'Warning: allergic to penicillin': association between penicillin allergy status in 2.3 million NHS general practice electronic health records, antibiotic prescribing and health outcomes

Eliciting the barriers and enablers towards anaesthetists giving penicillin-based antibiotic prophylaxis to low-risk patients who have had their penicillin allergy label removed as part of a preoperative delabelling process

Background

Some penicillin allergy labels can be removed by non-allergy specialists by direct oral challenge, but there is reluctance amongst anaesthetists to give penicillin to these patients. We aimed to assess anaesthetist beliefs about giving penicillin to patients delabelled by direct oral challenge.

Methods

A survey, developed using the Theoretical Domains Framework, was circulated to anaesthetists within a regional research network in England. Domains were rated using 5-point Likert scales. Overall and group medians were used to dichotomize domains rated by group into 'relatively important/unimportant' and 'relative enabler/barrier'.

Results

We received 257 responses from six hospitals (response rate 49.7%). Seven domains were rated as important for all stakeholder groups and hospitals: Knowledge, Skills, Belief in Capabilities, Belief in Consequences, Memory/Attention/Decisions, Environmental Context and Resources, and Emotions. Social and Professional Role was also important to all respondents except those in one hospital. Intentions and Optimism were rated as important for some groups/hospitals and unimportant for others. All four other domains were rated as unimportant for all groups/hospitals. All domains rated as important were enablers for all groups/hospitals, with the exception of Memory/Attention/Decisions and Emotions, which were rated as discordant barriers/enablers between groups. This means they were acting as a barrier for some staff groups/hospitals and an enabler for others. Barrier domains (Reinforcement, Goals, Social Influences, Behavioural Regulation) were all rated unimportant.

Conclusions

Behavioural influences on giving penicillin prophylaxis to a delabelled patient are complex and nuanced. These findings could inform targeted interventions, both across and within hospitals and staff groups.

β-Lactam allergy delabeling is safe and saves costs in Primary Care

OBJECTIVE

To determine whether the β-lactam allergy delabeling was safe and cost-saving in Primary Care (PC) patients.

DESIGN

We have conducted a retrospective chart review of PC patients with β-lactam allergy label evaluated in our Allergy Unit between 2017 and 2022. SITE: Allergy Department. Hospital Virgen del Rocio (Sevilla).

PARTICIPANTS

A total of 391 patients labeled for β-lactam allergy in PC were studied.

MAIN MEASUREMENTS

(a) Outcome evaluation of a β-lactam allergy delabeling procedure. (b) A ratio between the total e-prescribed antibiotic cost and the number of treatment days (the experimental daily antibiotic cost or EDAC) before and after delabeling was analyzed in delabeled and truly allergic patients.

RESULTS

The results of skin testing were positive in 9.2% of the reported cases (36 of 391 patients). The reactions to oral provocation challenge (OPC) occurred in 2.14% of the patients who underwent negative skin testing to offending β-lactam (in 15 of 699 OPC). A total of 307 patients (78.5%) were delabeled; 70 (17.9%) had a β-lactam selective response and 14 (3.59%) reacted to both penicillin and cephalosporin. The EDAC before and after the procedure in delabeled patients was significantly lower (0.88 € vs 0.62 €, p<10-3), than that observed in truly allergic group (0.87 € vs. 0.76 €, p=not significant).

CONCLUSION

To delabel β-lactam allergy in Primary Care patients is safe in most patients, cost-saving in antibioticotherapy, and allows identify the main clinical β-lactam allergy phenotypes that benefit from this procedure.

Prospective, Multicenter, Head-to-Head Comparison Between Allergists Versus Nonallergists in Low-Risk Penicillin Allergy Delabeling: Effectiveness, Safety, and Quality of Life (HK-DADI2)

BACKGROUND

Penicillin "allergy" labels are prevalent but frequently misdiagnosed. Mislabelled allergies are associated with adverse outcomes and increased antimicrobial resistance. With an urgent need to delabel the overwhelming number of mislabeled allergies, nonallergist evaluations have been advocated for low-risk individuals. Despite growing interest in non-allergist-led initiatives, evidence on their effectiveness, safety, and impact by direct comparisons is lacking.

OBJECTIVE

To assess the comparative outcomes of penicillin allergy evaluations conducted by allergists versus nonallergists.

METHODS

A prospective, multicenter, pragmatic study was conducted at 4 tertiary hospitals (1 allergist- vs 3 non-allergist-led) for low-risk penicillin allergy patients in Hong Kong-the Hong Kong Drug Allergy Delabelling Initiative 2 (HK-DADI2).

RESULTS

Among 228 low-risk patients who underwent testing (32.9% by allergists, 67.1% by nonallergists), only 14 (6.1%) had positive penicillin allergy testing results. Delabeling rates (94.1% vs 93.3%; P = .777), positive skin test results (2.6% vs 2.7%; P > .99), and drug provocation test results (3.3% vs 2.7%; P = 1.000) were similar between allergists and nonallergists. There were no systemic reactions in either cohort. All patients had significant improvements in health-related quality of life (Drug Hypersensitivity Quality of Life Questionnaire scores -5.00 vs -8.33; P = .072). Nonallergist evaluations had shorter waiting times (0.57 vs 15.7 months; P < .001), whereas allergists required fewer consultations with higher rate of completing evaluations within a single visit (odds ratio, 0.04; P < .001).

CONCLUSIONS

With training and support, nonallergists can independently evaluate low-risk penicillin allergies. Compared with allergists, evaluation of low-risk penicillin allergy by nonallergists can be comparably effective, safe, and impactful on quality of life. More multidisciplinary partnerships to empower nonallergists to conduct allergy evaluations should be encouraged.

Documented Penicillin Allergies on Antibiotic Selection at Pediatric Emergency Department Visits

BACKGROUND

Penicillin or amoxicillin are the recommended treatments for the most common pediatric bacterial illnesses. Allergies to penicillin are commonly reported among children but rarely true. We evaluated the impact of reported penicillin allergies on broad-spectrum antibiotic use overall and for the treatment of common respiratory infections among treat-and-release pediatric emergency department (ED) visits.

METHODS

Retrospective cohort study of pediatric patients receiving antibiotics during a treat-and-release visit at a large, pediatric ED in the northeast from 2014 to 2016. Study exposure was a reported allergy to penicillin in the electronic medical record. Study outcomes were the selection of broad-spectrum antibiotics and alternative (second-line) antibiotic therapy for the treatment of acute otitis media (AOM) and group A streptococcus (GAS) pharyngitis. We used unadjusted and adjusted generalized estimating equation models to analyze the impact of reported penicillin allergies on the selection of broad-spectrum antibiotics. We used unadjusted and adjusted logistic regression models to determine the probability of children with a documented penicillin allergy receiving alternative antibiotic treatments for AOM and GAS.

RESULTS

Among 12,987 pediatric patients, 810 (6.2%) had a documented penicillin allergy. Penicillin allergies increased the odds of children receiving a broad spectrum versus narrow spectrum antibiotic (adjusted odds ratio, 13.55; 95% confidence interval (CI), 11.34-16.18). In our adjusted logistic regression model, the probability of children with a documented penicillin allergy receiving alternative antibiotic treatment for AOM was 0.97 (95% CI, 0.94-0.99) and for GAS was 0.97 (95% CI, 0.92-0.99).

CONCLUSIONS

Antibiotic stewardship efforts in pediatric EDs may consider the delabeling of penicillin allergies particularly among children receiving antibiotics for an acute respiratory infection as a target for intervention.

Assessing the rationale of prescribing carbapenems among hospitalized patients with documented penicillin allergy: implications for stewardship

Background

A reported history of penicillin allergy frequently leads to the prescription of carbapenems as a substitute for penicillin to avoid allergic reactions. Such self-reported allergies need to be accurately characterized to identify targeted antibiotic stewardship interventions that potentially minimize unnecessary carbapenem use.

Design

Retrospective cohort study.

Method

The proportion of hospitalized patients with penicillin allergy history receiving carbapenem prescriptions was evaluated between January 1st, 2017 and December 31st, 2018 at the University Hospital Basel, Switzerland. The appropriateness of carbapenem prescription of each patient was evaluated using institutional guidelines based on previously published recommendations.

Results

Our analysis revealed that among 212 patients with recorded penicillin allergy, of the 247 carbapenem treatment episodes, 79 (32%) were unjustified. Abdominal and lower respiratory tract infections were most frequently associated with inappropriate carbapenem use (OR 2.64, 95% CI 1.22-5.71, P = .014 and OR 2.26, 95% CI 1.08-4.73, P = .031). The recorded allergy type was not documented or unclear in 153 patients (72%) and penicillin allergy was only confirmed in 2 patients (0.9%). Inconsistencies in allergic symptom documentation and allergy types were found between the institution's two software programs.

Conclusion

While a multimodal approach to identify and accurately label penicillin allergies remains essential to reduce inappropriate carbapenem use, our findings highlight the need for comprehensive and easily accessible guidelines for carbapenem utilization and structured history-based allergy assessment as an initial screening tool, embedded in a tailored digital allergy record template.

Impact of penicillin allergy records on antimicrobial prescribing in hospitalised patients

BACKGROUND

The overdiagnosis of penicillin allergy and misclassification of non-truly allergic reactions is a growing public health problem, associated with the overuse of broad-spectrum and restricted antimicrobials. We aimed to evaluate the impact of penicillin allergy status on antimicrobial prescribing.

METHODS

A retrospective study of inpatients with a documented penicillin allergy receiving antimicrobials was conducted from 1 April to 1 July 2021. Antimicrobial prescribing and clinical characteristics were compared between patients with an active penicillin allergy label and those whose label was removed following antimicrobial stewardship team review. Antimicrobials were classified in two categories: i) 'Access' (recommended), ii) 'Watch and Reserve' (restricted) according to WHO AWaRe classification, a tool to guide appropriate antibiotic use.

RESULTS

437 patients with a documented penicillin allergy receiving antimicrobials were included. 353 patients with an active penicillin allergy label, more frequently received antimicrobials from the 'Watch and Reserve list' (283;80% vs 30;37%; p<0.001). In contrast, 84 patients who were de-labelled received more often antimicrobials from the 'Access list' (53;63% vs 64;18%; p<0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

Penicillin allergy reviews and de-labelling strategies may reduce the use of restricted antimicrobials under the 'Watch and Reserve list'. This practice should be encouraged and reinforced in all hospitals.

Performance Characteristics of Basophil Activation Tests for Diagnosing Penicillin Allergy: A Meta-Analysis

BACKGROUND

Approximately 10% of the global population identify themselves as penicillin allergic, yet 90% are not truly allergic and could safely tolerate penicillin. There is no simple way to identify these people. Current in vitro diagnostics include specific immunoglobulin E (with a sensitivity of 19% and specificity of 97%) and a basophil activation test (BAT) with undefined sensitivity and specificity.

OBJECTIVE

To define the sensitivity and specificity of BAT in the diagnosis of penicillin allergy METHODS: We searched PubMed and EMBASE from inception to April 2, 2023, for original studies evaluating the performance characteristics of BAT for penicillin allergy in adults. Study selection, data extraction, risk of bias, assessment with QUADAS-2 tool, certainty assessment with Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development, and Evaluation (GRADE) methodology were performed independently, in duplicate. Meta-analysis was performed using Reitsma methodology.

RESULTS

Twenty-two studies fulfilled the inclusion criteria. Twelve used the same positive threshold giving a summary point sensitivity 51% (95% confidence interval [95% CI]46%-56%) and specificity 89% (95% CI 85%-93%). Significant risk of bias was identified owing to patient selection. GRADE certainty of evidence rated sensitivity very low due to imprecision and specificity as low. There was great heterogeneity in methods used. Use of 1,000 basophils per test did not improve performance above 500 basophils.

CONCLUSIONS

BAT sensitivity is highly variable across studies and remains too low to be considered as a routine element of clinical practice. BAT specificity is not as good as specific immunoglobulin E in penicillin allergy diagnosis. Significant further work is required in this field before clinical application of BAT in routine practice.

A multicentre observational study to investigate feasibility of a direct oral penicillin challenge in de-labelling 'low risk' patients with penicillin allergy by non-allergy healthcare professionals (SPACE study): Implications for healthcare systems

OBJECTIVE

The huge burden of inaccurate penicillin allergy labels (PALs) is an important driver of antimicrobial resistance. This is magnified by insufficient allergy specialists and lack of 'point-of-care' tests. We investigated the feasibility of non-allergy healthcare professionals (HCPs) delivering direct oral penicillin challenges (DPCs) for penicillin allergy de-labelling.

METHODS

This prospective observational study was conducted in three hospitals in England across three settings (acute medical, pre-surgical and haematology-oncology). Patients with a PAL were screened and stratified as low risk/high risk. Low risk patients (non-immune mediated symptoms, benign rash, tolerated amoxicillin since and family history) underwent a DPC.

RESULTS

N = 2257 PALs were screened, 1054 were eligible; 643 were approached, 373 declined, 270 consented and 259 risk stratified (low risk = 155; high risk = 104). One hundred and twenty-six low risk patients underwent DPC, 122 (96.8%) were de-labelled with no serious allergic reactions. Conversion rate from screening-to-consent was 12% [3.3% and 17.9% in acute and elective settings respectively; odds ratios for consent were 3.42 (p < 0.001) and 5.53 (p < 0.001) in haematology-oncology and pre-surgical setting respectively. Common reasons for failure to progress in the study included difficulty in reaching patients, clinical instability/medical reasons, lacking capacity to consent and psychological factors.

INTERPRETATION

DPCs can be delivered by non-allergy HCPs. A high proportion of patients with PALs did not progress in the study pathway. Strategies to deliver DPC at optimal points of the care pathway are needed to enhance uptake. Elective settings offer greater opportunities than acute settings for DPC. The safety and simplicity of DPCs lends itself to adoption by healthcare systems beyond the UK, including in resource-limited settings.

Impact of penicillin allergy labels on surgical site infections in a large UK cohort of gastrointestinal surgery patients

Objectives

Studies in the USA, Canada and France have reported higher surgical site infection (SSI) risk in patients with a penicillin allergy label (PAL). Here, we investigate the association between PALs and SSI in the UK, a country with distinct epidemiology of infecting pathogens and range of antimicrobial regimens in routine use.

Methods

Electronic health records and national SSI surveillance data were collated for a retrospective cohort of gastrointestinal surgery patients at Cambridge University Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust from 1 January 2015 to 31 December 2021. Univariable and multivariable logistic regression were used to examine the effects of PALs and the use of non-β-lactam-based prophylaxis on likelihood of SSI, 30 day post-operative mortality, 7 day post-operative acute kidney injury and 60 day post-operative infection/colonization with antimicrobial-resistant bacteria or Clostridioides difficile.

Results

Our data comprised 3644 patients and 4085 operations; 461 were undertaken in the presence of PALs (11.3%). SSI was detected after 435/4085 (10.7%) operations. Neither the presence of PALs, nor the use of non-β-lactam-based prophylaxis were found to be associated with SSI: adjusted OR (aOR) 0.90 (95% CI 0.65-1.25) and 1.20 (0.88-1.62), respectively. PALs were independently associated with increased odds of newly identified MRSA infection/colonization in the 60 days after surgery: aOR 2.71 (95% CI 1.13-6.49). Negative association was observed for newly identified infection/colonization with third-generation cephalosporin-resistant Gram-negative bacteria: aOR 0.38 (95% CI 0.16-0.89).

Conclusions

No evidence was found for an association between PALs and the likelihood of SSI in this large UK cohort, suggesting significant international variation in the impact of PALs on surgical patients.

Identifying the most at-risk age-group and longitudinal trends of drug allergy labeling amongst 7.3 million individuals in Hong Kong

BACKGROUND

Incorrect drug 'allergy' labels remain a global public health concern. Identifying regional trends of drug allergy labeling can guide appropriate public health interventions, but longitudinal or population drug allergy studies remain scarce. We analysed the serial epidemiology of drug allergy labeling to identify specific subgroups at highest risk of drug allergy labeling for potential interventions.

METHODS

Longitudinal, population-wide drug allergy labels and clinical data from over 7,337,778 individuals in Hong Kong between 2016 and 2021 were analysed.

RESULTS

The absolute prevalence and incidence of documented drug allergy were 5.61% and 277/100,000 population, respectively. Annual incidence of new allergy labels was stable between 2016 and 2019, until a significant drop in 2020 (-16.3%) during the COVID19 pandemic. The most common allergy labels were anti-infectives (245,832 [44.5%]), non-steroidal anti-inflammatory (106,843 [19.3%]), and nervous system drugs (45,802 [8.3%]). The most common labeled culprits for the most severe immediate-type (anaphylaxis) and non-immediate-type (Stevens-Johnson syndrome) reactions were beta-lactams and nervous system drugs, respectively. For individuals at highest risk of labeling, there was significantly higher incidence of overall drug and beta-lactam allergy labeling amongst individuals aged > 40 years which contributed to the majority of newly labeled allergies (377,004, 68.2%).

CONCLUSIONS

Contrary to traditional dogma, we identified disproportionately higher incidence of drug allergy labeling amongst older individuals, rather than the paediatric age group. We advocate for more population-wide drug allergy studies to investigate this phenomenon in other cohorts as well as future preventative and delabeling efforts focusing on the adult population.

Characterizing Antibiotic Allergy Labels in a Large UK Hospital Population to Inform Antimicrobial Stewardship and Delabeling Assessment Strategy

BACKGROUND

Antibiotic allergy labels are important barriers to treatment and antimicrobial stewardship, but their prevalence in UK hospitals is poorly described.

OBJECTIVE

To ascertain the prevalence and characteristics of antibiotic allergy labels in a large UK hospital setting and estimate the proportion of penicillin allergy labels for which point-of-care (POC) delabeling assessment would be appropriate.

METHODS

Electronic health records data were analyzed from all patients treated at Cambridge University Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust in 2019. Validated POC delabeling risk stratification criteria were retrospectively applied to penicillin allergy labels.

RESULTS

Recorded reactions to antibiotics were present in 11.8% of all patients (32,148 of 273,216), 16.3% of inpatients (13,874 of 85,230), and 9.7% of outpatients (18,274 of 187,986). Penicillins were the commonest reaction precipitant described (9.0% of patients; 24,646 of 273,216), followed by sulfonamides/trimethoprim (1.4%; 3869 of 273,216) and macrolides/lincosamides (1.3%; 3644 of 273,216). A total of 3.9% of inpatients had recorded reactions to >1 antibiotic class (3348 of 85,230). Cutaneous manifestations were the most commonly described reaction features (40.7% of labels; 15,821 of 38,902). Of 15,949 labels describing probable or possible penicillin "allergy" with sufficient detail to allow for the retrospective assessment of POC delabeling suitability, 1702 were deemed suitable for removal or downgrading of the label to "intolerance" without further investigation (10.7%), 11,887 were appropriate for POC assessment using an oral penicillin challenge (OPC) or OPC with prior bedside skin testing (74.5%), and 2360 were identified as unsuitable for any form of POC assessment (14.8%).

CONCLUSIONS

Antibiotic allergy labels are highly prevalent in a UK hospital setting. A large proportion of penicillin allergy labels may be suitable for POC delabeling assessment.

The effectiveness of interventions that support penicillin allergy assessment and delabeling of adult and pediatric patients by nonallergy specialists: a systematic review and meta-analysis

OBJECTIVES

Penicillin allergy records are often incorrect and may result in harm. We aimed to systematically review the effectiveness and safety of nonallergist health care worker delivery of penicillin allergy delabeling.

METHODS

We searched EMBASE/MEDLINE/CINAHL (Ovid), PsycInfo, Web of Science, and Cochrane CENTRAL from inception to January 21, 2022 and unpublished studies and gray literature. The proportion of patients allergic to penicillin delabeled and harmed was calculated using random-effects models.

RESULTS

Overall, 5019 patients were delabeled. Using allergy history alone, 14% (95% confidence interval [CI], 9-21%) of 4350 assessed patients were delabeled without reported harm. Direct drug provocation testing resulted in delabeling in 27% (95% CI, 18-37%) of 4207 assessed patients. Of the 1373 patients tested, 98% were delabeled (95% CI, 97-99%), and nonserious harm was reported in 1% (95% CI, 0-2%). Using skin testing, followed by drug provocation testing, 41% (95% CI, 24-59%) of 2890 assessed patients were delabeled. Of the 1294 tested patients, 95.0% (95% CI, 90-99%) were delabeled, and the reported harm was low (0%; (95% CI 0-1%).

CONCLUSION

Penicillin allergy delabeling by nonallergists is efficacious and safe. The proportion of assessed patients who can be delabeled increases with the complexity of testing method, but substantial numbers can be delabeled without skin testing.

Outcome of preoperative cefazolin use for infection prophylaxis in patients with self-reported penicillin allergy

BACKGROUND

Cephalosporins are the preferred antibiotics for prophylaxis against surgical site infections. Most studies give a rate of combined IgE and non-IgE penicillin allergy yet it is recommended that cephalosporins be avoided in patients having the former but can be used in those with the latter. Some studies use penicillin allergy while others penicillin family allergy rates. The primary goal of this study was to determine the rates of IgE and non-IgE allergy as well as cross reactions to both penicillin and the penicillin family. Secondary goals were to determine the surgical services giving preoperative cefazolin and the types of self reported reactions that patients' had to penicillin prompting their allergy status.

METHODS

All patients undergoing elective and emergency surgery at a University Health Sciences Centre were retrospectively studied. The hospital electronic medical record was used for data collection.

RESULTS

8.9% of our patients reported non-IgE reactions to penicillin with a cross reactivity rate of 0.9% with cefazolin. 4.0% of our patients reported IgE reactions to penicillin with a cross reactivity rate of 4.0% with cefazolin. 10.5% of our patients reported non-IgE reactions to the penicillin family with a cross reactivity rate of 0.8% with cefazolin. 4.3% of our patients reported IgE reactions to the penicillin family with a cross reactivity rate of 4.0% with cefazolin.

CONCLUSIONS

Our rate of combined IgE and non-IgE reactions for both penicillin and penicillin family allergy was within the range reported in the literature. Our rate of cross reactivity between cefazolin and combined IgE and non-IgE allergy both to penicillin and the penicillin family were lower than reported in the old literature but within the range of the newer literature. We found a lower rate of allergic reaction to a cephalosporin than reported in the literature. We documented a wide range of IgE and non-IgE reactions. We also demonstrated that cefazolin is frequently the preferred antibiotics for prophylaxis against surgical site infections by many surgical services and that de-labelling patients with penicillin allergy is unnecessary.

Addressing the Challenges of Penicillin Allergy Delabeling With Electronic Health Records and Mobile Applications

Allergy labels are common, often incorrect, and potentially harmful. There are many opportunities for clinical decision support (CDS) tools integrated in the electronic health record (EHR) and mobile apps to address the challenges with drug allergy management, including penicillin allergy delabeling (PADL). Effective delabeling solutions must consider multidisciplinary clinical workflow and multistep processes, including documentation, assessment, plan (eg, allergy testing and referral), record update, drug allergy alert management, and allergy reconciliation over time. Developing a systematic infrastructure to manage allergies across the EHR is critical to improve the accuracy and completeness of a patient's allergy and avoid inadvertently relabeling. Improving the appropriateness and relevancy of drug allergy alerts is important to reduce alert fatigue. Using alerts to guide clinicians on appropriate antibiotic use may reduce unnecessary β-lactam avoidance. To date, EHR CDS tools have facilitated non-allergists to provide PADL at the point of care. A mobile app was shown to support PADL and provide specialist support and education. Future research is needed to standardize, integrate, and evaluate innovative CDS tools in the EHR to demonstrate patient safety and clinical utility and facilitate wider adoption.

Comparative Effectiveness, Safety, and Real-World Outcomes of a Nurse-Led, Protocol-Driven Penicillin Allergy Evaluation From the Hong Kong Drug Allergy Delabelling Initiative (HK-DADI)

BACKGROUND

There is a high prevalence of unconfirmed penicillin allergy, which is associated with a multitude of adverse clinical outcomes. With the overwhelming burden of currently incorrect labels and the lack of allergy specialist services, new delabeling strategies are urgently needed.

OBJECTIVE

To assess the effectiveness, safety, and real-world outcomes of a nurse-led, protocol-driven evaluation of penicillin allergy, the Hong Kong Drug Allergy Delabelling Initiative (HK-DADI).

METHODS

Adult patients with suspected penicillin allergy were recruited into HK-DADI. Allergy and postdelabeling outcomes were retrospectively compared between patients evaluated via HK-DADI or traditional allergist evaluation.

RESULTS

A total of 312 completed penicillin allergy evaluation: 84 (27%) and 228 (73%) via HK-DADI and traditional pathways, respectively. Overall, 280 penicillin allergies were delabeled (90%). The delabeling rate between HK-DADI and traditional pathways was similar (90% vs 89%; P = .796). Among patients of the HK-DADI pathway, the delabeling rate was significantly higher among low-risk (LR) compared with non-LR patients (97% vs 77%; P = .010). Skin tests did not add diagnostic value among LR patients. No patients developed severe or systemic reactions during the evaluation. Upon 6- to 12-month follow-up (median, 10 months), 123 patients experienced infective episodes (44%) and 63 used penicillins again after delabeling (23%). This proportion was significantly higher in patients who were delabeled via HK-DADI compared with the traditional pathway (32% vs 19%; P = .026).

CONCLUSIONS

The Hong Kong Drug Allergy Delabelling Initiative, a nurse-led, protocol-driven evaluation, was safe and effective in penicillin allergy delabeling. It led to an even higher rate of future penicillin use after delabeling and mitigated the need for unnecessary skin testing among LR patients.

A review of evidence for pneumococcal vaccination in adults at increased risk of pneumococcal disease: risk group definitions and optimization of vaccination coverage in the United Kingdom

INTRODUCTION

Pneumococcal disease (PD) significantly contributes to morbidity and mortality, carrying substantial economic and public health burden. This article is a targeted review of evidence for pneumococcal vaccination in the UK, the definitions of groups at particular risk of PD and vaccine effectiveness.

AREAS COVERED

Relevant evidence focusing on UK data from surveillance systems, randomized controlled trials, observational studies and publicly available government documents is collated and reviewed. Selected global data are included where appropriate.

EXPERT OPINION

National vaccination programs have reduced the incidence of vaccine-type PD, despite the rising prominence of non-vaccine serotypes in the UK. The introduction of higher-valency conjugate vaccines provides an opportunity to improve protection against PD for adults in risk groups. Several incentives are in place to encourage general practitioners to vaccinate risk groups, but uptake is low-suboptimal particularly among at-risk individuals. Wider awareness and understanding among the public and healthcare professionals may increase vaccination uptake and coverage. National strategies targeting organizational factors are urgently needed to achieve optimal access to vaccines. Finally, identifying new risk factors and approaches to risk assessment for PD are crucial to ensure those at risk of PD can benefit from pneumococcal vaccination.

Antibiotic prescription after tooth extraction in adults: a retrospective cohort study in Austria

BACKGROUND

Broad spectrum antibiotics are often used for the prophylaxis of infectious endocarditis and treatment of odontogenic infections, but there are limited data related to antibiotic use and adherence to prescription guidelines.  METHODS: Data from patients with tooth extraction between 2014 and 2018 were selected from a database of a regional health insurance fund. We created three data sets, one based on all tooth extractions, one on multiple teeth extractions, and one including only single tooth extraction. After data collection, descriptive analysis was carried out. The differences in prescription pattern of antibiotic medicine were tested by χ² test, Student´s t-test or ANOVA.

RESULTS

From 43,863 patients with tooth extraction, 53% were female, and 3,983 patients (9.1%) filled a prescription for antibiotic medicine. From 43,863 patients, 157 patients (0.4%) had endocarditis risk, but only 8 patients of these (5.1%) filled an antibiotic prescription. In total, 9,234 patients had multiple and 34,437 patients had only one tooth extraction. Patients with more than one tooth extraction received more often antibiotic treatment (10.7%) compared to those with single tooth extractions (χ² = 36; p < 0,001). Patients with more than one tooth extraction were older, however, younger patients received antibiotics more frequently (t = 28,774, p = 0.001). There was no relationship with endocarditis risk status. Clindamycin and amoxicillin/clavulanic acid were the most frequently prescribed antibiotic medicines.

CONCLUSIONS

In this retrospective cohort study, dentists did not discriminate prophylactic antibiotic prescription with regard to endocarditis risk status. A factor influencing prescribing behaviour of antibiotic medicines was the number of extracted teeth.

Improving antimicrobial stewardship with penicillin allergy testing: a review of current practices and unmet needs

Penicillin allergy, the most frequently reported drug allergy, has been associated with suboptimal antibiotic therapy, increased antimicrobial resistance, increased rates of Clostridioides difficile colonization and infection, as well as extended hospital length of stay and increased cost. Although up to 10% of all patients may report penicillin allergy, most penicillin allergies are not confirmed. As such, most patients with a penicillin allergy can still safely use penicillin and related drugs following a more precise assessment. Herein, we review the current practices and unmet needs in penicillin allergy testing. The diagnostic algorithm is mostly based on a clinical history assessment followed by in vivo testing, i.e. skin test and/or drug challenge. As these tests are labour and resource intensive, there is increased interest in point-of-care penicillin allergy de-labelling solutions incorporated into Antimicrobial Stewardship Programmes including digital assessment tools. These can be locally parameterized on the basis of characteristics of target populations, incidence of specific allergies and local antibiotic usage to perform clinical risk stratification. Safely ruling out any residual risk remains essential and in vivo drug challenge and/or skin testing should be systematically encouraged. Gradual understanding and convergence of the risk stratification of the clinical presentation of penicillin allergy is enabling a wider implementation of this essential aspect of antimicrobial stewardship through digitalized decision tools and in vivo testing. More research is needed to deliver point of care in vitro diagnostic tools to democratize this de-labelling practice, which would be highly beneficial to patient care. This progress, together with better education of patients and clinicians about the availability, efficacy and safety of penicillin allergy testing, will increase the dissemination of penicillin allergy assessment as an important component of Antimicrobial Stewardship Programmes.

BSACI guideline for the set-up of penicillin allergy de-labelling services by non-allergists working in a hospital setting

The Standards of Care Committee of the British Society for Allergy and Clinical Immunology (BSACI) and a committee of experts and key stakeholders have developed this guideline for the evaluation and testing of patients with an unsubstantiated label of penicillin allergy. The guideline is intended for UK clinicians who are not trained in allergy or immunology, but who wish to develop a penicillin allergy de-labelling service for their patients. It is intended to supplement the BSACI 2015 guideline "Management of allergy to penicillin and other beta-lactams" and therefore does not detail the epidemiology or aetiology of penicillin allergy, as this is covered extensively in the 2015 guideline (1). The guideline is intended for use only in patients with a label of penicillin allergy and does not apply to other beta-lactam allergies. The recommendations include a checklist to identify patients at low risk of allergy and a framework for the conduct of drug provocation testing by non-allergists. There are separate sections for adults and paediatrics within the guideline, in recognition of the common differences in reported allergy history and likelihood of true allergy.

Mixed-methods evaluation of a behavioural intervention package to identify and amend incorrect penicillin allergy records in UK general practice

OBJECTIVES

About 6% of the UK general practice population has a record of a penicillin allergy but fewer than 10% of these are likely to be truly allergic. In the ALABAMA (Allergy Antibiotics and Microbial resistance) feasibility trial, primary care patients with penicillin allergy were randomised to penicillin allergy assessment pathway or usual care to assess the effect on health outcomes. A behavioural intervention package was developed to aid delabelling. This study aimed to investigate patients' and clinicians' views of penicillin allergy testing (PAT).

DESIGN

We conducted a mixed-methods process evaluation embedded within the ALABAMA trial, which included a clinician survey, a patient survey (at baseline and follow-up) and semistructured interviews with patients and clinicians.

SETTINGS

The study was conducted in primary care, as part of the feasibility stage of the ALABAMA trial.

PARTICIPANTS

Patients and primary care clinicians.

RESULTS

Clinicians (N=53; 52.2%) were positive about PAT and its potential value but did not have previous experience of referring patients for a PAT and were unsure whether patients would take penicillin after a negative allergy test. Patients (N=36; 46%) were unsure whether they were severely allergic to penicillin and did not fear a severe allergic reaction to penicillin. Clinician interviews showed that they were already aware of the benefit of PAT. Interviews with patients suggested the importance of safety as patients valued having numerous opportunities to address their concerns about safety of the test.

CONCLUSIONS

This study highlights the positive effects of the ALABAMA behavioural intervention for both patients and clinicians.

TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER

NCT04108637; ISRCTN20579216; Pre-results.

The Use of Electronic Health Records to Study Drug-Induced Hypersensitivity Reactions from 2000 to 2021

Electronic health records (EHRs) have revolutionized the field of drug hypersensitivity reaction (DHR) research. In this systematic review, we assessed 140 articles from 2000-2021, classifying them under six themes: observational studies (n=61), clinical documentation (n=27), case management (n=22), clinical decision support (CDS) (n=18), case identification (n=9), and genetic studies (n=3). EHRs provide convenient access to millions of medical records, facilitating epidemiological studies of DHRs. Though the goal of CDS is to promote safe drug prescribing, allergy alerts must be designed and used in a way that supports this effort. Ultimately, accurate allergy documentation is essential for DHR prevention.

OUP accepted manuscript

Antibiotic use (and misuse) accelerates antimicrobial resistance (AMR), and addressing this complex problem necessitates behaviour change related to infection prevention and management and to antibiotic prescribing and use. As most antibiotic courses are prescribed in primary care, a key focus of antimicrobial stewardship (AMS) is on changing behaviours outside of hospital. Behavioural science draws on behaviour change theories, techniques and methods developed in health psychology, and can be used to help understand and change behaviours related to AMR/AMS. Qualitative methodologies can be used together with a behavioural science approach to explore influences on behaviour and develop and evaluate behavioural interventions. This paper provides an overview of how the behavioural science approach, together with qualitative methods, can contribute and add value to AMS projects. First, it introduces and explains the relevance of the behavioural science approach to AMR/AMS. Second, it provides an overview of behaviour change ‘tools’: behaviour change theories/models, behavioural determinants and behaviour change techniques. Third, it explains how behavioural methods can be used to: (i) define a clinical problem in behavioural terms and identify behavioural influences; (ii) develop and implement behavioural AMS interventions; and (iii) evaluate them. These are illustrated with examples of using qualitative methods in AMS studies in primary care. Finally, the paper concludes by summarizing the main contributions of taking the behavioural science approach to qualitative AMS research in primary care and discussing the key implications and future directions for research and practice.

Effectiveness of interventions that support penicillin allergy assessment and de-labelling of patients by non-allergy specialists: a systematic review protocol

OBJECTIVE

This review will systematically examine and synthesize the evidence evaluating the effectiveness and safety of interventions that enable non-allergy specialist health care workers to assess allergy risk in patients with reported penicillin allergies and subsequently remove erroneous allergy records.

INTRODUCTION

The potential benefits of removing erroneous penicillin allergy labels (de-labeling) are wide-ranging. Penicillin allergy assessment and de-labeling is an antibiotic stewardship priority. Delivery of such assessment and de-labeling by non-allergy specialists has been reported in several studies, but the effectiveness and safety have not been formally synthesized. This is a necessary step in the upscaling of penicillin allergy assessment services.

INCLUSION CRITERIA

This review will consider quantitative studies using appropriate designs. The studies will include adults and pediatric patients who have undergone penicillin allergy assessment and de-labeling by non-allergy specialists in any health care setting.

METHODS

A range of databases will be searched to identify studies published in English, with no date limit. Unpublished studies and gray literature will also be searched. Title and abstract screening, and assessment of selected full texts against the inclusion criteria will be conducted by at least two independent reviewers. Identified studies will be assessed for methodological quality using standardized critical appraisal instruments. Data will be extracted and categorized using the EPOC taxonomy, and the effectiveness and safety of the intervention will be determined. Where possible, data will be pooled to facilitate meta-analysis. Data from heterogeneous studies will be reported narratively. The GRADE approach for grading the certainty of evidence will be followed.

SYSTEMATIC REVIEW REGISTRATION NUMBER

PROSPERO CRD42020219044.

The applications of eHealth technologies in the management of asthma and allergic diseases

Portable devices, such as smartphones and mobile Internet access have become ubiquitous in the last decades. The term 'eHealth' stands for electronic health. The tools included in the eHealth concept utilize phones, computers and the Internet and related applications to improve the health care industry. Implementation of eHealth technologies has been documented for the management of different chronic diseases, including asthma and allergic conditions. Clinicians and patients have gained opportunity to communicate in new ways, which could be used cost-effectively to improve disease control and quality of life of those affected. Additionally, these innovations bring new opportunities to academic researchers. For example, eHealth has allowed researchers to compile data points that were previously unavailable or difficult to access, and analyse them using novel tools, collectively described as 'big data'. The role of eHealth become more important since early 2020, due to the physical distancing rules and the restrictions on mobility that have been applied worldwide as a response to the coronavirus disease 2019 pandemic. In this review, we summarize the most recent developments in various eHealth platforms and their relevance to the speciality of allergy and immunology, from the point of view of three major stakeholders: clinicians, patients and researchers.

Development and Validation of a Mobile Clinical Decision Support Tool for the Diagnosis of Drug Allergy in Adults: The Drug Allergy App

BACKGROUND

Penicillin allergy overdiagnosis has been associated with inappropriate antibiotic prescribing, increased antimicrobial resistance, worse clinical outcomes, and increased health care costs.

OBJECTIVE

To develop and validate a questionnaire-based algorithm built in a mobile application to support clinicians in collecting accurate history of previous reactions and diagnosing drug allergy appropriately.

METHODS

A survey was completed by 164 medical and nonmedical prescribers to understand barriers to best practice. Based on the survey recommendations, we created a 10-item questionnaire-based algorithm to allow classification of drug allergy history in line with the National Institute for Health and Care Excellence guidelines on drug allergy. The algorithm was incorporated into a mobile application and retrospectively validated using anonymized clinical databases at regional immunology and dermatology centers in Manchester, United Kingdom.

RESULTS

A total of 55.2% of prescribers (95% confidence interval, 47% to 63.4%) thought it impossible to draw a firm conclusion based on history alone and 59.4% (95% CI, 51.4% to 67.5%) believed that regardless of the details of the penicillin allergy history, they would avoid all β-lactams. A drug allergy mobile application was developed and retrospectively validated, which revealed a low risk for misclassification of outcomes compared with reference standard drug allergy investigations in the allergy and dermatology clinics.

CONCLUSIONS

Perceived lack of time and preparedness to collect an accurate drug allergy history appear to be important barriers to appropriate antimicrobial prescribing. The Drug Allergy App may represent a useful clinical decision support tool to diagnose drug allergy correctly and support appropriate antibiotic prescribing.

Incidence of Clostridioides difficile infection (CDI) related to antibiotic prescribing by GP surgeries in Wales

BACKGROUND

Clostridioides difficile infection (CDI) is a healthcare-acquired infection (HAI) causing significant morbidity and mortality. Welsh CDI rates are high in comparison with those in England and Scotland.

OBJECTIVES

This retrospective ecological study used aggregated disease surveillance data to understand the impact of total and high-risk Welsh GP antibiotic prescribing on total and stratified inpatient/non-inpatient CDI incidence.

METHODS

All cases of confirmed CDI, during the financial years 2014-15 to 2017-18, were linked to aggregated rates of antibiotic prescribing in their GP surgery and classified as 'inpatient', 'non-inpatient' or 'unknown' by Public Health Wales. Multivariable negative-binomial regression models, comparing CDI incidence with antibiotic prescribing rates, were adjusted for potential confounders: location; age; social deprivation; comorbidities (estimated from prevalence of key health indicators) and proton pump inhibitor (PPI) prescription rates.

RESULTS

There were 4613 confirmed CDI cases, with an incidence (95% CI) of 1.44 (1.40-1.48) per 1000 registered patients. Unadjusted analysis showed that an increased risk of total CDI incidence was associated with higher total antibiotic prescribing [relative risk (RR) (95% CI) = 1.338 (1.170-1.529) per 1000 items per 1000 specific therapeutic group age-sex related GP prescribing units (STAR-PU)] and that high-risk antibiotic classes were positively associated with total CDI incidence. Location, age ≥65 years and diabetes were associated with increased risk of CDI. After adjusting for confounders, prescribing of clindamycin showed a positive association with total CDI incidence [RR (95% CI) = 1.079 (1.001-1.162) log items per 1000 registered patients].

CONCLUSIONS

An increased risk of CDI is demonstrated at a primary care practice population level, reflecting their antibiotic prescribing rates, particularly clindamycin, and population demographics.

Outcomes in reported penicillin allergic mothers and neonates requiring Group B streptococcal prophylaxis: a retrospective observational cohort study

Background

Infectious morbidity and mortality in the first week of life is commonly caused by early-onset neonatal Group B streptococcus (GBS) disease. This infection is spread from GBS positive mothers to neonates by vertical transmission during delivery and results in serious illness for newborns. Intrapartum prophylactic antibiotics have decreased the incidence of early-onset neonatal GBS disease by 80%. Patients labeled with a penicillin allergy (PcnA) alternatively receive either vancomycin or clindamycin but effectiveness is controversial. We evaluated the influence of a reported PcnA label versus no PcnA label on inpatient maternal and neonatal outcomes.

Methods

Our goal was to examine the relationship between a PcnA label, maternal and neonatal outcomes, and hospital costs. We collected retrospective data with institutional IRB approval from 2016 – 2018 for hospitalized patients who were GBS positive, pregnant at time of admission, ≥ 18 years of age, received antibiotic prophylaxis for GBS, were labeled as PcnA or non-PcnA, and completed a vaginal delivery. Patient characteristics and maternal/neonatal outcomes were examined. Statistical tests included calculations of means, medians, proportions, Mann–Whitney, two-sample t-tests, Chi-squared or Fisher’s Exact tests, and generalized linear and logistic regression models. Significance was set at p < 0.05.

Results

Most PcnA patients were white, older, had a higher median body mass index and mean heart rate, and a greater proportion used tobacco than non-PcnA patients. In regression analyses, PcnA hospitalized patients received a shorter duration of antibiotic treatment than non-PcnA patients [incidence rate ratio (IRR): 0.45, 95% CI: 0.38–0.53]. PcnA patients were also more likely to have their baby’s hospital LOS be > 48 h [adjusted odds ratio (AOR): 1.35, 95% CI: 1.07–1.69] even though the PcnA mothers’ LOS was not different from non-PcnA mothers. Cost of care, mortality, intensive care, median parity, mean gravidity, and miscarriage were similar between the groups.

Conclusions

In hospitalized obstetric patients, a PcnA label was associated with a shorter maternal course of antibiotic treatment and a longer neonatal LOS. Further prospective studies are needed to clarify the underlying reasons for these outcomes.

DALES, Drug Allergy Labels in Elective Surgical patients: a prospective multicentre cross-sectional study of incidence, risks, and attitudes in penicillin de-labelling strategies

BACKGROUND

We sought to define the prevalence and nature of patient-reported drug allergies, determine their impact on prescribing, and explore drug allergy knowledge and attitudes amongst anaesthetists.

METHODS

We performed a prospective cross-sectional study in 213 UK hospitals in 2018. Elective surgical patients were interviewed, with a detailed allergy history taken in those self-reporting drug allergy. Anaesthetists completed a questionnaire concerning perioperative drug allergy.

RESULTS

Of 21 219 patients included, 6214 (29.3 %) (95% confidence interval [CI]: 28.7-29.9) reported drug allergy. Antibiotics, NSAIDs, and opioids were the most frequently implicated agents. Of a total of 8755 reactions, 2462 (28.1%) (95% CI: 29.2-31.1) were categorised as high risk for representing genuine allergy after risk stratification. A history suggestive of chronic spontaneous urticaria significantly increased the risk of reporting drug allergy (odds ratio 2.68; 95% CI: 2.4-3; P<0.01). Of 4756 anaesthetists completing the questionnaire, 1473 (31%) (95% CI: 29.7-32.3) routinely discuss perioperative allergy risk with patients. Prescribing habits in the presence of drug allergy labels differ depending on the implicated agent. Most anaesthetists (4678/4697; 99.6%) (95% CI: 99.4-99.8) prescribe opioids when reactions are consistent with side-effects, although 2269/4697 (48%) (95% CI: 46.9-49.7) would avoid the specific opioid reported.

CONCLUSIONS

Almost 30% of UK elective surgical patients report a history of drug allergies, but the majority of reported reactions are likely to be non-allergic reactions. Allergy labels can impact on perioperative prescribing through avoidance of important drugs and use of less effective alternatives. We highlight important knowledge gaps about drug allergy amongst anaesthetists, and the need for improved education around allergy.

Management of penicillin allergy in primary care: a qualitative study with patients and primary care physicians

Background

Six percent of patients are allergic to penicillin according to their medical records. While this designation protects a small number of truly allergic patients from serious reactions, those who are incorrectly labelled may be denied access to recommended first line treatment for many infections. Removal of incorrect penicillin allergy may have positive health consequences for the individual and the general population.

We aimed to explore primary care physicians’ (PCPs) and patients’ views and understanding of penicillin allergy with a focus on clinical management of infections in the face of a penicillin allergy record.

Methods

We conducted an interview study with 31 patients with a penicillin allergy record, and 19 PCPs in the North of England. Data were analysed thematically.

Results

Patients made sense of their allergy status by considering the timing and severity of symptoms. Diagnosis of penicillin allergy was reported to be ‘imperfect’ with PCPs relying on patient reports and incomplete medical records. PCPs and patients often suspected that an allergy record was incorrect, but PCPs were reluctant to change records. PCPs had limited knowledge of allergy services. PCPs often prescribed alternative antibiotics which were easy to identify. Both patients and PCPs differed in the extent to which they were aware of the negative consequences of incorrect penicillin allergy records, their relevance and importance to their lives, and management of penicillin allergy.

Conclusions

PCPs and patients appear insufficiently aware of potential harms associated with incorrect penicillin allergy records. Some of the problems experienced by PCPs could be reduced by ensuring the details of newly diagnosed reactions to antibiotics are clearly documented. In order for PCPs to overturn more incorrect penicillin records through appropriate use of allergy services, more information and training about these services will be needed.

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s12875-021-01465-1.

The impact of penicillin allergy de-labelling on the WHO AWaRe antibiotic categories: a retrospective cohort study

BACKGROUND

The WHO's AWaRe classification categorizes antibiotics into three stewardship groups: Access, Watch and Reserve. The Access group includes antibiotics with lower resistance potential than antibiotics in the other two groups. The UK five-year AMR strategy has set targets for reducing non-Access antibiotic use. The majority of penicillins are in the Access group and therefore patients with a penicillin allergy record are likely to receive more non-Access antibiotics. This study aimed to quantify the impact of penicillin allergy records on non-Access antibiotic prescribing and to estimate potential reductions in non-Access antibiotic use through penicillin allergy de-labelling.

METHODS

Inpatients of a 750-patient-bed UK district general hospital in England prescribed antibiotics between 1^st April 2018 and 31^st March 2019 were included. Variables included: age, sex, co-morbidity, infection treated, antibiotic usage, hospital length of stay, penicillin allergy status. Multivariable logistic regression was used to explore the association between patient characteristics and their receipt of antibiotics in the Access and non-Access groups.

RESULTS

A total of 67,059 antibiotic prescriptions for 23,356 inpatients were analysed. Penicillin allergy records were present in 14.3% of hospital admissions. Patients with a penicillin allergy record were around four times more likely (odds ratio = 4.7) to receive an antibiotic from the non-Access groups (i.e. Reserve and Watch groups). We estimate de-labelling 50% of hospital inpatients with a penicillin allergy record could reduce non-Access antibiotic use by 5.8% and total antibiotic use by 0.86%.

CONCLUSION

Penicillin allergy records are associated with non-Access antibiotic prescribing. Penicillin allergy de-labelling has potential to reduce non-Access antibiotic use.

Patterns of dental antibiotic prescribing in 2017: Australia, England, United States, and British Columbia (Canada)

OBJECTIVE

Our objective was to compare patterns of dental antibiotic prescribing in Australia, England, and North America (United States and British Columbia, Canada).

DESIGN

Population-level analysis of antibiotic prescription.

SETTING

Outpatient prescribing by dentists in 2017.

PARTICIPANTS

Patients receiving an antibiotic dispensed by an outpatient pharmacy.

METHODS

Prescription-based rates adjusted by population were compared overall and by antibiotic class. Contingency tables assessed differences in the proportion of antibiotic class by country.

RESULTS

In 2017, dentists in the United States had the highest antibiotic prescribing rate per 1,000 population and Australia had the lowest rate. The penicillin class, particularly amoxicillin, was the most frequently prescribed for all countries. The second most common agents prescribed were clindamycin in the United States and British Columbia (Canada) and metronidazole in Australia and England. Broad-spectrum agents, amoxicillin-clavulanic acid, and azithromycin were the highest in Australia and the United States, respectively.

CONCLUSION

Extreme differences exist in antibiotics prescribed by dentists in Australia, England, the United States, and British Columbia. The United States had twice the antibiotic prescription rate of Australia and the most frequently prescribed antibiotic in the US was clindamycin. Significant opportunities exist for the global dental community to update their prescribing behavior relating to second-line agents for penicillin allergic patients and to contribute to international efforts addressing antibiotic resistance. Patient safety improvements will result from optimizing dental antibiotic prescribing, especially for antibiotics associated with resistance (broad-spectrum agents) or C. difficile (clindamycin). Dental antibiotic stewardship programs are urgently needed worldwide.

Association Between Removal of a Warning Against Cephalosporin Use in Patients With Penicillin Allergy and Antibiotic Prescribing

IMPORTANCE

Electronic health records (EHRs) often include default alerts that can influence physician selection of antibiotics, which in turn may be associated with a suboptimal choice of agents and increased antibiotic resistance.

OBJECTIVE

To examine whether removal of a default alert in the EHR to avoid cephalosporin use in patients with penicillin allergies is associated with changes in cephalosporin dispensing or administration in these patients.

DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS

This retrospective cohort study of a natural experiment included data on patients who had received antibiotic treatment in the hospital or outpatient setting in 2 regions of a large, integrated health system in California from January 1, 2017, to December 31, 2018. Of 4 398 792 patients, 4 206 480 met the eligibility criteria: enrollment in the health system during antibiotic use, availability of complete demographic data, and use of antibiotics outside of the washout period.

INTERVENTIONS OR EXPOSURES

Oral or parenteral antibiotics dispensed or administered after removal of an EHR alert to avoid cephalosporin use in patients with a recorded penicillin allergy.

MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES

Probability that an antibiotic course was a cephalosporin. A multinomial logistic regression model was used to examine the change in rates of cephalosporin use before and after an EHR penicillin allergy alert was removed in 1 of the study regions. Temporal changes in use rates were controlled for by comparing changes in cephalosporin use among patients with or without a penicillin allergy at the site that removed the warning and among patients at a comparison site that retained the warning. Regression models were used to examine adverse events.

RESULTS

Of the 4 206 480 patients who met all inclusion criteria, 2 465 849 (58.6%) were women; the mean (SD) age was 40.5 (23.2) years. A total of 10 652 014 antibiotic courses were administered or dispensed, divided approximately evenly between the period before and after removal of the warning. Before removal of an alert in the electronic health record system to avoid prescribing of cephalosporins to patients with a penicillin allergy at 1 of the 2 sites, 58 228 courses of cephalosporins (accounting for 17.9% of all antibiotic use at the site) were used among patients with a penicillin allergy; after removal of the alert, administration or dispensing of cephalosporins increased by 47% compared with cephalosporin administration or dispensing among patients without a penicillin allergy at the same site and patients at the comparison site that retained the warning (ratio of ratios of odds ratios [RROR], 1.47; 95% CI, 1.38-1.56) . No significant differences in anaphylaxis (9 total cases), new allergies (RROR, 1.02; 95% CI, 0.93-1.12), or treatment failures (RROR, 1.02; 95% CI, 0.99-1.05) were found at the course level. No significant differences were found in all-cause mortality (ratio of ratios of rate ratios [RRRR], 1.03; 95% CI, 0.94-1.13), hospital days (RRRR, 1.04; 95% CI, 0.99-1.10), and new infections (Clostridioides difficile: RRRR, 1.02; 95% CI, 0.84-1.22; methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus: RRRR, 0.87; 95% CI, 0.75-1.00; and vancomycin-resistant Enterococcus: RRRR, 0.82; 95% CI, 0.55-1.22) at the patient level.

CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE

In this cohort study, removal of a warning in the electronic health record to avoid cephalosporin use in patients with penicillin allergies was associated with increased administration and dispensing of cephalosporin. This simple and rapidly implementable system-level intervention may be useful for improvement in antibiotic stewardship.

Practice- and individual-level antibiotic prescribing associated with antibiotic treatment non-response in respiratory tract infections: a national retrospective observational study

OBJECTIVES

Antibiotic overuse results in adverse clinical outcomes. This study quantified the independent contributions of practice- and individual patient-level antibiotic prescribing to antibiotic treatment non-response in respiratory tract infections (RTIs) in primary care.

METHODS

RTI episodes with antibiotic prescribed in 2018 were extracted from an Australian national general practice database. Practices were classified into tertiles by total antibiotic prescriptions per patient and ratios of broad- to narrow-spectrum antibiotic prescriptions. The association between practice- and individual patient-level antibiotic prescribing in the previous year and antibiotic treatment non-response (defined as prescription of a different antibiotic) ≤30 days after the initial RTI episode was quantified using generalized estimating equations.

RESULTS

Of 84 597 RTI episodes with antibiotics prescribed in 558 practices, 5570 (6.6%) episodes of treatment non-response were identified. Patients with high individual-level antibiotic prescribing (≥4 prescriptions/year) had an increased risk of treatment non-response (versus no prescriptions/year: OR = 1.64, 95% CI = 1.52-1.77). At the practice level, there was no significant association between total antibiotic prescriptions per patient and treatment non-response (high versus low: OR = 0.99, 95% CI = 0.92-1.06). RTI episodes in practices with high broad- to narrow-spectrum antibiotic ratios had an increased risk of treatment non-response (versus low-ratio practices: OR = 1.14, 95% CI = 1.05-1.23); this association was only observed among patients with <4 antibiotic prescriptions/year.

CONCLUSIONS

The general practice-level broad- to narrow-spectrum antibiotic ratio was a predictor of RTI antibiotic treatment non-response in patients with lower individual-level antibiotic use. The measure of practice-level antibiotic prescribing could potentially guide the improvement of antibiotic treatment.

Is there a role of penicillin allergy in developing Clostridioides difficile infection?

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

To explore the evidence for an association between penicillin allergy, antibiotic prescribing and Clostridioides difficile (CDI) infection.

RECENT FINDINGS

Several studies have highlighted the differences in antibiotic prescribing in penicillin allergic patients and the impact on rates of C. difficile infection.

SUMMARY

Penicillin allergy leads to higher incidences of prescriptions for antibiotics that are known to predispose to CDI. In turn CDI is more common in patients with penicillin allergy. Penicillin allergy is often erroneously ascribed to patients and should be challenged.

Penicillin Allergy De-labeling Results in Significant Changes in Outpatient Antibiotic Prescribing Patterns

Unverified penicillin allergies are common but most patients with a penicillin allergy label can safely use penicillin antibiotics. Penicillin allergy labels are associated with poor clinical outcomes and overuse of second-line antibiotics. There is increasing focus on penicillin allergy "de-labeling" as a tool to improve antibiotic prescribing and antimicrobial stewardship. The effect of outpatient penicillin allergy de-labeling on long-term antibiotic use is uncertain. We performed a retrospective pre- and post- study of antibiotic dispensing patterns, from an electronic dispensing data repository, in patients undergoing penicillin allergy assessment at Auckland City Hospital, New Zealand. Over a mean follow-up of 4.55 years, 215/304 (70.7%) of de-labeled patients were dispensed a penicillin antibiotic. Rates of penicillin antibiotic dispensing were 0.24 (0.18-0.30) penicillin courses per year before de-labeling and 0.80 (0.67-0.93) following de-labeling with a reduction in total antibiotic use from 2.30 (2.06-2.54) to 1.79 (1.59-1.99) antibiotic courses per year. In de-labeled patients, the proportion of antibiotic courses that were penicillin antibiotics increased from 12.81 to 39.62%. Rates of macrolide, cephalosporin, trimethoprim/co-trimoxazole, fluoroquinolone, "other" non-penicillin antibiotic use, and broad-spectrum antibiotic use were all lower following de-labeling. Further, antibiotic costs were lower following de-labeling. In this study, penicillin allergy de-labeling was associated with significant changes in antibiotic dispensing patterns.

Developing a behavioural intervention package to identify and amend incorrect penicillin allergy records in UK general practice and subsequently change antibiotic use

OBJECTIVES

To develop a behavioural intervention package to support clinicians and patients to amend incorrect penicillin allergy records in general practice. The intervention aimed to: (1) support clinicians to refer patients for penicillin allergy testing (PAT), (2) support patients to attend for PAT and (3) support clinicians and patients to prescribe or consume penicillin, when indicated, following a negative PAT result.

METHODS

Theory-based, evidence-based and person-based approaches were used in the intervention development. We used evidence from a rapid review, two qualitative studies, and expert consultations with the clinical research team to identify the intervention 'guiding principles' and develop an intervention plan. Barriers and facilitators to the target behaviours were mapped to behaviour change theory in order to describe the proposed mechanisms of change. In the final stage, think-aloud interviews were conducted to optimise intervention materials.

RESULTS

The collated evidence showed that the key barriers to referral of patients by clinicians were limited experience of referral and limited knowledge of referral criteria and PAT. Barriers for patients attending PAT were lack of knowledge of the benefits of testing and lack of motivation to get tested. The key barriers to the prescription and consumption of first-line penicillin following a negative test result were patient and clinician beliefs about the accuracy of PAT and whether taking penicillin was safe. Intervention materials were designed and developed to address these barriers.

CONCLUSIONS

We present a novel behavioural intervention package designed to address the multiple barriers to uptake of PAT in general practice by clinicians and patients. The intervention development details how behaviour change techniques have been incorporated to hypothesise how the intervention is likely to work to help amend incorrect penicillin allergy records. The intervention will go on to be tested in a feasibility trial and randomised controlled trial in England.

Antimicrobial stewardship in dental practice

BACKGROUND

Antibiotic resistance is a global public health problem that is responsible for increased patient morbidity and mortality and financial burden. Dental antibiotic prescribing contributes to approximately 10% of all antibiotic prescriptions, and an estimated 80% of that prescribing is deemed inappropriate. Dental antimicrobial stewardship (AMS) has an important role to play in international efforts to tackle antibiotic resistance. The aim of the authors was to comment on the implementation of AMS strategies in outpatient dental practices.

METHODS

The authors included previous studies regarding outpatient antibiotic stewardship, longitudinal studies quantifying dispensed dental antibiotic prescription use, and interventional studies aimed at implementing AMS interventions in dentistry.

RESULTS

Researchers in several studies conducted trials regarding the use of various interventions, mostly comprising a combination of audit, feedback, dissemination of guidelines, and educational components to improve dental prescribing.

CONCLUSIONS AND PRACTICAL IMPLICATIONS

In regard to the establishment of an AMS strategy, aspects to be considered should include raising awareness about the risks of unnecessary use of antibiotics. Engaging and educating the entire dental team and patients, as well as collaborating with other specialized professionals, are important elements. Context-specific interventions with a methodical and measured approach are ideal.

Sustaining and spreading penicillin allergy delabelling: A narrative review of the challenges for service delivery and patient safety

Many patients report allergies to penicillin, although in over 90% of these the label of penicillin allergy is shown to be incorrect following comprehensive testing. Inappropriate and inaccurate penicillin allergy labelling is a barrier to antimicrobial stewardship and can lead to patient harm. This review assesses an emergent evidence base and trend favouring delabelling using direct oral penicillin challenges following a stratified risk assessment of the likelihood and existence of true penicillin allergy, to identify and make recommendations for key components for implementation in standard practice. Research to date has focussed on the feasibility and clinical and financial outcomes of these direct delabelling strategies. There is a paucity of studies exploring the views and engagement of patients and healthcare professionals, and a gap in the evidence for prerequisites to safely deliver, sustain and spread the implementation of such services across health systems.

Penicillin allergy: a practical approach to assessment and prescribing

Penicillin allergies are not always lifelong. Approximately 50% are lost over five years

A reaction to penicillin during a childhood infection is unlikely to be a true allergy

Only 1–2% of patients with a confirmed penicillin allergy have an allergy to cephalosporins. In patients with a low risk of severe allergic reactions, cephalosporins are a relatively safe treatment option

Patients with a history of delayed non-severe reactions, such as mild childhood rashes that occurred over 10 years ago, may be suitable for an oral rechallenge with low-dose penicillin. This should be done in a supervised hospital environment

In many cases, with appropriate assessment and allergy testing, it may be possible to remove the penicillin allergy label