Background: Complete diagnosis and therapy of seasonal allergic rhinoconjunctivitis require evidence that exposure to the sensitizing pollen triggers allergic symptoms. Electronic clinical diaries, by recording disease severity scores and pollen exposure, can demonstrate this association. However, patients who spontaneously download an e-diary app show very low adherence to their recording. Objective: The objective of our study was to assess adherence of patients with seasonal allergic rhinitis to symptom recording via e-diary explicitly prescribed by an allergist within a blended care approach. Methods: The @IT-2020 project is investigating the diagnostic synergy of mobile health and molecular allergology in patients with seasonal allergic rhinitis. In the pilot phase of the study, we recruited Italian children (Rome, Italy) and adults (Pordenone, Italy) with seasonal allergic rhinitis and instructed them to record their symptoms, medication intake, and general conditions daily through a mobile app (Allergy.Monitor) during the relevant pollen season. Results: Overall, we recruited 101 Italian children (Rome) and 93 adults (Pordenone) with seasonal allergic rhinitis. Adherence to device use slowly declined during monitoring in 3 phases: phase A: first week, ≥1267/1358, 90%; phase B: second to sixth week, 4992/5884, 80% to 90%; and phase C: seventh week onward, 2063/2606, 70% to 80%. At the individual level, the adherence assessed in the second and third weeks of recording predicted with enough confidence (Rome: Spearman ρ=0.75; P<.001; Pordenone: ρ=0.81; P<.001) the overall patient adherence to recording and was inversely related to postponed reporting (ρ=–0.55; P<.001; in both centers). Recording adherence was significantly higher during the peak grass pollen season in Rome, but not in Pordenone. Conclusions: Adherence to daily recording in an e-diary, prescribed and motivated by an allergist in a blended care setting, was very high. This observation supports the use of e-diaries in addition to face-to-face visits for diagnosis and treatment of seasonal allergic rhinitis and deserves further investigation in real-life contexts.

Background: The adequate definition of pollen seasons is essential to facilitate a correct diagnosis, treatment choice, and outcome assessment in patients with seasonal allergic rhinitis. A position paper by the European Academy of Allergy and Clinical Immunology (EAACI) proposed season definitions for Northern and Middle Europe.Objective: To test the pollen season definitions proposed by EAACI in six Mediterranean cities for seven pollen taxa.Methods: As part of the @IT.2020 multi‐center study, pollen counts for Poaceae, Oleaceae, Fagales, Cupressaceae, Urticaceae (Parietaria spp.), and Compositae (Ambrosia spp., Artemisia spp.) were collected from January 1 to December 31, 2018. Based on these data, pollen seasons were identified according to EAACI criteria. A unified monitoring period for patients in AIT trials was created and assessed for feasibility.Results: The analysis revealed a great heterogeneity between the different locations in terms of pattern and length of the examined pollen seasons. Further, we found a fragmentation of pollen seasons in several segments (max. 8) separated by periods of low pollen counts (intercurrent periods). Potential monitoring periods included often many recording days with low pollen exposure (max. 341 days).Conclusion: The Mediterranean climate leads to challenging pollen exposure times. Monitoring periods for AIT trials based on existing definitions may include many intermittent days with low pollen concentrations. Therefore, it is necessary to find an adapted pollen season definition as individual solution for each pollen and geographical area.