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 .
Effectiveness of inhaler types for real-world asthma management: retrospective observational study using the GPRD
Purpose : Results of r and omized controlled trials may not predict effectiveness of inhaled corticosteroids ( ICS ) in real-world clinical practice , where inhaler technique and device characteristics can influence effectiveness . We compared asthma outcomes for ICS delivered via three different inhaler devices : pressurized metered-dose inhaler ( pMDI ) , breath-actuated MDI ( BAI ) , and dry powder inhaler ( DPI ) . Patients and methods : This retrospective data base study evaluated 1-year outcomes for primary care patients with asthma aged 5–60 years prescribed their first ICS ( initiation population ) by pMDI ( n = 39,746 ) , BAI ( n = 9809 ) , or DPI ( n = 6792 ) , or their first ICS dose increase ( step-up population ) by pMDI ( n = 6245 ) , BAI ( n = 1388 ) , or DPI ( n = 1536 ) . Co- primary outcome measures were composite proxy measures of asthma control ( no hospital attendance for asthma , oral corticosteroids , or antibiotics for lower respiratory infection ) and severe exacerbations ( unscheduled hospital admission , emergency room attendance , or oral corticosteroids ) . Outcomes were adjusted for potential confounding factors identified during a baseline year . Results : In the initiation population , adjusted odds ratios ( 95 % confidence intervals [ CI ] ) for asthma control , as compared with pMDIs , were significantly better for BAIs ( 1.08 [ 1.02–1.14 ] ) and DPIs ( 1.13 [ 1.06–1.21 ] ) , while adjusted exacerbation rate ratios ( 95 % CI ) were 1.00 ( 0.93–1.08 ) and 0.88 ( 0.81–0.95 ) , respectively . In the step-up population , adjusted odds of asthma control were 1.21 ( 1.05–1.39 ) for BAIs and 1.13 ( 0.99–1.29 ) for DPIs ; adjusted exacerbation rate ratios were 0.83 ( 0.71–0.98 ) for BAIs and 0.85 ( 0.74–0.98 ) for DPIs , compared with pMDIs . Conclusion : Inhaler device selection may have a bearing on clinical outcomes . Differences in real-world effectiveness among these devices require closer evaluation in well- design ed prospect i ve trials
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 .