Allergic rhinitis (AR) and asthma represent global health problems for all age groups. Asthma and rhinitis frequently coexist in the same subjects. Allergic Rhinitis and its Impact on Asthma (ARIA) was initiated during a World Health Organization workshop in 1999 (published in 2001). ARIA has reclassified AR as mild/moderate-severe and intermittent/persistent. This classification closely reflects patients' needs and underlines the close relationship between rhinitis and asthma. Patients, clinicians, and other health care professionals are confronted with various treatment choices for the management of AR. This contributes to considerable variation in clinical practice, and worldwide, patients, clinicians, and other health care professionals are faced with uncertainty about the relative merits and downsides of the various treatment options. In its 2010 Revision, ARIA developed clinical practice guidelines for the management of AR and asthma comorbidities based on the Grading of Recommendation, Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) system. ARIA is disseminated and implemented in more than 50 countries of the world. Ten years after the publication of the ARIA World Health Organization workshop report, it is important to make a summary of its achievements and identify the still unmet clinical, research, and implementation needs to strengthen the 2011 European Union Priority on allergy and asthma in children.

The pharmacologic treatment of allergic rhinitis proposed by ARIA is an evidence‐based and step‐wise approach based on the classification of the symptoms. The ARIA workshop, held in December 1999, published a report in 2001 and new information has subsequently been published. The initial ARIA document lacked some important information on several issues. This document updates the ARIA sections on the pharmacologic and anti‐IgE treatments of allergic rhinitis. Literature published between January 2000 and December 2004 has been included. Only a few studies assessing nasal and non‐nasal symptoms are presented as these will be discussed in a separate document.

Allergic rhinitis (AR) and chronic idiopathic urticaria (CIU) are highly burdensome diseases, which are increasing in prevalence, especially in the paediatric population. Despite the availability of a large number of medications for treatment of AR and CIU, their use in children has primarily been based on data obtained from a limited number of clinical trials in children and/or testing in adults. The H₁-antihistamines have traditionally been used as first-line treatment for the relief of both AR and CIU symptoms in children. The first-generation H₁-antihistamines are associated with marked adverse effects such as sedation, sleepiness/drowsiness as well as difficulties in learning and cognitive processing; thus, they are recommended for limited or discontinued use in children with AR or CIU. In contrast, second-generation H₁-antihistamines are more adapted for the use in children with AR and CIU due to better safety profiles. However, only a limited number of trials with these agents have been conducted and generally, data from well-designed trials in children are lacking. Levocetirizine is one of the most extensively investigated H₁-antihistamines for its pharmacologic properties, safety, efficacy as well as overall global satisfaction in children aged 2–12 years. Levocetirizine is the only H₁-antihistamine launched in the 21st century shown to lack clinically relevant adverse effects on physical and psychomotor development or routine laboratory tests over a long-term period of 18 months in 1- to 3-year-old children predisposed to development of allergic disease. Available data suggest that levocetirizine is a suitable treatment option for AR and CIU in children aged 6 months to 12 years.

The telephone survey technique allowed for establishment of random representative samples, and application of mathematical weighting procedures assured that the true national values were restored in the data set. As all interviews were performed in a standardised manner we conclude that the telephone-based survey methodology enables national representative data set to be established and compared.

No abstract