Results Although highlighting a general lack of high- quality real-life effectiveness observational research on these clinical ly important topics , the analysis provided insights into how identified observational studies might inform asthma guidelines developers and clinicians .
Overall , RELEVANT appeared reliable and easy to use by expert review ers .
Conclusions Using such quality appraisal tools is m and atory to assess whether specific observational real-life effectiveness studies can be used to inform guideline development and /or decision-making in clinical practice
Abstract Introduction A Task Force was commissioned jointly by the European Academy of Allergy and Clinical Immunology ( EAACI ) and the Respiratory Effectiveness Group ( REG ) to develop a  quality assessment tool for real-life observational research to identify high- quality real-life asthma studies that could be considered within future guideline development .
Prescribing practices and asthma control with hydrofluoroalkane-beclomethasone and fluticasone: a real-world observational study.
BACKGROUND Long-term r and omized trials comparing asthma outcomes between inhaled corticosteroids in real-world population s are lacking . As such , rigorously conducted observational studies to complement the findings of r and omized trials are needed . OBJECTIVE We sought to compare asthma-related outcomes over 1 year as recorded in a large primary care data base for patients aged 5 to 60 years receiving a first prescription ( initiation population ) or dose increase ( step-up population ) of hydrofluoroalkane (HFA)-beclomethasone or fluticasone .  METHODS We used a retrospective matched cohort study in which patients were matched on baseline demographic and disease severity measures . Co primary outcomes were asthma control ( a composite measure comprising no unplanned visit or hospitalization for asthma , oral corticosteroids , or antibiotics for lower respiratory tract infection ) and exacerbation rate . RESULTS More than 80 % of patients in each population achieved asthma control ; 10 % and 16 % of patients in the initiation and step-up population s , respectively , received add-on or combination therapy during the year . Fluticasone was prescribed at significantly higher doses than HFA-beclomethasone for both population s ( P < or= .001 ) . In the initiation population ( n = 1319 in each cohort ) the adjusted odds ratio for achieving asthma control with HFA-beclomethasone was 1.30 ( 95 % CI , 1.02 - 1.65 ) relative to fluticasone . In the step-up population ( cohorts : n = 250 ) the adjusted odds ratio for achieving asthma control with HFA-beclomethasone was 1.22 ( 95 % CI , 0.66 - 2.26 ) . Exacerbation rates were similar between cohorts . CONCLUSIONS In a real-world setting patients receiving HFA-beclomethasone had a similar or better chance of achieving asthma control at lower prescribed doses than with fluticasone
Results Although highlighting a general lack of high- quality real-life effectiveness observational research on these clinical ly important topics , the analysis provided insights into how identified observational studies might inform asthma guidelines developers and clinicians .
Overall , RELEVANT appeared reliable and easy to use by expert review ers .
Conclusions Using such quality appraisal tools is m and atory to assess whether specific observational real-life effectiveness studies can be used to inform guideline development and /or decision-making in clinical practice
Abstract Introduction A Task Force was commissioned jointly by the European Academy of Allergy and Clinical Immunology ( EAACI ) and the Respiratory Effectiveness Group ( REG ) to develop a  quality assessment tool for real-life observational research to identify high- quality real-life asthma studies that could be considered within future guideline development .