Allergy management in primary care across European countries -- actual status

Global assessment of the knowledge and confidence in managing allergic disorders among primary care pediatricians across Europe: An EAACI task force report

BACKGROUND

Pediatricians are often the first point of contact for children in Primary Care (PC), but still perceive gaps in their allergy knowledge. We investigated self-perceived knowledge gaps and educational needs in pediatricians across healthcare systems in Europe so that future educational initiatives may better support the delivery of allergy services in PC.

METHOD

A multinational survey was circulated to pediatricians who care for children and adolescents with allergy problems in PC by the EAACI Allergy Educational Needs in Primary Care Pediatricians Task Force from February to March 2023. A 5-point Likert scale was used to assess the level of agreement with questionnaire statements. Thirty surveys per country were the cut-off for inclusion and statistical analysis.

RESULTS

In this study, 1991 respondents were obtained from 56 countries across Europe and 210 responses were from countries with a cut-off below 30 participants per country. Primary care pediatricians (PCPs) comprised 74.4% of the respondents. The majority (65.3%) were contracted to state or district health services. 61.7% had awareness of guidelines for onward allergy referral in their countries but only 22.3% were aware of the EAACI competencies document for allied health professionals for allergy. Total sample respondents versus PCPs showed 52% and 47% of them have access to allergy investigations in their PC facility (mainly specific IgE and skin prick tests); 67.6% and 58.9% have access to immunotherapy, respectively. The main barrier to referral to a specialist was a consideration that the patient's condition could be diagnosed and treated in this PC facility, (57.8% and 63.6% respectively). The main reasons for referral were the need for hospital assessment, and partial response to first-line treatment (55.4% and 59.2%, 47% and 50.7%, respectively). Learning and assessment methods preference was fairly equally divided between Traditional methods (45.7% and 50.1% respectively) and e-learning 45.5% and 44.9%, respectively. Generalist physicians (GPs) have the poorest access to allergy investigations (32.7%, p = .000). The majority of the total sample (91.9%) assess patients with allergic pathology. 868 (43.6%) and 1117 (46.1%), received allergy training as undergraduates and postgraduates respectively [these proportions in PCPs were higher (45% and 59%), respectively]. PCPs with a special interest in allergology experienced greater exposure to allergy teaching as postgraduates. GPs received the largest amount of allergy teaching as undergraduates. Identifying allergic disease based on clinical presentation, respondents felt most confident in the management of eczema/atopic dermatitis (87.4%) and rhinitis/asthma (86.2%), and least confident in allergen immunotherapy (36.9%) and latex allergy (30.8%).

CONCLUSION

This study exploring the confidence of PCPs to diagnose, manage, and refer patients with allergies, demonstrated knowledge gaps and educational needs for allergy clinical practice. It detects areas in need of urgent improvement especially in latex and allergen immunotherapy. It is important to ensure the dissemination of allergy guidelines and supporting EAACI documents since the majority of PCPs lack awareness of them. This survey has enabled us to identify what the educational priorities of PCPs are and how they would like to have them met.

A practical guide to prescribing sublingual immunotherapy tablets in North America for pediatric allergic rhinoconjunctivitis: an injection-free allergy immunotherapy option

Allergic rhinoconjunctivitis (ARC) is a common disease that affects individuals of all ages. Pediatricians may be the first (and only) point of care for children with ARC. Sublingual immunotherapy (SLIT)-tablets are a convenient at-home, injection-free allergy immunotherapy option that can be used for the treatment of ARC. This paper provides a practical guide for pediatricians to aid in prescribing SLIT-tablets to children with ARC in North America. Topics include a summary of the available SLIT-tablets and their efficacy and safety, guidance on when SLIT-tablets are an appropriate option, and how to diagnose ARC and identify culprit allergens. Practical guidance is also provided through a proposed decision tree, a prescribing checklist and prescribing procedures, and suggested follow-up assessments.

Provision of Food Allergy Care in the United Kingdom and United States: Current Issues and Future Directions

Food allergy (FA) is a growing issue worldwide. The United Kingdom and United States are high-income, industrialized countries with reported increases in FA prevalence over the past few decades. This review compares delivery of FA care in the United Kingdom and United States and each country's response to the heightened demand and disparities for FA services. In the United Kingdom, allergy specialists are scarce and general practitioners (GPs) provide most allergy care. Whereas the United States has more allergists per capita than the United Kingdom, there is still a shortage of allergy services owing to the greater reliance on specialist care for FA in America and wide geographic variation in access to allergist services. Currently, generalists in these countries lack the specialty training and equipment to diagnose and manage FA optimally. Moving forward, the United Kingdom aims to enhance training for GPs so they may provide better quality frontline allergy care. In addition, the United Kingdom is implementing a new tier of semi-specialized GPs and increasing cross-center collaboration through clinical networks. The United Kingdom and United States aim to increase the number of FA specialists, which is critical at a time of rapidly expanding management options for allergic and immunologic diseases requiring clinical expertise and shared decision-making to select appropriate therapies. While these countries aim to grow their supply of quality FA services actively, further efforts to build clinical networks and perhaps recruit international medical graduates and expand telehealth services are necessary to reduce disparities in access to care. For the United Kingdom in particular, increasing quality services will require additional support from the leadership of the centralized National Health Service, which remains challenging.

A Pragmatic Primary Practice Approach to Using Specific IgE in Allergy Testing in Asthma Diagnosis, Management, and Referral

Asthma afflicts an estimated 339 million people globally and is associated with ill health, disability, and early death. Strong risk factors for developing asthma are genetic predisposition and environmental exposure to inhaled substances that may provoke allergic reactions. Asthma guidelines recommend identifying causal or trigger allergens with specific IgE (sIgE) testing after a diagnosis of asthma has been made. Allergy testing with sIgE targets subpopulations of patients considered at high risk, such as those with frequent exacerbations, emergency visits or hospitalizations, or uncontrolled symptoms. Specific recommendations apply to preschool children, school-age children, patients with persistent or difficult-to-control asthma, patients needing oral corticosteroids or high-dose inhaled steroids, patients seeking understanding and guidance about their disease, and candidates for advanced therapies (biologics, allergen immunotherapy). Allergen skin testing is common in specialized settings but less available in primary care. Blood tests for total and sIgE are accessible and yield quantifiable results for tested allergens, useful for detecting sensitization. Results are interpreted in the context of the patient’s clinical presentation, age, and relevant allergen exposures. Incorporating sIgE testing into asthma management adds objective information to identify specific allergies and can guide personalized treatment plans, which reinforce patient-doctor communication. Test results can also be used to predict exacerbations and response to therapies. Additional diagnostic information can be gleaned from (i) eosinophil count ≥300 μL, which significantly increases the odds of having exacerbations, and emerging eosinophil biomarkers (eg, eosinophil-derived neurotoxin), which can be measured in plasma or serum samples, and (ii) fractional exhaled nitric oxide (FeNO), with values ≥25 ppb regarded as the cutoff for diagnosis, evaluating inhaled corticosteroid response, and of probable response to anti-IgE, anti-IL4 and anti-IL5 receptor biologics. Referral to asthma/allergy specialists is warranted when the initial diagnosis is uncertain, and when asthma symptoms, impairment, or exacerbations are repeated or severe.

Current allergy educational needs in primary care. Results of the EAACI working group on primary care survey exploring the confidence to manage and the opportunity to refer patients with allergy

The aim of this survey was to explore the specific educational needs of a cohort of European GPs with regards to allergy training so that future educational initiatives may better support the delivery of allergy services in primary care.

METHOD

This study took the form of a cross-sectional observational study in which a structured electronic questionnaire was distributed to primary care providers, in eight languages, across 8 European countries between September 2019 and November 2019. Data associated with demographic parameters, professional qualifications, type of employment, level of confidence regarding competencies for diagnosis and treatment of allergic diseases, referral of patients to allergist and preferred method of learning and assessment were collected. A 5-point Likert scale was used to assess level of confidence. Exploratory analysis was carried out.

RESULTS

A total of 687 responses were available for analysis, with 99.3% of responders working within Europe. 70.1% of participants were female; and 48.0% and 48.0% of participants respectively had received some undergraduate and/or postgraduate allergy education. Confidence in dealing with different aspect of allergy management differed between countries. The main reason for specialist referral was a perceived need for tertiary assessment (54.3%), and the main barrier for referral was the consideration that the patient's condition could be appropriately diagnosed and treated in a primary care facility. Up to 44.7% and 55.3% of participants reported that they preferred e-Learning over traditional learning.

CONCLUSIONS

This study identified the specific areas of skills training and educational needs of GPs in managing allergic conditions in primary care, and provided insights into possible strategies for more feasible and cost-effective approaches.

Harmonizing allergy care-integrated care pathways and multidisciplinary approaches

There is a wide time gap between the publication of evidence and the application of new knowledge into routine clinical practice. The consequence is sub-optimal outcomes, particularly concerning for long-term relapsing/remitting conditions such as allergic diseases. In response, there has been a proliferation of published guidelines which systematically review evidence for the gold-standard management of most allergic disorders. However, this has not necessarily been followed by improved outcomes, partly due to a lack of coordination across the patient pathway. This has become known as the "second translational gap". A proposed solution is the development and implementation of integrated care pathways (ICPs) to optimize patient outcomes, with the notion that evidence-based medicine requires evidence-based implementation. ICP implementation is shown to improve short-term outcomes for acute conditions and routine surgery, including reduced length of hospital stay, improved documentation and improved patient safety. However, this improvement is not reflected in patient experience or patient-centered functional outcomes. The implementation of life-long, cost-effective interventions within comprehensive pathways requires a deep appreciation for complexity within allergy care.

We promote an evidence-based methodology for the implementation of ICPs for allergic disorders in which all stakeholders in allergy care are positioned equally and encouraged to contribute, particularly patients and their caregivers. This evidence-based process commences with scoping the unmet needs, followed by stakeholder mapping. All stakeholders are invited to meetings to develop a common vision and mission through the generation of action/effect diagrams which helps build concordance across the agencies. Dividing the interventions into achievable steps and reviewing with plan/do/study/act cycles will gradually modify the pathway to achieve the best outcomes. While the management guidelines provide the core knowledge, the key component of implementation involves education, training, and support of all healthcare professionals (HCPs), patients and their caregivers.

The pathways should define the level of competence required for each clinical task. It may be useful to leave the setting of care delivery or the specific HCP involved undefined to account for variable patterns of health service delivery as well as local socioeconomic, ethnic, environmental, and political imperatives. In all cases, where competence is exceeded, it is necessary to refer to the next stage in the pathway. The success and sustainability of ICPs would ideally be judged by patient experience, health outcomes, and health economics. We provide examples of successful programs, most notably from Finland, but recommend that further research is required in diverse settings to optimize outcomes worldwide.

Exploiting Causality for Improved Prediction of Patient Volumes by Gaussian Processes

Estimating and surveillance volumes of patients are of great importance for public health and resource allocation. In many situations, the change of these volumes is correlated with many factors, e.g., seasonal environmental variables, medicine sales, and patient medical claims. It is often of interest to predict patient volumes and to that end, discovering causalities can improve the prediction accuracy. Correlations do not imply causations and they can be spurious, which in turn may entail deterioration of prediction performance if the prediction is based on them. By contrast, in this paper, we propose an approach for prediction based on causalities discovered by Gaussian processes. Our interest is in estimating volumes of patients that suffer from allergy and where the model and the results are highly interpretable. In selecting features, instead of only using correlation, we take causal information into account. Specifically, we adopt the Gaussian processes-based convergent cross mapping framework for causal discovery which is proven to be more reliable than the Granger causality when time series are coupled. Moreover, we introduce a novel method for selecting the history or look-back length of features from the perspective of a dynamical system in a principled manner. The quasi-periodicities that commonly exist in observations of volumes of patients and environment variables can readily be accommodated. Further, the proposed method performs well even in cases when the data are scarce. Also, the approach can be modified without much difficulty to forecast other types of patient volumes. We validate the method with synthetic and real-world datasets.

Study protocol: Development, implementation, evaluation and refinement of a translational allergic rhinitis clinical management pathway (AR-CMaP) for community pharmacies

BACKGROUND

Allergic Rhinitis (AR) is a highly burdened chronic respiratory disease1-4, which affects about 40% of the world's population5. Research shows that only 15% of people with AR, in the community pharmacy setting are using optimal AR medication6. There is a clear need to better implement AR management guidelines so that more effective medication selection and an evidence-based approach to the management of AR is implemented.

OBJECTIVE

This paper describes the methods that will be used to develop, implement, evaluate and refine an evidence-based, guideline informed allergic rhinitis clinical management pathway, Allergic Rhinitis Clinical Management Pathway (AR-CMaP) for community pharmacy.

METHODS

AR-CMaP was developed based on the latest AR management guidelines for pharmacy7 and empirical evidence associated with patient self-management behaviours in community pharmacy15, utilising the Promoting Action on Research Implementation in Health Services implementation framework (Phase 1). AR-CMaP was then implemented in six pharmacies in the Australian Capital Territory (ACT), Australia (Phase 2). The impact of AR-CMaP on AR management in the pharmacy (AR medication management and pharmacy practice) will be evaluated in a pre-post intervention study design (Phase 3). Phase 4 will involve the refinement of AR-CMaP to ensure its generalisability and scalability; readiness for large-scale dissemination across different pharmacy locations (e.g. rural, remote, metropolitan) and different pharmacy business models.

CONCLUSIONS

There is an urgent need to develop a translational AR clinical pathway, to address the wide-spread challenge of suboptimal AR management and burden of AR on individuals and society. This protocol paper describes the methods underpinning the development, implementation, evaluation and refinement of an evidence-based AR clinical pathway for community pharmacy setting, which is in line with current clinical evidence and feasible for effective implementation into the community pharmacy setting.

International severe asthma registry (ISAR): protocol for a global registry

Background

Severe asthma exerts a disproportionately heavy burden on patients and health care. Due to the heterogeneity of the severe asthma population, many patients need to be evaluated to understand the clinical features and outcomes of severe asthma in order to facilitate personalised and targeted care. The International Severe Asthma Registry (ISAR) is a multi-country registry project initiated to aid in this endeavour.

Methods

ISAR is a multi-disciplinary initiative benefitting from the combined experience of the ISAR Steering Committee (ISC; comprising 47 clinicians and researchers across 29 countries, who have a special interest and/or experience in severe asthma management or establishment and maintenance of severe asthma registries) in collaboration with scientists and experts in database management and communication. Patients (≥18 years old) receiving treatment according to the 2018 definitions of the Global Initiative for Asthma (GINA) Step 5 or uncontrolled on GINA Step 4 treatment will be included. Data will be collected on a core set of 95 variables identified using the Delphi method. Participating registries will agree to provide access to and share standardised anonymous patient-level data with ISAR. ISAR is a registered data source on the European Network of Centres for Pharmacoepidemiology and Pharmacovigilance. ISAR’s collaborators include Optimum Patient Care, the Respiratory Effectiveness Group (REG) and AstraZeneca. ISAR is overseen by the ISC, REG, the Anonymised Data Ethics & Protocol Transparency Committee and the ISAR operational committee, ensuring the conduct of ethical, clinically relevant research that brings value to all key stakeholders.

Conclusions

ISAR aims to offer a rich source of real-life data for scientific research to understand and improve disease burden, treatment patterns and patient outcomes in severe asthma. Furthermore, the registry will provide an international platform for research collaboration in respiratory medicine, with the overarching aim of improving primary and secondary care of adults with severe asthma globally.

The Role of Aeroallergen Sensitization Testing in Asthma Management

Asthma is a global disease affecting almost 400 million people. Simultaneously, the overall burden of allergies is increasing. Although allergies are frequent and commonly recognized triggers of asthma severity and exacerbations, the majority of patients with asthma are not investigated for their underlying aeroallergen sensitizations, despite the potentially preventable consequences and therapeutic options. This review summarizes the current state of aeroallergen sensitization testing for people with asthma. We describe who should be tested and why, how testing can be used to optimize asthma management, list barriers to implementation of effective asthma management strategies, and make recommendations for improving asthma/allergy management by aeroallergen testing. Establishing a diagnosis of asthma and determining whether there is an allergic component is fundamental to an effective treatment plan. Moreover, moving from severity-based to phenotype-based asthma care can improve the care of asthma and allergic diseases. Timely diagnosis of aeroallergen sensitizations forms the basis for individualized treatment plans, which may include allergen remediation strategies when appropriate, and allergen immunotherapy, the only immunomodulating therapy for allergic asthma. Finally, the advent of biologics will expand the number of patients who can benefit from treatment, with decreased symptoms and disease remission a possibility for the first time.

2019 ARIA Care pathways for allergen immunotherapy

Allergen immunotherapy (AIT) is a proven therapeutic option for the treatment of allergic rhinitis and/or asthma. Many guidelines or national practice guidelines have been produced but the evidence-based method varies, many are complex and none propose care pathways. This paper reviews care pathways for AIT using strict criteria and provides simple recommendations that can be used by all stakeholders including healthcare professionals. The decision to prescribe AIT for the patient should be individualized and based on the relevance of the allergens, the persistence of symptoms despite appropriate medications according to guidelines as well as the availability of good-quality and efficacious extracts. Allergen extracts cannot be regarded as generics. Immunotherapy is selected by specialists for stratified patients. There are no currently available validated biomarkers that can predict AIT success. In adolescents and adults, AIT should be reserved for patients with moderate/severe rhinitis or for those with moderate asthma who, despite appropriate pharmacotherapy and adherence, continue to exhibit exacerbations that appear to be related to allergen exposure, except in some specific cases. Immunotherapy may be even more advantageous in patients with multimorbidity. In children, AIT may prevent asthma onset in patients with rhinitis. mHealth tools are promising for the stratification and follow-up of patients.

Why Do People Misdiagnose Themselves with Food Hypersensitivity? An Exploration of the Role of Biopsychosocial Factors

Up to 35% of people self-diagnose food allergy or intolerance (food hypersensitivity [FH]), or diagnose it in their child, and self-manage the condition rather than seek a clinical diagnosis. This is much higher than the latest FH prevalence rate, estimated to affect 2–5% of the general population. The actual prevalence rate may be underestimated due to the lack of diagnostic services; however, this can only account for a small proportion of the discrepancy because only a small percentage of self-reported FH can be clinically confirmed. Many people are therefore misdiagnosing their or their child’s symptoms as FH and needlessly removing foods from their or their child’s diet. There are a number of possible reasons for this misdiagnosis, which can be considered from a biopsychosocial perspective. Psychological factors include a confusion over the diagnosis, coincidental pairing of food and symptom, psychological or psychosomatic reactions, and taste aversions. There are also biological mechanisms that have not been fully considered in food allergy research that may be relevant, such as conditioning of the immune system or stress responses. A social context pertains to a greater awareness of FH due to media coverage and changes in food labelling laws. Any of these theories are plausible, but the research to date has a number of methodological issues. Most studies report on small self-selected samples recruited from clinics and there is a lack of general population data. Studies also tend to be cross-sectional, which does not allow cause and effect to be established. Future research needs to include longitudinal designs that incorporate qualitative elements to enable a detailed exploration of reasons why people self and misdiagnose FH.

Four seasons of Czech asthma study: asthma characteristics and management reality in the Czech Republic

Objective: To describe the characteristics and management of asthma in clinical practice in the Czech Republic in the context of international guidelines and clinical realities.Methods: Data were collected over four seasons from summer 2016 to spring 2017 and are mostly presented using descriptive statistics.Results: We obtained valid data for 4557 adult patients with asthma, including detailed phenotyping (71% eosinophilic allergic, 10% eosinophilic non-allergic, 19% non-eosinophilic non-allergic asthma) from 58 allergologists and 56 pulmonologists. The average time to diagnosis was 3 years. In more than half of the subjects, bronchodilator testing (BDT) results were available at primary diagnosis. More than 10% of physicians did not test for mold allergy. Occupational asthma was diagnosed in 0.7% of subjects. According to the attending physician, 68% of patients had well-controlled and 10% had uncontrolled asthma. Ninety-four percent of patients were on preventive treatment, with 91% using an inhaled corticosteroids (ICS) at an average dose of 705 µg/day budesonide equivalent. Approximately 75% of patients were on an ICS/LABA, with 91% using fixed combinations. Among patients using ICS/formoterol, a maintenance and reliever therapy regime was prescribed in 67%.Conclusions: The quality of asthma management in the Czech Republic is comparable to that of other developed countries and better in some respects (frequent BDT, phenotyping, and use of preventive treatment). Nevertheless, there is unnecessary delay in diagnosis and lack of research on possible environmental causes (workplace, molds). Pharmacotherapy shows good adherence to guidelines. Although 10% of patients show poor control, there is concurrently a trend for overtreatment.

Development of algorithms for the diagnosis and management of acute allergy in primary practice

Most patients presenting with allergies are first seen in the primary care setting. However, inadequacies in training and available guidance for general practitioners (GP) have been identified as significantly impacting the quality of care for these patients, resulting in inefficient use of healthcare resources. To address the lack of available guidance, a working group of French allergists has developed a series of online tools aimed at GPs. The expert panel developed algorithms for the diagnosis and treatment of common allergies by incorporating deliberations based on clinical guidelines and experience. In addition, they developed tables of common symptoms and detailed clinical cases that guide GPs through the typical decisions they are faced with in line with current best practice. These tools translate evidence-based recommendations from international clinical guidelines, outlining the key steps involved and assisting the physician in making decisions at each step. In addition to targeting improvements in diagnosis and standard of primary care, the tools also aim to reduce the burden on specialist allergy services by enabling GPs to diagnose and treat mild and moderate allergies, referring only severe and/or atypical cases to secondary care. The tools are adapted to the high primary care workload, enabling the physician to access essential information rapidly without unnecessary referrals to specialist allergy services.

Why Do People Misdiagnose Themselves with Food Hypersensitivity? An Exploration of the Role of Biopsychosocial Factors

Up to 35% of people self-diagnose food allergy or intolerance (food hypersensitivity [FH]), or diagnose it in their child, and self-manage the condition rather than seek a clinical diagnosis. This is much higher than the latest FH prevalence rate, estimated to affect 2–5% of the general population. The actual prevalence rate may be underestimated due to the lack of diagnostic services; however, this can only account for a small proportion of the discrepancy because only a small percentage of self-reported FH can be clinically confirmed. Many people are therefore misdiagnosing their or their child’s symptoms as FH and needlessly removing foods from their or their child’s diet. There are a number of possible reasons for this misdiagnosis, which can be considered from a biopsychosocial perspective. Psychological factors include a confusion over the diagnosis, coincidental pairing of food and symptom, psychological or psychosomatic reactions, and taste aversions. There are also biological mechanisms that have not been fully considered in food allergy research that may be relevant, such as conditioning of the immune system or stress responses. A social context pertains to a greater awareness of FH due to media coverage and changes in food labelling laws. Any of these theories are plausible, but the research to date has a number of methodological issues. Most studies report on small self-selected samples recruited from clinics and there is a lack of general population data. Studies also tend to be cross-sectional, which does not allow cause and effect to be established. Future research needs to include longitudinal designs that incorporate qualitative elements to enable a detailed exploration of reasons why people self and misdiagnose FH.

The feasibility of an allergy management support system (AMSS) for IgE-mediated allergy in primary care

Background

The allergy management support system (AMSS) was developed to assist general practitioners (GPs) to handle the increasing burden of allergic diseases and facilitates the diagnosis and management of allergy. The aim of this cluster-randomized controlled pilot study was to test the feasibility of this AMSS for primary care.

Methods

GPs received diagnostic and management recommendations generated by the AMSS in addition to sIgE-test results (intervention) or GPs received sIgE-test results only (control). The AMSS recommendations are based on the previously developed patient-completed AMSS questionnaire and sIgE-test results. The AMSS was considered feasible when > 70% of the AMSS recommendations were sent to the GP within ten working days of sIgE-testing. GPs completed a questionnaire on their diagnosis and management before (T1) and after (T2) receiving sIgE test results. Agreement and disagreement concerning diagnosis, medication and referrals between GPs and AMSS was investigated at T1 and T2. A total agreement score between GPs and AMSS was calculated. GPs in the intervention group completed a questionnaire to evaluate the utility of the AMSS. Semi-structured interviews were used to explore the motivation of GPs who did not include patients in this pilot study.

Results

Twenty-seven GPs included 101 patients. Forty-two patients (72%) completed the AMSS questionnaire in the intervention group. The majority of the AMSS recommendations (93%) were returned to the GP within 10 working days after sIgE-test results were known [mean (SD) 4.7 (4.0) working days]. GPs in the intervention group reported largely following the AMSS recommendations in 71% of cases. The total agreement scores concerning diagnosis were significantly higher (p < 0.001) in the intervention group than the control group [mean (SD); 0.9 (1.8) vs − 0.8 (1.0)]. The agreement concerning medication or referral between GPs and AMSS did not differ between the intervention and the control group. GPs in the intervention group were reasonably positive about the AMSS. Not enrolling patients was not caused by anticipated ineffectiveness of the AMSS.

Conclusion

The AMSS can be considered to be feasible for primary care. GPs tend to follow the AMSS recommendations. The AMSS may contribute to the empowerment of GPs to better manage allergy patients in primary care.

Trial registration ISRCTN ISRCTN36780877. Registered 23 November 2017 (retrospectively registered)

An EAACI task force report: recognising the potential of the primary care physician in the diagnosis and management of drug hypersensitivity

Adverse drug reactions include drug hypersensitivity reactions (DHRs), which can be immunologically mediated (allergy) or non-immunologically mediated. The high number of DHRs that are unconfirmed and often self-reported is a frequent problem in daily clinical practice, with considerable impact on future prescription choices and patient health. It is important to distinguish between hypersensitivity and non-hypersensitivity reactions by adopting a structured diagnostic approach to confirm or discard the suspected drug, not only to avoid life-threatening reactions, but also to reduce the frequent over-diagnosis of DHRs. Primary care physicians are often the first point of contact for the sufferer of a reaction, as such they have a key role in deciding whether to discard the diagnosis or send the patient for further investigation. In this review, we highlight the importance of diagnosing DHRs, analysing in detail the role of primary care physicians. We describe the common patterns of DHRs and signs of its progression, as well as the indications and contraindications for referring the patient to an allergist. The diagnostic process is described and the possible tests are discussed, which often depend on the drug involved and the type of DHR suspected. We also describe recommendations regarding the avoidance of medication suspected to have caused the reaction and the use of alternatives.

Challenges in the implementation of the EAACI AIT guidelines: A situational analysis of current provision of allergen immunotherapy

PURPOSE

The European Academy of Allergy and Clinical Immunology (EAACI) has produced Guidelines on Allergen Immunotherapy (AIT). We sought to gauge the preparedness of primary care to participate in the delivery of AIT in Europe.

METHODS

We undertook a mixed-methods, situational analysis. This involved a purposeful literature search and two surveys: one to primary care clinicians and the other to a wider group of stakeholders across Europe.

RESULTS

The 10 papers identified all pointed out gaps or deficiencies in allergy care provision in primary care. The surveys also highlighted similar concerns, particularly in relation to concerns about lack of knowledge, skills, infrastructural weaknesses, reimbursement policies and communication with specialists as barriers to evidence-based care. Almost all countries (92%) reported the availability of AIT. In spite of that, only 28% and 44% of the countries reported the availability of guidelines for primary care physicians and specialists, respectively. Agreed pathways between specialists and primary care physicians were reported as existing in 32%-48% of countries. Reimbursement appeared to be an important barrier as AIT was only fully reimbursed in 32% of countries. Additionally, 44% of respondents considered accessibility to AIT and 36% stating patient costs were barriers.

CONCLUSIONS

Successful working with primary care providers is essential to scaling-up AIT provision in Europe, but to achieve this, the identified barriers must be overcome. Development of primary care interpretation of guidelines to aid patient selection, establishment of disease management pathways and collaboration with specialist groups are required as a matter of urgency.

Incomplete and incorrect epinephrine auto-injector training to food-allergic patients by pharmacists in the Netherlands

BACKGROUND

Successful treatment of anaphylaxis in the community relies on early and correct use of epinephrine auto-injectors (EAI). In the Netherlands, pharmacists supply EAIs to patients and have a crucial role in instructing patients in how and when to use EAI. However, there are currently no data in Europe on the quality of such instruction provided by pharmacists. Therefore, the aims of this study were to investigate the knowledge, attitudes, and beliefs regarding food allergy among pharmacists in the Netherlands and to investigate the quality of EAI instructions and demonstrations to patients by pharmacists.

METHODS

Pharmacists were asked to complete an online questionnaire. Quality of instructions and demonstration accuracy were assessed in mystery guest visits to randomly selected pharmacies. For the statistical analysis, descriptive methods were used.

RESULTS

In total, 25 of 115 questionnaires were completed. Only two (8%) respondents gave correct answers concerning the proper EAI demonstration. Twenty-one (84%) respondents thought that the provision of instructions was the responsibility of pharmacists. In total, ten pharmacies were included in simulated patient visits. Five of them (50%) demonstrated the EAI. None of them demonstrated the EAI use correctly.

CONCLUSION

Food-allergic patients at high risk for anaphylaxis who receive their EAI from a community pharmacy are often not instructed on how to use an EAI or receive incorrect instructions. Pharmacists show considerable gaps in knowledge about food allergy and its management. These data suggest that opportunities exist to improve the quality of care provided by pharmacies to high-risk food-allergic patients.

Development of an allergy management support system in primary care

Background

Management of allergic patients in the population is becoming more difficult because of increases in both complexity and prevalence. Although general practitioners (GPs) are expected to play an important role in the care of allergic patients, they often feel ill-equipped for this task. Therefore, the aim of this study was to develop an allergy management support system (AMSS) for primary care.

Methods

Through literature review, interviewing and testing in secondary and primary care patients, an allergy history questionnaire was constructed by allergists, dermatologists, GPs and researchers based on primary care and specialists’ allergy guidelines and their clinical knowledge. Patterns of AMSS questionnaire responses and specific immunoglobulin E (sIgE)-test outcomes were used to identify diagnostic categories and develop corresponding management recommendations. Validity of the AMSS was investigated by comparing specialist (gold standard) and AMSS diagnostic categories.

Results

The two-page patient-completed AMSS questionnaire consists of 12 (mainly) multiple choice questions on symptoms, triggers, severity and medication. Based on the AMSS questionnaires and sIgE-test outcome of 118 patients, approximately 150 diagnostic categories of allergic rhinitis, asthma, atopic dermatitis, anaphylaxis, food allergy, hymenoptera allergy and other allergies were identified, and the corresponding management recommendations were formulated. The agreement between the allergy specialists’ assessments and the AMSS was 69.2% (CI 67.2–71.2).

Conclusion

Using a systematic approach, it was possible to develop an AMSS that allows for the formulation of diagnostic and management recommendations for GPs managing allergic patients. The AMSS thus holds promise for the improvement of the quality of primary care for this increasing group of patients.

Systematic review of pathways for the delivery of allergy services

OBJECTIVES

The incidence and prevalence of allergies worldwide has been increasing and allergy services globally are unable to keep up with this increase in demand. This systematic review aims to understand the delivery of allergy services worldwide, challenges faced and future directions for service delivery.

METHODS

A systematic scoping review of Ovid, EMBASE, HMIC, CINAHL, Cochrane, DARE, NHS EED and INAHTA databases was carried out using predefined inclusion and exclusion criteria. Data on the geographical region, study design and treatment pathways described were collected, and the findings were narratively reported. This review followed the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses (PRISMA) guidelines.

RESULTS

205 publications were screened and 27 selected for review. Only 3 were prospective studies, and none included a control group. There were no eligible publications identified from North America, Africa, Australia and most parts of Asia. Most publications relate to allergy services in the UK. In general, allergy services globally appear not to have kept pace with increasing demand. The review suggests that primary care practitioners are not being adequately trained in allergy and that there is a paucity of appropriately trained specialists, especially in paediatric allergy. There appear to be considerable barriers to service improvement, including lack of political will and reluctance to allocate funds from local budgets.

CONCLUSIONS

Demand for allergy services appears to have significantly outpaced supply. Primary and secondary care pathways in allergy seem inadequate leading to poor referral practices, delays in patient management and consequently poor outcomes. Improvement of services requires strong public and political engagement. There is a need for well-planned, prospective studies in this area and a few are currently underway. There is no evidence to suggest that any given pathway of service provision is better than another although data from a few long-term, prospective studies look very promising.

Epinephrine auto-injector prescriptions to food-allergic patients in primary care in The Netherlands

Background

The knowledge of general practitioner(s) (GPs) regarding food allergy and anaphylaxis and practices in the prescription of epinephrine auto-injector(s) (EAIs) among GPs has previously only been studied using questionnaires and hypothetical cases. Therefore, there are currently no data as to whether or not GPs prescribe EAIs to high risk food-allergic patients presenting to primary care practices. The aim of this study was therefore to describe and evaluate practice in EAI prescription by GPs to food-allergic patients in The Netherlands.

Methods

Patients aged 12–23 years who consulted their GP for allergic symptoms were identified in a primary care database. Patients were classified as probably or unlikely to be food-allergic. A risk factor assessment was done to identify probably food-allergic patients at high risk for anaphylaxis to assess the need for an EAI.

Results

One hundred forty-eight out of 1015 patients consulted their GP for allergic symptoms due to food. Eighty patients were excluded from analysis because of incomplete records. Thirty-four patients were classified as probably food-allergic. Twenty-seven of them were considered high risk patients and candidates for an EAI. Importantly, only 10 of them had actually been prescribed an EAI by their GP.

Conclusions

This study shows that high risk food-allergic patients that visit their GPs are often not prescribed an EAI. Thus, previously identified low rates of EAI ownership may be partly due to GPs not prescribing this medication to patients for whom it would be appropriate to do so. These data suggest that there is a need for improvement of the quality of care for high risk food-allergic patients in primary care.

House Dust Mite Respiratory Allergy: An Overview of Current Therapeutic Strategies

Although house dust mite (HDM) allergy is a major cause of respiratory allergic disease, specific diagnosis and effective treatment both present unresolved challenges. Guidelines for the treatment of allergic rhinitis and asthma are well supported in the literature, but specific evidence on the efficacy of pharmacotherapy treatment for known HDM-allergic patients is weaker. The standard diagnostic techniques--skin prick test and specific IgE testing--can be confounded by cross-reactivity. However, component-resolved diagnosis using purified and recombinant allergens can improve the accuracy of specific IgE testing, but availability is limited. Treatment options for HDM allergy are limited and include HDM avoidance, which is widely recommended as a strategy, although evidence for its efficacy is variable. Clinical efficacy of pharmacotherapy is well documented; however, symptom relief does not extend beyond the end of treatment. Finally, allergen immunotherapy has a poor but improving evidence base (notably on sublingual tablets) and its benefits last after treatment ends. This review identifies needs for deeper physician knowledge on the extent and impact of HDM allergy in respiratory disease, as well as further development and improved access to molecular allergy diagnosis. Furthermore, there is a need for the development of better-designed clinical trials to explore the utility of allergen-specific approaches, and uptake of data into guidance for physicians on more effective diagnosis and therapy of HDM respiratory allergy in practice.

Pragmatic randomized controlled trial of a structured allergy intervention for adults with asthma and rhinitis in general practice

BACKGROUND

It is widely believed that in patients with allergic rhinitis and asthma, avoidance of specific triggers can help improve symptom control and reduce need for medication. Whilst most patients with asthma or rhinitis are sensitized to airborne allergens, primary care diagnostic and management decisions are often made without either obtaining a detailed history of the patient's allergic triggers or performing skin prick tests. Thus, management decisions are empirical and allergen avoidance advice is either not given or, if given, not tailored to the patient's sensitivities.

METHOD

To ascertain whether allergy assessment and tailored advice in general practice for patients with asthma and rhinitis enhance well-being, we conducted a pragmatic, open, randomized controlled trial of allergy intervention (structured allergy history and skin prick testing and appropriate advice on allergy avoidance) versus usual care in adult patients with a working diagnosis of asthma and/or rhino-conjunctivitis. Outcomes were assessed after 12 months by an observer who was blinded to allocation. The main outcome measures were asthma and rhinitis symptoms, disease-specific health-related quality of life, generic quality of life and lung function.

RESULTS

There were no significant differences in baseline demographics or disease characteristics between patients assigned to immediate or delayed skin prick testing. No significant differences were observed between groups for any measures of symptoms, quality of life or lung function at 12 months (all P > 0.05).

CONCLUSION

Amongst adults with known asthma and/or rhinitis in primary care, taking a structured allergy history with skin prick tests and giving tailored advice on allergy avoidance made no difference to their symptoms, quality of life or lung function as measured twelve months later.

The contribution of biotechnology toward progress in diagnosis, management, and treatment of allergic diseases

'Biotechnology' has been intuitively used by humans since thousands of years for the production of foods, beverages, and drugs based on the experience without any scientific background. However, the golden era of this discipline emerged only during the second half of the last century. Incredible progresses have been achieved on all fields starting from the industrialization of the production of foods to the discovery of antibiotics, the decipherment of the genetic code, and rational approaches to understand and define the status we now call 'healthy'. The extremely complex interactions between genetic background, life style, and environmental factors influencing our continuously increasing life span have become more and more evident and steadily generate new questions which are only partly answered. Here, we try to summarize the contribution of biotechnology to our understanding, control, and cure of IgE-mediated allergic diseases. We are aware that a review of such a vast topic can never cover all aspects of the progress achieved in the different fields.

Development and implementation of a decision pathway for general practitioners for the management or referral of suspected allergy

Many patients with suspected allergy are referred to specialist care inappropriately. We aimed to develop and implement an online decision pathway to aid General Practitioners' (GPs) management decisions in suspected allergy. Our study involved 1487 GPs, 3 referral management centres, 5 GP system suppliers, 4 primary care trusts, and 1 specialist allergy clinic. The pathway was implemented by 3/5 GP system suppliers, published to Map of Medicine and on a specialist clinic website. In the first year, the pathway ranked in the top 10/160 local care maps accessed via Map of Medicine and was viewed 900 times. Only 96 GPs registered to use the clinic website. Only 110 (7%) GPs responded to the feedback request, of which 13/110 (12%) had used the pathway; nearly all thought it useful. It was used by referral management centres as explanation of rejected referrals. Alternative approaches to embed its use are required. Significance for public healthOne in three people in the UK are affected by allergies during their lifetime. Early diagnosis and appropriate management can improve quality of life and reduce emergency hospitalisation. However, referring patients to secondary care is costly in terms of time and resources. We developed a pathway algorithm to support General Practitioners' (GPs) allergy management and referral decisions to ensure that all referrals to specialist clinics were appropriate. The study illustrates a real world implementation with lessons for those seeking to improve the primary-secondary care interface, implementing pathways in various formats. In the UK, Map of Medicine seems to be the most used software. We demonstrated the difficulty of reaching GPs to encourage adoption of online decision support and suggest new ways forward by expanding care pathways into more detailed protocols for use directly by patients.

Recommendations for the allergy management in the primary care

The majority of patients seeking medical advice for allergic diseases are first seen in a primary care setting. Correct diagnosis with identification of all offending allergens is an absolute prerequisite for appropriate management of allergic disease by the general practitioner. Allergy diagnostic tests recommended for use in primary care are critically reviewed in accordance with the significant workload in a primary care setting. Simplified pathways for recognition and diagnosis of allergic diseases are proposed, that should be further adapted to local (national) conditions.

Drug allergies in primary care practice in Romania: a questionnaire - based survey

INTRODUCTION

Recent data from literature have shown many difficulties in managing allergic diseases in primary care in most countries and a consequently clear need for standardized educational programmes. Drug allergies represent an important medical issue for general practitioners (GPs) in Romania, though no national data about incidence, severity and management exist.The aim of our study was to evaluate epidemiological aspects of drug allergies in primary care practice in Bucharest, especially the diagnostic and therapeutic attitudes of family doctors and their need for education and training in this field of pathology.

FINDINGS

A questionnaire with 21specific questions was addressed to 800 family doctors from Bucharest, either directly or via internet, with a response rate of 31,87%.The answers showed a significant interest of GPs in drug allergies, which are considered an increasing pathology. Almost half of the responders had never attended any form of education in allergology and 96% expressed a clear interest to participate in specialized educational programmes. We have noticed an underestimation of the severity of drug allergy, a surprisingly high percentage of allergy skin tests or blood tests recommended by GPs without specialist advice, and persistant confidence in alternative medicine.

CONCLUSIONS

We concluded that the attitude towards and the competence regarding drug allergies of GPs in this study, as well as their collaboration with allergists, are not standardized and updated according to current guidelines. Further educational programs for GPs in drug allergies, based on standardized guidelines and national epidemiological studies for evaluation of drug allergy-related morbidity and mortality are needed.

Sublingual immunotherapy: World Allergy Organization position paper 2013 update

We have prepared this document, "Sublingual Immunotherapy: World Allergy Organization Position Paper 2013 Update", according to the evidence-based criteria, revising and updating chapters of the originally published paper, "Sublingual Immunotherapy: World Allergy Organization Position Paper 2009", available at http://www.waojournal.org. Namely, these comprise: "Mechanisms of sublingual immunotherapy;" "Clinical efficacy of sublingual immunotherapy" - reporting all the data of all controlled trials published after 2009; "Safety of sublingual immunotherapy" - with the recently published Grading System for adverse reactions; "Impact of sublingual immunotherapy on the natural history of respiratory allergy" - with the relevant evidences published since 2009; "Efficacy of SLIT in children" - with detailed analysis of all the studies; "Definition of SLIT patient selection" - reporting the criteria for eligibility to sublingual immunotherapy; "The future of immunotherapy in the community care setting"; "Methodology of clinical trials according to the current scientific and regulatory standards"; and "Guideline development: from evidence-based medicine to patients' views" - including the evolution of the methods to make clinical recommendations.Additionally, we have added new chapters to cover a few emerging crucial topics: "Practical aspects of schedules and dosages and counseling for adherence" - which is crucial in clinical practice for all treatments; "Perspectives and new approaches" - including recombinant allergens, adjuvants, modified allergens, and the concept of validity of the single products. Furthermore, "Raising public awareness about sublingual immunotherapy", as a need for our patients, and strategies to increase awareness of allergen immunotherapy (AIT) among patients, the medical community, all healthcare stakeholders, and public opinion, are also reported in detail.

Improving allergy management in the primary care network--a holistic approach

The incidence, prevalence and costs of allergy have increased substantially in recent decades in many parts of Europe. The dominant model of allergy care within Europe is at the moment specialist-based. This model will become unsustainable and undeliverable with increasing disease prevalence. One solution to increase provision of allergy services is to diversify the providers. A new model for the provision of allergy care in the community with the general practitioner at the forefront is proposed. Pre- and postgraduate allergy education and training, implementation of pathways of care, allergy specialization and political will to generate resources and support are essential to achieve this new model. In parallel the holistic view of allergic diseases should be maintained, including assessment of severity and risk, psychological factors and health-care related costs in the context of the patient-centered decision making process.