Have expert guidelines made a difference in asthma outcomes?

Current Opinion in Allergy and Clinical Immunology

Volumn 13, Issue 3, 2013, Pages 237-243

  Podjasek, Jenna C ^a   Rank, Matthew A ^b  

^a MAYO CLINIC   (United States)

^b MAYO CLINIC   (United States)

Author keywords

asthma; guideline adherence; practice guideline; quality of healthcare

Indexed keywords

NICOTINE;

ASTHMA; COMMUNITY CARE; CONSULTATION; DISEASE CONTROL; DISEASE EXACERBATION; DISEASE SEVERITY; EUROPE; FEEDBACK SYSTEM; FOLLOW UP; HEALTH CARE DELIVERY; HEALTH CARE QUALITY; HEALTH EDUCATION; HEALTH SURVEY; HOME CARE; HOSPITALIZATION; HUMAN; MOBILE PHONE; MULTICENTER STUDY (TOPIC); NURSING CARE; OUTPATIENT CARE; PATIENT COUNSELING; PRACTICE GUIDELINE; PRIORITY JOURNAL; PROGNOSIS; RANDOMIZED CONTROLLED TRIAL (TOPIC); REGISTERED NURSE; REVIEW; SELF MONITORING; SPIROMETRY; STANDARDIZATION; TELEMONITORING;

ANIMALS; ASTHMA; ELECTRICAL EQUIPMENT AND SUPPLIES; EUROPE; GUIDELINE ADHERENCE; HUMANS; PATIENT EDUCATION AS TOPIC; PRACTICE GUIDELINES AS TOPIC; QUALITY IMPROVEMENT; UNITED STATES;

EID: 84876891358     PISSN: 15284050     EISSN: 14736322     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1097/ACI.0b013e32836093c3     Document Type: Review

References (23)

1. Horak F, Jäger S. The Vienna challenge chamber (VCC) - a new method for allergen exposition test. Wien Klin Wochenschr 1987; 99:509-510.
2. Committee for Medicinal Products for Human Use (CHMP) at the European Medicines Agency (EMA). Guideline on the clinical development of products for specific immunotherapy for the treatment of allergic diseases. London, UK; November 2008; Draft CHMP/EWP/18504/2006. http://www.emea.europa.eu/pdfs/human/ ewp/1850406enfin.pdf. [Accessed March 14th 2013]
3. Devillier P, Le Gall M, Horak F. The allergen challenge chamber: a valuable tool for optimizing the clinical development of pollen immunotherapy. Allergy 2011; 66:163-169.
4. Hohlfeld JM, Holland-Letz T, Larbig M, et al. Diagnostic value of outcome measures following allergen exposure in an environmental challenge chamber compared with natural conditions. Clin Exp Allergy 2010; 40:998-1006.
5. Day JH, Horak F, Briscoe MP, et al. The role of allergen challenge chambers in the evaluation of anti allergic medication: an inernational consensus paper. Clin Exp Allergy Rev 2006; 6:31-59.
6. Bernstein JA. Correlation between a pollen challenge chamber and a natural allergen exposure study design for eliciting ocular and nasal symptoms: early evidence supporting a paradigm shift in drug investigation? J Allergy Clin Immunol 2012; 130:128-129.
7. Togias A. Asthma, Allergy, and Inflammation Branch, Division of Allergy, Immunology and Transplantation, NIAID/NIH. Environmental exposure units: clinical trial design for validation. Bethesda: National Institute for Allergy and Infectious Diseases/National Institutes of Health; 2010. pp. 1-12.
8. Van Overtvelt L, Baron-Bodo V, Horiot S, et al. Changes in basophil activation during grass-pollen sublingual immunotherapy do not correlate with clinical efficacy. Allergy 2011; 66:1530-1537.
9. Howarth P, Malling HJ, Molimard M, Devillier P. Analysis of allergen immu-notherapy studies shows increased clinical efficacy in highly symptomatic patients. Allergy 2012; 67:321-327.
10. Ellis AK, Ratz JD, Day AG, Day JH. Factors that affect the allergic rhinitis response to ragweed allergen exposure. Ann Allergy Asthma Immunol 2010; 104:293-298.
11. Huss-Marp J, Darsow U, Brockow K, et al. Can immunoglobulin E-measure-ment replace challenge tests in allergic rhinoconjunctivitis to grass pollen? Clin Exp Allergy 2011; 41:1116-1124.
12. Yuki A, Terada T, Ichihara T, et al. Evaluating the effects of testing period on pollinosis symptoms using an allergen challenge chamber. Allergol Int 2011; 60:533-539.
13. Badorrek P, Dick M, Hecker H, et al. Antiallergic drug testing in an environmental challenge chamber is suitable both in and out of the relevant pollen season. Ann Allergy Asthma Immunol 2011; 106:336-344.
14. Horak F, Jäger S, Berger U, et al. Controlled exposure to mite allergen for a dose-finding of dimethindene maleate (DMM). Agents Actions 1994; 41:C124-C126. (Pubitemid 24199954)
15. Rønborg SM. Exposure chamber for allergen challenge. The development and validation of a new concept. Allergy 1996; 51:82-88.
16. Scadding GW, Calderon MA, Bellido V, et al. Optimisation of grass pollen nasal allergen challenge for assessment of clinical and immunological outcomes. J Immunol Methods 2012; 384:25-32.
17. Ito K, Terada T, Yuki A, et al. Preliminary study of a challenge test to the patients with Japanese cedar pollinosis using an environmental exposure unit. Auris Nasus Larynx 2010; 37:694-699.
18. Jacobs RL, Ramirez DA, Andrews CP. Validation of the biogenics research chamber for Juniperus ashei (mountain cedar) pollen. Ann Allergy Asthma Immunol 2011; 107:133-138.
19. Wood RA, Laheri AN, Eggleston PA. The aerodynamic characteristics of cat allergen. Clin Exp Allergy 1993; 23:733-739. (Pubitemid 23294868)
20. Corren J, Wood RA, Patel D, et al. Effects of omalizumab on changes in pulmonary function induced by controlled cat room challenge. J Allergy Clin Immunol 2011; 127:398-405.
21. De Blay F. Provocation tests as measure of efficacy and dosage. Allergy 2011; 66 (Suppl. 95):47-49.
22. Patel D, Couroux P, Hickey P. Fel d 1-derived peptide antigen desensitization shows a persistent treatment effect 1 year after the start of dosing: a randomized, placebo-controlled study. J Allergy Clin Immunol 2013; 131:103.e7-109.e7.
23. Jacobs RL, Harper N, He W, et al. Responses to ragweed pollen in a pollen challenge chamber versus seasonal exposure identify allergic rhinoconjunc-tivitis endotypes. J Allergy Clin Immunol 2012; 130:122-127.