparing responses between allergists and pulmonologists (Chi-square test, p < 0.05) and between OMA/IL5 and OMA groups (p < 0.05). Conclusions: Uncertainties and inconsistencies regarding the use of biological medications have been shown. The accuracy of prescribers to correctly identify asthma severity, according to guidelines criteria, is quite poor. Although a substantial majority of prescribers believe that biological drugs are safer than low dose long-term treatment with oral steroids, and that they must be used instead of oral steroids, every effort should be made to further increase awareness. Efficacy as disease modifiers, biomarkers for selecting responsive patients, timing for outcomes evaluation, and checks need to be addressed by further research. Practices and beliefs regarding the use of asthma biologics differ between the prescriber's specialty and experience; however, the latter seems more significant in determining beliefs and behavior. Tailored educational measures are needed to ensure research results are better integrated in daily practice.