MACVIA-ARIA Sentinel NetworK for allergic rhinitis (MASK-rhinitis): the new generation guideline implementation

Several unmet needs have been identified in allergic rhinitis: identification of the time of onset of the pollen season, optimal control of rhinitis and comorbidities, patient stratification, multidisciplinary team for integrated care pathways, innovation in clinical trials and, above all, patient empowerment. MASK-rhinitis (MACVIA-ARIA Sentinel NetworK for allergic rhinitis) is a simple system centred around the patient which was devised to fill many of these gaps using Information and Communications Technology (ICT) tools and a clinical decision support system (CDSS) based on the most widely used guideline in allergic rhinitis and its asthma comorbidity (ARIA 2015 revision). It is one of the implementation systems of Action Plan B3 of the European Innovation Partnership on Active and Healthy Ageing (EIP on AHA). Three tools are used for the electronic monitoring of allergic diseases: a cell phone-based daily visual analogue scale (VAS) assessment of disease control, CARAT (Control of Allergic Rhinitis and Asthma Test) and e-Allergy screening (premedical system of early diagnosis of allergy and asthma based on online tools). These tools are combined with a clinical decision support system (CDSS) and are available in many languages. An e-CRF and an e-learning tool complete MASK. MASK is flexible and other tools can be added. It appears to be an advanced, global and integrated ICT answer for many unmet needs in allergic diseases which will improve policies and standards.

Awake examination versus DISE for surgical decision making in patients with OSA: A systematic review

OBJECTIVE: Traditionally, upper airway examination is performed while the patient is awake. However, in the past two decades, drug-induced sleep endoscopy (DISE) has been used as a method of tridimensional evaluation of the upper airway during pharmacologically induced sleep. This study aimed to systematically review the evidence regarding the usefulness of DISE compared with that of traditional awake examination for surgical decision making in patients with obstructive sleep apnea (OSA). DATA SOURCES: Scopus, PubMed, and Cochrane Library databases were searched. REVIEW METHODS: Only studies with a primary objective of evaluating the usefulness of DISE for surgical decision making in patients with OSA were selected. The included studies directly compared awake examination data with DISE outcome data in terms of possible influences on surgical decision making and operation success. RESULTS: A total of eight studies with 535 patients were included in this review. Overall, the surgical treatment changed after DISE in 50.24% (standard deviation 8.4) cases. These changes were more frequently associated with structures contributing to hypopharyngeal or laryngeal obstruction. However, these differences do not automatically indicate a higher success rate. CONCLUSION: This review emphasized the direct impact of DISE compared with that of awake examination on surgical decision making in OSA patients. However, it is also clear that the available published studies lack evidence on the association between this impact and surgical outcomes