The challenge of de-labeling penicillin allergy

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.

Pediatric Residents Knowledge of Penicillin Allergy

Penicillin allergy knowledge has not been evaluated specifically in the pediatric resident population. An anonymous electronic survey was distributed to all the pediatric residents in a single residency program to ascertain knowledge of penicillin allergies and allergy history taking skills. Responses among each resident class were compared using the Fisher exact test, 2-tailed. A total of 46 (52%) of 88 pediatric residents completed the survey. Only 63% reported to have had prior penicillin allergy education. All residents incorrectly identified low-risk symptoms as high-risk symptoms. The knowledge of penicillin allergy was poor across all training levels with no improvement over the duration of training. There is large support in the literature for de-labeling penicillin allergy in patients. Pediatric residents evaluate patients in childhood when most of the allergy labeling occurs. We need to consider strategies for incorporating penicillin allergy education in pediatric residency training.

Removing penicillin allergy label in a hospitalized adolescent with a remote penicillin and recent cephalosporin allergy

Background: β-Lactam antibiotics are widely used with increased utilization in hospitalized patients. Of this population, as high as 10-20% report an allergy to β-lactam antibiotics but <5% are at risk of developing clinically significant immunoglobulin E- or T-lymphocyte-mediated reactions. Most of the time, these reported allergies are present during an illness with no previous inquiry of their validity, which makes investigation and possible removal of this allergy label a challenge. Methods: We report a 16-year-old boy who presented with 1 week of night sweats, chills, headaches, and fatigue, followed by 1 day of fever and right knee swelling and who was diagnosed with septic bursitis. Due to concern of a penicillin allergy label, the patient was started on a cefepime infusion. Five minutes into the infusion, the patient reported puffy eyes and itchy throat, followed by a witnessed cascading flat nonpruritic erythematous rash from head to shoulders. This rash went away in 3 minutes after stopping the infusion and the patient being given 50 mg of intravenous diphenhydramine and 10 mg of oral dexamethasone. He was subsequently diagnosed with a cefepime allergy. Results: Allergy/immunology was the speciality consulted, and, by using a screening questionnaire, the patient's reported penicillin allergy was determined to be low risk. Subsequent 1-step oral challenge was the key to providing the patient with the necessary antibiotic course to resolve his infection. Conclusion: Multiple reported antibiotic allergies lead to poor antibiotic stewardship that causes impactful health and financial burden on the patient and health-care system. It is thus important to have an evidence-based systematic approach to de-label penicillin antibiotic allergy labels to reduce these potential harms.

Non-IgE-Mediated Immediate Drug-Induced Hypersensitivity Reactions

Immediate drug-induced hypersensitivity reactions (IDHSRs) have conventionally been attributed to an immunoglobulin E (IgE)-mediated mechanism. Nevertheless, it has now been acknowledged that IDHSRs can also occur independently of IgE involvement. Non-IgE-mediated IDHSRs encompass the activation of effector cells, both mast cell-dependent and -independent and the initiation of inflammatory pathways through immunogenic and nonimmunogenic mechanisms. The IDHSRs involve inflammatory mediators beyond histamine, including the platelet-activating factor, which activates multiple cell types, including smooth muscle, endothelium, and MC, and evidence supports its importance in IgE-mediated reactions in humans. Clinically, distinguishing IgE from non-IgE mechanisms is crucial for future treatment strategies, including drug(s) restriction, readministration approaches, and pretreatment considerations. However, this presents significant challenges because certain drugs can trigger both mechanisms, and their presentations can appear similarly, ranging from mild to life-threatening symptoms. Thus, history alone is often inadequate for differentiation, and skin tests lack a standardized approach. Moreover, drug-specific IgE immunoassays have favorable specificity but low sensitivity, and the usefulness of the basophil activation test remains debatable. Lastly, no biomarker reliably differentiates between both mechanisms. Whereas non-IgE-mediated mechanisms likely predominate in IDHSRs, reclassifying most drug-related IDHSRs as non-IgE-mediated, with suggested prevention through dose administration adjustments, is premature and risky. Therefore, continued research and validated diagnostic tests are crucial to improving our capacity to distinguish between these mechanisms, ultimately enhancing patient care.

Delabeling of allergy to beta-lactam antibiotics in hospitalized patients: a prospective study evaluating cost savings

BACKGROUND

Patients with a penicillin allergy label are at risk of an associated increase in adverse antibiotic events and hospitalization costs.

AIM

We aimed to study the economic savings derived from the correct diagnosis and delabeling inpatients with suspected beta-lactam allergy, considering the acquisition cost of antimicrobials prescribed during a patient's hospital stay.

METHOD

We prospectively evaluated patients admitted to the University Hospital of Salamanca who had been labeled as allergic to beta-lactams and performed a delabeling study. Subsequently, cost differences between antibiotics administered before and after the allergy study and those derived from those patients who received alternative antibiotics during admission and those who switched to beta-lactams after the allergy study were calculated.

RESULTS

One hundred seventy-seven inpatients labeled as allergic to beta-lactams underwent a delabeling study; 34 (19.2%) were confirmed to have allergy to beta-lactams. Of the total number of patients, 136 (76.8%) received antibiotics during their hospitalization, involving a mean (SD) cost of €203.07 (318.42) and a median (IQR) cost of €88.97 (48.86-233.56). After delabeling in 85 (62.5%) patients, the antibiotic treatment was changed to beta-lactams. In this group of patients, the mean cost (SD) decreased from €188.91 (351.09) before the change to 91.31 (136.07) afterward, and the median cost (IQR) decreased from €72.92 (45.82-211.99) to €19.24 (11.66-168). The reduction was significant compared to the median cost of patients whose treatment was not changed to beta-lactams (p<0.001).

CONCLUSION

Delabeling hospitalized patients represents a cost-saving measure for treating patients labeled as allergic to beta-lactams.

Beta-Lactam Allergy De-labeling in a Pediatric Hospital

OBJECTIVE

To assess the ability to de-label pediatric patients of their beta-lactam allergy by using a newly implemented institutional protocol and to identify potential barriers to the de-labeling process.

METHODS

All patients with reported allergies to prespecified beta-lactam antibiotics were eligible for a -beta-lactam allergy interview. Following the interview, patients were grouped into 4 risk categories-no risk, low risk, moderate risk, and high risk-and assessed for intervention eligibility. Potential interventions included de-labeling based on the interview alone or proceeding to an oral amoxicillin challenge with or without penicillin allergy skin testing.

RESULTS

Of the 62 patients eligible for beta-lactam allergy interviews, 40% (n = 25) were de-labeled. Among de-labeled patients, 60% (n = 15) were de-labeled on the basis of the interview alone. Additionally, no failures were documented in patients who underwent an oral amoxicillin challenge or penicillin skin testing. Barriers to performing oral amoxicillin challenges or penicillin skin testing included concomitant systemic steroid or antihistamine use, refusal of intervention, and insufficient resources to perform penicillin skin testing.

CONCLUSIONS

There was a high frequency of patients de-labeled of their beta-lactam allergies in this study. Increased education to patients, parents, and providers on the de-labeling process, as well as increased personnel available to coordinate and perform de-labeling interventions, may result in more beta-lactam allergy de-labeling.

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.

Biomarkers of immediate drug hypersensitivity

Immediate drug hypersensitivity reactions (IDHRs) are a burden for patients and the health systems. This problem increases when taking into account that only a small proportion of patients initially labelled as allergic are finally confirmed after an allergological workup. The diverse nature of drugs involved will imply different interactions with the immunological system. Therefore, IDHRs can be produced by a wide array of mechanisms mediated by the drug interaction with specific antibodies or directly on effector target cells. These heterogeneous mechanisms imply an enhanced complexity for an accurate diagnosis and the identification of the phenotype and endotype at early stages of the reaction is of vital importance. Currently, several endophenotypic categories (type I IgE/non-IgE, cytokine release, Mast-related G-protein coupled receptor X2 (MRGPRX2) or Cyclooxygenase-1 (COX-1) inhibition and their associated biomarkers have been proposed. A precise knowledge of endotypes will permit to discriminate patients within the same phenotype, which is crucial in order to personalise diagnosis, future treatment and prevention to improve the patient's quality of life.

The importance of clinical history in the diagnosis of drug hypersensitivity in children

BACKGROUND

In case of suspected hypersensitivity reactions (HRs) to drugs, a challenging area for pediatricians is detecting relevant elements in the parent-reported history, in order to reach a definite diagnosis. We analyzed the concordance between the description of the HR and the medical reports documented at the time of the event. Furthermore, we studied any correlation between clinical history variables and the prediction of true allergy.

METHODS

We retrospectively collected 50 charts of children referred to our Allergy Unit, after a previous access to the Emergency Department. We compared the description of the HR at acute phase to the history told by parents. Type and timing of the HR and culprit drug were classified as "known" or "unknown." The diagnosis was confirmed or excluded at the end of the investigations. Logistic regression analysis was performed to find any significant association.

RESULTS

The type of the HR was known in 74%, the timing in 28%, and the culprit drug in 98%. We showed that having had a severe HR had an increased odds of remembering the timing; being older >6 years and having had an immediate HR had an increased odds of remembering the type; time to diagnostic was lower in patients whose parents remembered the type of HR.

CONCLUSION

Our paper underlines the importance of an accurate anamnesis at the time of the event. Providing the physicians with a standardized Case Report Form could be a useful tool to simplify the diagnostic work-up and minimize mistakes due to lack of memory.

Effectiveness, barriers and facilitating factors of strategies for active delabelling of patients with penicillin allergy labels: a systematic review protocol

INTRODUCTION

Up to 15% of adult patients in the clinical setting report to be allergic to penicillin. However, in most cases, penicillin allergy is not confirmed. Due to the negative aspects associated with erroneous penicillin allergy, the implementation of active delabelling processes for penicillin allergy is an important part of antibiotic stewardship programmes. Depending on the clinical setting, different factors need to be considered during implementation. This review examines the effectiveness of different delabelling interventions and summarises components and structures that facilitate, support or constrain structured penicillin allergy delabelling.

METHODS AND ANALYSIS

This review will adhere to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses. The databases MEDLINE (via PubMed), EMBASE and Cochrane Library were searched for studies reporting on any intervention to identify, assess or rule out uncertain penicillin allergy. To improve completeness, two further databases are also searched for grey literature. Study design, intervention type, professional groups involved, effectiveness, limitations, barriers, facilitating factors, clinical setting and associated regulatory factors will be extracted and analysed. In addition, exclusion criteria for participation in the delabelling intervention and criteria for not delabelling penicillin allergy will be summarised. In case of failed protocols, these are highlighted and quantitatively analysed if possible. Two independent reviewers will perform the screening process and data extraction. Discordant decisions will be resolved through review by a third reviewer. Bias assessment of the individual studies will be performed using the Newcastle Ottawa Scale.

ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION

Because individual patient-related data are not analysed, an ethical approval is not required. The review will be published in a peer-reviewed scientific journal.

Drug-induced hypersensitivity reactions in a Lebanese outpatient population: A decade-long retrospective analysis (2012-2021)

Background

Drug hypersensitivity reactions (DHRs) are becoming more common as a result of increasing prevalence and case complexity. Allergists and clinical immunologists worldwide are challenged daily to adequately diagnose and manage these reactions. Data in the literature regarding DHR outpatient consultations are scarce worldwide, limited in the Middle East, and currently unavailable in Lebanon.

Objective

This retrospective study aimed to evaluate the characteristics of all reported DHRs over 10 years in a tertiary-care allergy clinic in Lebanon.

Methods

We conducted a decade-long (2012-21) retrospective analysis of the archived medical records of patients with a history of DHRs. Demographics, clinical history, diagnostic tools, and characteristics of the DHRs were collected and analyzed.

Results

A total of 758 patients experienced DHRs to therapeutic molecules provided for ambulatory care. Our results identified 72 medications. The most frequently implicated drug classes included β-lactam antibiotics (53.8%), followed closely by nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (48.9%). Of the 758 patients, 32.6% reported DHRs to multiple molecules, and 11.8% reported concomitant DHRs to 1 or several molecules provided in the perioperative setting. Of those, opioids and neuromuscular blocking agents were the 2 most common therapeutic classes. Furthermore, we evaluated the cross-reactivity between molecules of the same class. In neuromuscular blocking agents, rocuronium and cisatracurium were the most commonly cross-reactive, and for opioids, the most common association we recorded was with morphine and pethidine.

Conclusion

Our findings constitute the first step toward a more comprehensive evaluation of the clinical characteristics of DHRs in Lebanon.

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.

Resource utilization and cost assessment of a proactive penicillin allergy de-labeling program for low-risk inpatients

BACKGROUND

Resource utilization and costs can impede proactive assessment and de-labeling of penicillin allergy among inpatients.

METHODS

Our pilot intervention was a proactive penicillin allergy de-labeling program for new inpatients with penicillin allergy. Patients deemed appropriate for a challenge with a low-risk penicillin allergy history were administered 250 mg amoxicillin and monitored for 1 h. We performed an explorative economic evaluation using various healthcare professional wages.

RESULTS

Over two separate 2-week periods between April 2021 and March 2022, we screened 126 new inpatients with a penicillin allergy. After exclusions, 55 were appropriate for formal assessment. 19 completed the oral challenge, and 12 were directly de-labeled, resulting in a number needed to screen of 4 and a number needed to assess of 1.8 to effectively de-label one patient. The assessor's median time in the hospital per day de-labeling was 4h08 with a range of (0h05, 6h45). A single-site annual implementation would result in 715 penicillin allergy assessments with 403 patients de-labeled assuming 20,234 annual weekday admissions and an 8.9% penicillin allergy rate. Depending on the assessor used, the annual cost of administration would be between $21,476 ($53.29 per effectively de-labeled patient) for a pharmacy technician and $61,121 ($151.67 per effectively de-labeled patient) for a Nurse Practitioner or Physician Assistant.

CONCLUSION

A proactive approach, including a direct oral challenge for low-risk in-patients with penicillin allergy, appears safe and feasible. Similar programs could be implemented at other institutions across Canada to increase access to allergy assessment.

Sepsis Stewardship: The Puzzle of Antibiotic Therapy in the Context of Individualization of Decision Making

The main recent change observed in the field of critical patient infection has been universal awareness of the need to make better use of antimicrobials, especially for the most serious cases, beyond the application of simple and effective formulas or rigid protocols. The increase in resistant microorganisms, the quantitative increase in major surgeries and interventional procedures in the highest risk patients, and the appearance of a significant number of new antibiotics in recent years (some very specifically directed against certain mechanisms of resistance and others with a broader spectrum of applications) have led us to shift our questions from "what to deal with" to "how to treat". There has been controversy about how best to approach antibiotic treatment of complex cases of sepsis. The individualized and adjusted dosage, the moment of its administration, the objective, and the selection of the regimen are pointed out as factors of special relevance in a critically ill patient where the frequency of resistant microorganisms, especially among the Enterobacterales group, and the emergence of multiple and diverse antibiotic treatment alternatives have made the appropriate choice of antibiotic treatment more complex, requiring a constant updating of knowledge and the creation of multidisciplinary teams to confront new infections that are difficult to treat. In this article, we have reviewed the phenomenon of the emergence of resistance to antibacterials and we have tried to share some of the ideas, such as stewardship, sparing carbapenems, and organizational, microbiological, pharmacological, and knowledge tools, that we have considered most useful and effective for individualized decision making that takes into account the current context of multidrug resistance. The greatest challenge, therefore, of decision making in this context lies in determining an effective, optimal, and balanced empirical antibiotic treatment.

Patient Adherence to Written Instructions following Complete Allergological Evaluation for Suspected Beta-Lactam Allergy: A Tertiary Hospital Study in Greece

BACKGROUND

Beta-lactam (BL) antibiotics are among the most prescribed groups of drugs worldwide and have been implicated in a variety of allergic reactions. There is a paucity of literature regarding patient adherence to prescribed instructions following comprehensive allergy assessments.

OBJECTIVE

The objective was to follow up the clinical course of BL allergy in patients who underwent thorough allergological investigation for suspected BL allergy at a tertiary hospital and ascertain patients' compliance with the provided written instructions.

MATERIALS

An observational study in patients referred for suspected BL allergy who underwent a comprehensive allergy workup (in vivo ± in vitro tests, DPT in culprit and/or alternative BL) and who subsequently received written instructions was conducted. Data on the nature of the reported drug hypersensitivity reaction, the culprit BL drug, the allergological workup, and the detailed instructions provided in a written drug allergy report were collected retrospectively. Patients' compliance with the instructions was recorded by a telephone survey using a pre-defined questionnaire.

RESULTS

Among the 212 patients meeting the inclusion criteria, 87 patients (72.4% women; mean age 50.1 years; age range 6-84 years) responded to the telephone survey and were included in this study. Surprisingly, 45 out of 87 (51.7%) patients did not adhere to the written instructions. The primary factor contributing to non-compliance was the fear of re-occurrence of a drug-induced allergic reaction (personal and/or triggered by their treating physician reluctance), accounting for 77.7% of cases. The analysis demonstrated that the initial reaction's severity and type, as well as the outcomes of skin testing, did not correlate with compliance to instructions (p > 0.05). Surprisingly enough, a drug provocation test (DPT), irrespectively of the result, emerged as a negative predictor for adherence, with only 40.6% of DPT patients complying compared to 77.8% of those who did not undergo DPT (p = 0.005; odds ratio = 0.195; 95% confidence interval: 0.058-0.655). Variables such as performing DPT with alternative or incriminated drugs or the result of the DPT (positive-negative) were not associated with patient compliance. Conversely, the type of instructions provided exhibited a noteworthy correlation with compliance. Patients who were explicitly instructed to entirely avoid all BL antibiotics demonstrated markedly higher adherence rates (83.3%) compared to those who were advised to have a partial or complete release of BLs (31.8% and 58.1%, respectively; p < 0.05). Notably, among compliant patients who received either the original culprit drug or the alternative (32 out of 87, 36.7%), no allergic reactions were reported. In contrast, among the 12 patients with written avoidance of all BLs, subsequent BL intake led to immediate reactions (Grade I and IV) in 2 patients (16.6%).

CONCLUSIONS

A notable disparity in patient adherence to written instructions prohibiting or releasing beta-lactams was demonstrated. Less than half of the patients ultimately complied with the provided instructions, underscoring the need for tailored patients' education and strategies to improve adherence in the management of suspected BL allergy.

Ethics of antibiotic allergy

Antibiotic allergies are commonly reported among patients, but most do not experience reactions on rechallenge with the same agents. These reported allergies complicate management of infections in patients labelled as having penicillin allergy, including serious infections where penicillin-based antibiotics are the first-line (most effective and least toxic) treatment option. Allergy labels are rarely questioned in clinical practice, with many clinicians opting for inferior second-line antibiotics to avoid a perceived risk of allergy. Reported allergies thereby can have significant impacts on patients and public health, and present major ethical challenges. Antibiotic allergy testing has been described as a strategy to circumvent this dilemma, but it carries limitations that often make it less feasible in patients with acute infections or in community settings that lack access to allergy testing. This article provides an empirically informed ethical analysis of key considerations in this clinical dilemma, using Staphylococcus aureus bacteraemia in patients with penicillin allergies as a case study. We argue that prescribing first-line penicillin-based antibiotics to patients with reported allergies may often present a more favourable ratio of benefits to risks, and may therefore be more ethically appropriate than using second-line drugs. We recommend changes to policy-making, clinical research and medical education, in order to promote more ethically acceptable responses to antibiotic allergies than the status quo.

A retrospective case-control study to evaluate the use of beta-lactam desensitization in the management of penicillin-allergic patients: a potential strategy for Antimicrobial Stewardship Programs

Introduction: Penicillin allergy labels (PAL) are common in the hospital setting and are associated with worse clinical outcomes. Desensitization can be a useful strategy for allergic patients when alternative options are suboptimal or not available. The aim was to compare clinical outcomes of patients with PAL managed with antibiotic desensitization vs. those who received alternative non-beta-lactam antibiotic treatments. Methods: A retrospective 3:1 case-control study was performed between 2015-2022. Cases were adult PAL patients with infection who required antibiotic desensitization; controls were PAL patients with infection managed with an alternative antibiotic treatment. Cases and controls were adjusted for age, sex, infection source, and critical or non-critical medical services. Results: Fifty-six patients were included: 14 in the desensitization group, 42 in the control group. Compared to the control group, desensitized PAL patients had more comorbidities, with a higher Charlson index (7.4 vs. 5; p = 0.00) and more infections caused by multidrug-resistant (MDR) pathogens (57.1% vs. 28.6%; p = 0.05). Thirty-day mortality was 14.3% in the desensitized group, 28.6% in the control group (p = 0.24). Clinical cure occurred in 71.4% cases and 54.8% controls (p = 0.22). Four control patients selected for MDR strains after alternative treatment; selection of MDR strains did not occur in desensitized patients. Five controls had antibiotic-related adverse events, including Clostridioides difficile or nephrotoxicity. No antibiotic-related adverse events were found in the study group. In multivariate analysis, no differences between groups were observed for main variables. Conclusion: Desensitization was not associated with worse clinical outcomes, despite more severe patients in this group. Our study suggests that antibiotic desensitization may be a useful Antimicrobial Stewardship tool for the management of selected PAL patients.

Approach for delabeling beta-lactam allergy in children

A considerable number of pediatric patients treated with beta-lactam (BL) antibiotics develop delayed onset of skin rashes during the course of treatment. Although the most frequent cause of these symptoms is infectious, many cases are labeled as allergic reactions to these drugs. BL allergy labels could have a negative impact, as they imply avoidance of this group of drugs and the use of second-line antibiotics, leading to a potential increase in adverse effects and the utilization of less effective therapies. This constitutes a major public health concern and economic burden, as the use of broad-spectrum antibiotics can result in multidrug-resistant organisms and prolonged hospital stays. Therefore, it is crucial to delabel patients during childhood to avoid false labeling in adult life. Although the label of BL allergy is among the most frequent causes of allergy referral, its management remains controversial, and new diagnostic perspectives are changing the paradigm of managing BL allergies in children. Traditionally, drug provocation testing (DPT) was exclusively performed in patients who had previously obtained negative results from skin tests (STs). However, the sensitivity of STs is low, and the role of in vitro testing in the pediatric population is not well defined. Recent studies have demonstrated the safety of direct DPT without prior ST or serum tests for pediatric patients who report a low-risk reaction to BLs, which is cost-effective. However, there is still a debate on the optimal allergic workup to be performed in children with a benign immediate reaction and the management of children with severe cutaneous adverse drug reactions. In this review, we will discuss the impact of the label of BL allergy and the role of the different tools currently available to efficiently address BL allergy delabeling in children.

A new clinical opportunity: Rechallenging penicillin allergy in an outpatient pharmacy

In the United States, approximately 27 million people have a documented penicillin allergy, but 90% of the allergies are falsely labeled. By rechallenging suspected allergies, a pharmacist can optimize patient care, fulfill antimicrobial stewardship objectives, and educate patients on true allergies. We suggest a protocol that allows pharmacists to investigate the presence of an allergy and conduct a challenge when indicated. The protocol consists of a patient interview, a risk assessment, an oral rechallenge, and the potential for a skin test. The testing and delabeling of penicillin allergies will enhance the practice of antimicrobial stewardship in the outpatient setting. In the changing landscape of pharmacy, community pharmacists can increase their services and improve patient care. Owing to limited documented experience in the outpatient pharmacy, an opportunity to set the standard and be a leader in the field is present.

A new pathway for penicillin delabeling in Norway

Background

Penicillin allergy is self-reported by 3-10% of patients admitted to hospital. The label is wrong in 90% of the cases and has severe health implications. Penicillin-delabeling can reverse the negative effects of the label, and pathways adapted to local practice are needed. No tools are available in Norway for penicillin delabeling outside an allergy clinic.

Objective

To create and validate the first penicillin delabeling pathway applicable outside an allergy clinic in Norway.

Methods

An interdisciplinary taskforce created a penicillin allergy delabeling program (PAD) adapted to the Norwegian health care system. This was validated in a prospective, single-center study. Very low-risk and low-risk patients underwent a direct oral penicillin challenge and high-risk patients were referred for allergologic evaluation.

Results

One-hundred forty-nine patients declaring penicillin allergy were included. Seventy-four (50%) were very-low- and low risk patients suitable for a direct oral penicillin challenge resulting in only 1 mild reaction. Sixty high-risk patients were eligible for an oral penicillin challenge after allergologic evaluation; 3 patients reacted non-severely.

Conclusion

We have created and demonstrated feasibility of the first penicillin delabeling program (PAD) applicable in a hospital setting outside an allergy clinic in Norway. Our data suggest this is safe and beneficial, with 49% patients delabeled through a direct oral penicillin challenge, performed without any serious adverse events, and an overall 87% delabeling rate.

The role of major and minor determinants in penicillin allergy testing: Time to revisit an old friend?

Background

Skin testing is an important step in evaluation of penicillin allergic reactions. It includes testing to the following: amoxicillin, benzyl penicillin, and products generated in vivo after penicillin administration, the major determinant hapten penicilloyl-polylysine (PPL) and the minor determinant mixture (MDM). Although PPL and MDM are available as a commercial kit, their supply and cost remain problematic.

Objective

We aimed to evaluate the performance and utility of PPL and MDM in penicillin allergy testing.

Methods

A retrospective audit over a 5-year period was undertaken for those with penicillin testing in a tertiary immunology unit.

Results

In all, 214 patients were identified. Of those patients, 151 (70.6%) were female and the average age was 58 years. Unspecified penicillin was the most common index drug (n = 127 [59.3%]), followed by amoxicillin (n =3 [24.8%]) and amoxicillin-clavulanic acid (n = 21 [9.7%]). The result of skin testing was positive in 23 patients (10.7%); skin prick testing was positive in 10 patients (4.7%), and intradermal testing (IDT) was positive in 13 patients (6.1%), the majority of whom had identified amoxicillin or amoxicillin-clavulanic acid as the index drug (n = 22 [95.7%]). The result of testing to PPL and/or MDM was positive with IDT only (n=5 [23.8%]). PPL and MDM positivity coexisted with a positive reaction to amoxicillin IDT in 2 patients, 1 of whom passed an amoxicillin challenge. Additionally, 2 positive tests to PPL were present with a negative result for MDM; of these 2 positive results, 1 was positive to amoxicillin IDT. In only 1 case were the results of testing for MDM and PPL both positive, with negative results to all native β-lactams tested; the patient tolerated an amoxicillin challenge. Overall, the negative predictive value for both skin prick testing and IDT was 89.5%.

Conclusion

Benzyl penicillin and amoxicillin alone may be sufficient for in vivo testing in suspected individuals with penicillin allergy.

Barriers to penicillin allergy de-labeling in the inpatient and outpatient settings: a qualitative study

BACKGROUND

Penicillin allergy is the most commonly reported drug allergy in the US. Despite evidence demonstrating that up to 90% of labels are incorrect, scalable interventions are not well established. As part of a larger mixed methods investigation, we conducted a qualitative study to describe the barriers to implementing a risk-based penicillin de-labeling protocol within a single site Veteran's hospital.

METHODS

We conducted individual and group interviews with multidisciplinary inpatient and outpatient healthcare teams. The interview guides were developed using the Theoretical Domains Framework (TDF) to explore workflows and contextual factors influencing identification and evaluation of patients with penicillin allergy. Three researchers iteratively developed the codebook based on TDF domains and coded the data using thematic analysis.

RESULTS

We interviewed 20 clinicians. Participants included three hospitalists, five inpatient pharmacists, one infectious disease physician, two anti-microbial stewardship pharmacists, four primary care providers, two outpatient pharmacists, two resident physicians, and a nurse case manager for the allergy service. The factors that contributed to barriers to penicillin allergy evaluation and de-labeling were classified under six TDF domains; knowledge, skills, beliefs about capabilities, beliefs about consequences, professional role and identity, and environmental context and resources. Participants from all groups acknowledged the importance of penicillin de-labeling. However, they lacked confidence in their skills to perform the necessary evaluations, such as test dose challenges. The fear of inducing an allergic reaction and adding further complexity to patient care exacerbated their reluctance to de-label patients. The lack of ownership of de-labeling initiative was another significant obstacle in establishing consistent clinical workflows. Additionally, heavy workloads, competing priorities, and ease of access to alternative antibiotics prevented the prioritization of tasks related to de-labeling. Space limitations and nursing staff shortages added to challenges in outpatient settings.

CONCLUSION

Our findings demonstrated that barriers to penicillin allergy de-labeling fall under multiple behavioral domains. Better role clarification, opportunities to develop necessary skills, and dedicated resources are needed to overcome these barriers. Future interventions will need to employ a systemic approach that addresses each of the behavioral domains influencing penicillin allergy de-labeling with stakeholder engagement of the inpatient and outpatient health care teams.

Does thePenicillin Allergy Label Affect Outcomes of Complicated Odontogenic Infections?

PURPOSE

Penicillins are a potent antibiotic in managing odontogenic infections, but 10% of the population is labelled as allergic to these drugs. This has limited their use and resulted in increased utilization of health care resources as well as complications associated with alternative antibiotics. The purpose of the study was to measure the association between patients labeled as penicillin allergic and treatment outcomes in a sample of patients treated for complicated odontogenic infections. Additionally, we sought to investigate antibiotic resistance patterns in these patients.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

A retrospective cohort study was performed at the Michigan Medicine health care system to include patients who were treated for complicated odontogenic infections by oral and maxillofacial surgery between 2016 and 2020. Complicated odontogenic infection was defined as any odontogenic infection requiring admission and surgical management in the operating room. The primary predictor variable was the penicillin allergy label, which was determined by chart review and not confirmed with formal testing. Outcomes were measures of disease severity. The primary outcome variable was hospital length of stay. Secondary outcome variables were ICU admission (yes/no), repeat computed tomography scan(s), repeat surgery (yes/no), and re-admission (yes/no). Co-variates included were age, sex (male/female), tobacco use status, diabetes, immunocompromised state, number of spaces involved, white blood cell count upon admission and insurance status. For our secondary aim, the primary predictor variable was again penicillin allergy and outcome variable was antibiotic resistance as determined by wound culture results following surgical intervention. Negative binomial regression and logistic regression analyses were performed. P < .05 was considered significant.

RESULTS

A total of 150 patients met the inclusion criteria and of those 17.3% reported as penicillin allergic. Patients labelled as penicillin allergic did not differ significantly from patients without penicillin allergy label in terms of treatment outcomes. Age, diabetes, and immunosuppression were associated with an increased length of stay. Patients labelled as penicillin allergic were at significantly higher risk for antibiotic resistance (relative risk = 2.34; 95% confidence interval, 1.66 to 3.32; P < .001), specifically clindamycin resistance (relative risk = 3.17; 95% confidence interval, 1.93 to 5.18; P < .001).

CONCLUSIONS

Penicillin allergy was significantly associated with clindamycin resistance. There were similar outcomes amongst patients with and without a penicillin allergy label despite antibiotic differences. Delabeling efforts for patients with a reported penicillin allergy must be considered and local nomograms for antibiotic selection should be used by providers when seeking alternative antibiotics.

Analysis of a beta-lactam allergy assessment protocol challenging diverse reported allergies managed by an antimicrobial stewardship program

Objective

To assess the safety and efficacy of a novel beta-lactam allergy assessment algorithm managed by an antimicrobial stewardship program (ASP) team.

Design

Retrospective analysis.

Setting

One quaternary referral teaching hospital and one tertiary care teaching hospital in a large western Pennsylvania health network.

Patients or participants

Patients who received a beta-lactam challenge dose under the beta-lactam allergy assessment algorithm.

Interventions

A beta-lactam allergy assessment protocol was designed and implemented by an ASP team. The protocol risk stratified patients' reported allergies to identify patients appropriate for a challenge with a beta-lactam antibiotic. This retrospective analysis assessed the safety and efficacy of this protocol among patients receiving a challenge dose from November 2017 to July 2021.

Results

Over a 45-month period, 119 total patients with either penicillin or cephalosporin allergies entered the protocol. Following a challenge dose, 106 (89.1%) patients were treated with a beta-lactam. Eleven patients had adverse reactions to a challenge dose, one of which required escalation of care to the intensive care unit. Of the patients with an unknown or low-risk reported allergy, 7/66 (10.6%) had an observed adverse reaction compared to 3/42 (7.1%) who had an observed reaction with a reported high-risk or anaphylactic allergy.

Conclusions

Our implemented protocol was safe and effective, with over 90% of patients tolerating the challenge without incident and many going on to receive indicated beta-lactam therapy. This protocol may serve as a framework for other inpatient ASP teams to implement a low-barrier allergy assessment led by ASP teams.

Penicillin allergy that persisted after 66 years: case report

The most common documented allergy is due to penicillin use, and penicillin allergy is often diagnosed early in childhood. However, fewer than 1% of the approximately 10% of the population with reported penicillin allergy have a true allergy. Antimicrobial stewardship programmes have employed pharmacist-led protocols to rechallenge patients with a documented history of penicillin allergy. There are published data to suggest that patients with a history of penicillin allergy can be successfully rechallenged and desensitised. We report a case of a 74-year-old woman with a documented childhood history of penicillin allergy who was rechallenged with amoxicillin/clavulanate (Augmentin) in the hospital during admission. She was given one trial dose of amoxicillin/clavulanate for the treatment of urinary tract infection to cover organisms detected in the urine culture. Amoxicillin/clavulanate was determined to be the most suitable antibiotic for empirical treatment. Given a documented history of penicillin allergy from over 60 years ago, the likelihood of reactivity was suspected to be low to none. The patient, however, developed an allergic reaction after the one-time oral amoxicillin/clavulanate 875/125 mg dose trial.

A pharmacist-led penicillin allergy de-labelling project within a preoperative assessment clinic: the low-hanging fruit is within reach

BACKGROUND

Having a false penicillin-allergy label is linked to longer hospital stays and to an increased risk of Clostridioides difficile and meticillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus infection.

AIM

To assess a penicillin-allergy de-labelling tool designed for use by the non-allergist.

METHODS

Patients attending the surgical preoperative assessment clinic (POAC) at a large UK teaching hospital, who reported a penicillin allergy, were directly de-labelled by nursing or pharmacy staff, where appropriate. A penicillin-allergy de-labelling tool designed for use by the non-allergist was adapted and applied; nursing staff were provided with supporting information and education to enable removal of spurious labels. Antimicrobial pharmacists (AMPs) provided follow-up, cross-checked prophylactic antibiotics administered, interrogated clinical notes, and telephoned patients following their surgery, for details of any adverse reactions suffered.

FINDINGS

A total of 163 patients reporting a penicillin allergy were identified for intervention. Twenty-nine (17.8%) patients reported a penicillin-allergy history appropriate for direct de-labelling, of whom eight (27.6%) declined to consent. The remaining 21 patients (12.8%) were directly de-labelled, with 12 (7.4%) patients consenting during their POAC appointment; the remaining nine (5.5%) patients were consented and de-labelled after their surgery by an AMP.

CONCLUSION

The POAC was identified as an appropriate location and time-point in the patient pathway to enable the direct removal of spurious penicillin-allergy labels prior to surgery. Results suggest that this could be undertaken by nursing staff, although support from AMPs enabled a greater number of patients to be de-labelled.

Safety and outcomes of "at-home self-provocation tests" in patients with mild nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drug-induced urticaria/angioedema

BACKGROUND

Nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drug (NSAID) hypersensitivity is common; however, many patients do not receive an accurate diagnosis and are using unnecessary alternative drugs or have medication restrictions.

OBJECTIVE

To establish a protocol for provocation tests that can be performed safely and effectively at home to give patients an accurate diagnosis, whereas also delabeling NSAID hypersensitivity.

METHODS

We retrospectively analyzed the medical records of 147 patients with NSAID hypersensitivity. All patients had NSAID-induced urticaria/angioedema with less than 10% body surface area skin involvement. One specialist developed the protocol through history taking and chart review. If NSAID hypersensitivity was confirmed, an oral provocation test was performed to confirm the safe alternative medications (group A). If it was undetermined, an oral provocation test was performed to confirm the diagnosis and alternative medications (group B). All oral provocation tests were performed by patients in their homes according to the protocol.

RESULTS

Approximately 26% of group A patients had urticaria or angioedema symptoms with alternative drugs, whereas the remaining 74% was safe. In group B, 34% of the patients were diagnosed with having NSAID hypersensitivity. However, 61% did not respond to the culprit drug; therefore, NSAID hypersensitivity had been misdiagnosed. During this at-home self-provocation test, no severe hypersensitivity reactions occurred.

CONCLUSION

Many patients originally suspected of having NSAID hypersensitivity were confirmed to have been misdiagnosed. We successfully conducted an effective and safe at-home self-provocation test.

Opportunities for Antimicrobial Stewardship Interventions Among Solid Organ Transplant Recipients

Although antimicrobial stewardship programs have excelled over the past decade, uptake and application of these programs to special populations such as solid organ transplant recipients have lagged. Here, we review the value of antimicrobial stewardship for transplant centers and highlight data supporting interventions that are ripe for adoption. In addition, we review the design of antimicrobial stewardship initiatives, targets for both syndromic and system-based interventions.

Penicillin allergy delabeling: Opportunities for implementation and dissemination

Although existing as a safety measure to prevent iatrogenic harm, unconfirmed penicillin allergy labels have a negative impact on personal and public health. One downstream effect of unconfirmed penicillin allergy is the continued emergence and transmission of resistant bacteria and their associated health care costs. Recognizing the consequences of inaccurate penicillin allergy labels, professional and public health organizations have started promoting the adoption of proactive penicillin allergy evaluations, with the ultimate goal of removing the penicillin allergy label when the allergy is disproved, also known as penicillin allergy "delabeling." A penicillin allergy evaluation includes a comprehensive allergy history often followed by drug challenge, sometimes with preceding skin testing. Currently, penicillin allergy delabeling is largely carried out by allergy specialists in outpatient settings. Penicillin allergy delabeling is performed on inpatients, albeit rarely, often at the time of need, as a point-of-care procedure. Access to penicillin allergy evaluation services is limited. Recent studies demonstrate the feasibility of expanding penicillin allergy evaluations and delabeling to internists, pediatricians, emergency medicine physicians, infectious diseases specialists, and clinical pharmacists. However, reducing the impact of mislabeled penicillin allergy will require comprehensive efforts and new investments. In this review, we summarize the current practices of penicillin allergy delabeling and discuss expansion opportunities for penicillin allergy delabeling as quality improvement.

An overview of penicillin allergies for nurses

ABSTRACT

Antibiotics are frequently reported as allergies by patients, particularly antibiotics from the penicillin family. Most of these reported allergies are benign, and the consequences of alternative therapies can be significant. This article provides background information on penicillin allergies and serves as a guide to penicillin allergy management.Reprinted with permission from Wrynn, A.F. An overview of penicillin allergies for nurses. Nurse Pract 2022; 47(9): 30-36. Copyright Wolters Kluwer. All rights reserved.

Penicillin de-labelling in vancouver, British Columbia, Canada: comparison of approaches, outcomes and future directions

BACKGROUND

Inaccurate penicillin allergy labels lead to inappropriate antibiotic prescriptions and harmful patient consequences. System-wide efforts are needed to remove incorrect penicillin allergy labels, but more health services research is required on how to best deliver these services.

METHODS

Data was extracted from five hospitals in Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada from October 2018-May 2022. The primary outcomes of this study were to outline de-labelling protocol designs, identify the roles of various healthcare professionals in de-labelling protocols and identify rates of de-labelling penicillin allergies and associated adverse events at various institutions. Our secondary outcome was to describe de-labelling rates for special populations, including pediatric, obstetric and immunocompromised subpopulations. To achieve these outcomes, participating institutions provided their de-labelling protocol designs and data on program participants. Protocols were then compared to find common themes and differences. Furthermore, adverse events were reviewed and percentages of patients de-labelled at each institution and in total were calculated.

RESULTS

Protocols demonstrated a high level of variability, including different methods of participant identification, risk-stratification and roles of providers. All protocols used oral and direct oral challenges, heavily involved pharmacists and had physician oversight. Despite the differences, of the 711 patients enrolled in all programs, 697 (98.0%) were de-labelled. There were 9 adverse events (1.3%) with oral challenges with mainly minor symptoms.

CONCLUSIONS

Our data demonstrates that de-labelling programs effectively and safely remove penicillin allergy labels, including pediatric, obstetric and immunocompromised patients. Consistent with current literature, most patients with a penicillin allergy label are not allergic. De-labelling programs could benefit from increasing clinician engagement by increasing accessibility of resources to providers, including guidance for de-labelling of special populations.

The Dutch Working Party on Antibiotic Policy (SWAB) guideline for the approach to suspected antibiotic allergy

OBJECTIVES

Prudent handling of reported antibiotic allergy is an important aspect of antibiotic stewardship. The Dutch Working Party on Antibiotic Policy (SWAB) constituted a multidisciplinary expert committee to provide evidence-based recommendations for bedside decision making in antibiotic therapy in patients that report an antibiotic allergy.

METHODS

The guideline committee generated 12 key questions, most of which were population, intervention, comparison and outcome (PICO) questions relevant for both children and adults with suspected antibiotic allergy. For each question a systematic literature search was performed and reviewed for the best available evidence according to the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) system. Quality of evidence was graded from very low to high and recommendations were formulated in structured discussions as strong or weak.

RESULTS

Sixty recommendations were provided for suspected allergy to beta-lactam antibiotics (BLA) and non-beta-lactam antibiotics (NBLA). Due to the absence of randomized controlled trials in this field, the underlying evidence was predominantly graded as low or very low. Available data supports that a detailed allergy history should always be performed and critically appraised. When cross-allergy between BLA groups is not to be expected due to absence of molecular similarity of the side chains, the patient can be safely exposed to the alternative BLA. An exception to this rule are severe delayed type reactions, in which reexposure to a BLA should only be considered after consultation of a multidisciplinary team.

CONCLUSIONS

Accumulated scientific data now supports a more liberal approach that better balances benefits of treatment with first choice and usually smaller spectrum antibiotics with appropriate avoidance of antibiotics in case of a truly high risk of a (severe) allergic reaction. In the Netherlands, a formal guideline was developed that provides recommendations for the approach towards suspected allergy to BLA and frequently used NBLA, thereby strongly supporting antimicrobial stewardship.

Parental Perceptions of Penicillin Allergy Risk Stratification and Delabeling

BACKGROUND

Penicillin (PCN) allergy labels are widely recognized to be highly inaccurate. Little is known about parental perceptions of the PCN allergy evaluation and removal process, especially in the hospital setting.

METHODS

Focus groups were held with parents of children and adolescents with a PCN allergy label discharged from a large academic children's hospital between January 1, 2019, and April 15, 2020. The open-ended, semistructured moderator guide included questions about PCN allergy testing and evaluation, accuracy of the PCN allergy diagnosis, amoxicillin oral challenges, delabeling process, and preferred setting for PCN allergy delabeling evaluation (outpatient clinic, hospital, etc). Study investigators coded the transcripts and identified underlying themes using inductive and deductive thematic analysis.

RESULTS

A total of 21 parents and 2 adolescents participated across 4 focus groups. We developed a theoretical framework depicting key elements of parents' and adolescents' experiences with PCN allergies, consisting of 4 major interconnected themes: (1) family context; (2) the invitation to delabel; (3) decision context; and (4) the PCN delabeling outcome. PCN allergies remained a concern for families even if their children passed an oral challenge. Some parents preferred testing to be performed in the hospital and felt this was a safer location for the procedure.

CONCLUSIONS

Parents are amenable to hospital based PCN allergy evaluation and delabeling. Further studies should incorporate parental and patient preferences to implement safe and effective PCN allergy delabeling processes in the hospital setting.

A potential cost savings analysis of a penicillin de-labeling program

Introduction

Over 95% of patients documented as penicillin allergic can tolerate a penicillin without a reaction. Inaccurate documentation of penicillin allergy leads to more expensive alternative antibiotic prescriptions and an increased incidence of resistant infections.

Objective

To understand the potential drug cost savings of a penicillin de-labeling program to a healthcare system.

Methods

We evaluated patient visits with documented penicillin allergy who presented to the pediatric Emergency Department (PED) and 22 associated primary care clinics. Patients were included if they were discharged home with a non-penicillin antibiotic when the first-line treatment for the diagnosis would have been a penicillin. The potential cost savings were the sum of all visit-level cost differences between the non-penicillin prescription(s) and a counterfactual penicillin prescription. To factor in a 95% successful patient de-labeling rate, we repeatedly sampled 95% from the patients with the eligible visits 10,000 times to produce an estimate of the potential cost savings.

Results

Over the 8-year period, 2,034 visits by 1,537 patients to the PED and 12,349 visits by 6,073 patients to primary care clinics satisfied eligibility criteria. If 95% of the patients could have been successfully de-labeled, it would have generated a cost saving of $618,653 (95% CI $618,617—$618,689) for all the corresponding payers in the system.

Conclusions

Implementing a penicillin de-labeling program across a healthcare system PED and its associated primary care clinics would bring significant cost savings. Healthcare systems should rigorously evaluate optimal methods to de-label patients with reported penicillin allergy.

Impact of Penicillin Allergy-Based Alternative Antibiotics on the Risk of Postoperative Central Nervous System Infection: A Retrospective Cohort Study

BACKGROUND

Central nervous system (CNS) infection is one of the most serious complications after neurosurgery. This study aimed to analyze the effect of penicillin allergy (PA) and alternative prophylactic antibiotics on risk of postoperative CNS infection in patients undergoing neurosurgery.

METHODS

Data of patients who underwent neurosurgical procedures from January 2015 to December 2021 were analyzed retrospectively. Patients with PA were compared with patients without PA in a 1:1 ratio. A multivariate logistic regression model was used to examine whether PA was a risk factor for postoperative CNS infection.

RESULTS

Overall, 15,049 eligible neurosurgical records were reviewed, from which 578 surgical records of 556 patients with PA were matched to 578 records of 570 patients without PA. Patients with PA showed significantly lower probability to receive prophylactic cephalosporins (55.9% vs. 98.8%, P < 0.01), but significantly higher probability to receive clindamycin (41.86% vs. 1.03%, P < 0.01), than patients without PA. Multivariate analysis revealed that patients with PA were more likely to experience postoperative CNS infection than patients without PA (odds ratio = 2.03; 95% confidence interval, 1.15-3.56; P = 0.014). The incidence of postoperative CNS infection returned to a level comparable to that in general population when patients with suspected PA received prophylactic cephalosporins.

CONCLUSIONS

PA is associated with higher risk of postoperative CNS infection in patients undergoing neurosurgery. This may be attributed to the use of alternative prophylactic antibiotics other than cephalosporins, especially clindamycin.

Self-reported beta-lactam allergy in government and private hospitals in Cape Town, South Africa

BACKGROUND

Up to a quarter of inpatients in high-income countries (HICs) self-report beta-lactam allergy (BLA), which if incorrect,increases the use of alternative antibiotics, worsening individual health outcomes and driving bacterial resistance. In HICs, up to 95% ofself-reported BLAs are incorrect. The epidemiology of BLA in low- and middle-income African countries is unknown.

OBJECTIVES

To describe the epidemiology and de-labelling outcomes of self-reported BLA in hospitalised South African (SA) patients.

METHODS

Point-prevalence surveys were conducted at seven hospitals (adult, paediatric, government and privately funded, district andtertiary level) in Cape Town, SA, between April 2019 and June 2021. Ward prescription records and in-person interviews were conductedto identify and risk-stratify BLA patients using the validated PEN-FAST tool. De-labelling was attempted at the tertiary allergy clinic atGroote Schuur Hospital.

RESULTS

A total of 1 486 hospital inpatients were surveyed (1 166 adults and 320 children). Only 48 patients (3.2%) self-reported a BLA,with a higher rate in private than in government-funded hospitals (6.3% v. 2.8%; p=0.014). Using the PEN-FAST tool, only 10.4% (n=5/48)of self-reported BLA patients were classified as high risk for true penicillin hypersensitivity. Antibiotics were prescribed to 70.8% (n=34/48)of self-reported BLA patients, with 64.7% (n=22/34) receiving a beta-lactam. Despite three attempts to contact patients for de-labelling atthe allergy clinic, only 3/36 underwent in vivo testing, with no positive results, and 1 patient proceeded to a negative oral challenge.

CONCLUSION

Unlike HICs, self-reported BLA is low among inpatients in SA. The majority of those who self-reported BLA were low risk fortype 1 hypersensitivity, but outpatient de-labelling efforts were largely unsuccessful.

The Safety of the Direct Drug Provocation Test in Beta-Lactam Hypersensitivity in Children: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

BACKGROUND

Direct drug provocation test (DPT) without prior skin testing (ST) has been investigated in children suspected of being at risk for beta-lactam (BL) hypersensitivity reaction (HSR). However, no systematic review and meta-analysis has investigated the efficacy and safety of direct DPT for BL-HSR in children.

OBJECTIVE

To investigate the prevalence of BL-HSR by direct DPT and the safety of direct DPT in children.

METHODS

We searched MEDLINE, EMBASE, Web of Science, and CINAHL from their inception to July 23, 2022, for studies that performed direct DPT in children with suspected BL-HSR, or for studies that performed DPT in all cases with ST results, but they ignored the ST results. The true prevalence was defined as the proportion of children who experienced an HSR during direct DPT. Safety was determined according to the proportion of children who developed a dangerous reaction following DPT.

RESULTS

Twenty-eight studies with 8,334 direct challenges were included. Fifteen studies included patients who presented with either immediate or nonimmediate HSR, and the majority of the index reactions were nonsevere. Amoxicillin/amoxicillin-clavulanic acid was the most commonly used during the DPT. The pooled prevalence of confirmed BL-HSR was 5.23% (95% CI 4.17-6.39; I² = 72%). Immediate and nonimmediate HSR were reported in 0.8% (95% CI 0.43-1.25; I² = 55.1%) and 3.69% (95% CI 2.66-4.87; I² = 79.77%), respectively. Severe reactions were found in 3 cases with the frequency of 0.036% (95% CI 0.012-0.112; I² = 0%).

CONCLUSIONS

The prevalence of BL-HSR by direct DPT was 5.23%, and the frequency of severe reactions from direct DPT was very low (0.036%). Our findings support direct DPT as a safe and effective delabeling tool in children with suspected nonsevere BL-HSR.

Parent-reported penicillin allergies in children: A qualitative study

BACKGROUND

Penicillin allergies are commonly reported in children. Most reported penicillin allergies are false, resulting in the unnecessary selection of alternative antibiotic treatments that promote antibiotic resistance. While formal allergy testing is encouraged to establish a diagnosis of penicillin allergy, children are rarely referred for allergy testing, and study of parents' experiences and perceptions of their child's reported penicillin allergy is limited. We aimed to describe parents' experiences and perceptions of their child's penicillin allergy and attitudes towards penicillin allergy testing to identify opportunities to engage parents in antimicrobial stewardship efforts.

METHODS

This was a qualitative descriptive study.

RESULTS

Eighteen parents participated in this study. Parents' children were on average 2 years old when the index reaction occurred, and 7 years had passed since the reaction. Transcripts revealed that participants were receptive to penicillin allergy testing for their child after learning the consequences of penicillin allergy and availability of allergy testing. Four major themes emerged from data (1) parents' making sense of allergy; (2) parents' impressions of allergy label, (3) parents' attitudes towards allergy testing, and (4) parents' desire to be informed of testing availability.

CONCLUSIONS

Efforts are needed to engage parents in addressing spuriously reported penicillin allergies.

The association between penicillin allergy and surgical site infection after orthopedic surgeries: a retrospective cohort study

Background

Cephalosporins are used as first-line antimicrobial prophylaxis for orthopedics surgeries. However, alternative antibiotics are usually used in the presence of penicillin allergy (PA), which might increase the risk of surgical site infection (SSI). This study aimed to analyze the relationship between SSI after orthopedic surgeries and PA among surgical candidates and related alternative antibiotic use.

Methods

In this single-center retrospective cohort study, we compared inpatients with and without PA from January 2015 to December 2021. The primary outcome was SSI, and the secondary outcomes were SSI sites and perioperative antibiotic use. Moreover, pathogen characteristics of all SSIs were also compared between the two cohorts.

Results

Among the 20,022 inpatient records, 1704 (8.51%) were identified with PA, and a total of 111 (0.55%) SSI incidents were reported. Compared to patients without PA, patients with PA had higher postoperative SSI risk (1.06%, 18/1704 vs. 0.51%, 93/18318), shown both in multivariable regression analysis (odds ratio [OR] 2.11; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.26-3.50; p= 0.004) and propensity score matching (OR 1.84; 95% CI, 1.05-3.23; p= 0.034). PA was related to elevated deep SSI risk (OR 2.79; 95% CI, 1.47-5.30; p= 0.002) and had no significant impact on superficial SSI (OR 1.39; 95% CI, 0.59-3.29; p= 0.449). The PA group used significantly more alternative antibiotics. Complete mediation effect of alternative antibiotics on SSI among these patients was found in mediation analysis. Pathogen analysis revealed gram-positive cocci as the most common pathogen for SSI in our study cohort, while patients with PA had higher infection rate from gram-positive rods and gram-negative rods than non-PA group.

Conclusion

Compared to patients without PA, patients with PA developed more SSI after orthopedic surgeries, especially deep SSI. The elevated infection rate could be secondary to the use of alternative prophylactic antibiotics.

Barriers to paediatric penicillin allergy de-labelling in UK secondary care: a regional survey

BACKGROUND

Incorrect penicillin allergy labels result in the use of inappropriately broad-spectrum antibiotics. De-labelling inaccurate penicillin allergy promotes antimicrobial stewardship and optimises prescribing practices. The objectives were to evaluate paediatric clinicians' knowledge and understanding of penicillin allergy and to identify barriers in tackling incorrect penicillin allergy labels.

METHODS

Paediatric clinicians from across the West Midlands of the UK were surveyed using an online, anonymised questionnaire between 1 August and 30 September 2021. Domains explored were (1) approach to penicillin allergy clinical vignettes, (2) knowledge of the impact of penicillin allergy labels, (3) frequency of allergy-focused history questions and (4) barriers in tackling incorrect penicillin allergy.

RESULTS

Responses were received from 307 paediatric clinicians across 12 hospitals. Sixty-one per cent would not prescribe a penicillin-based antibiotic if a family history of penicillin allergy was reported. There was an overall deficit in taking an allergy-focused history with only 36.5% inquiring about diagnostic confirmation. Absence, or lack of awareness of a referral pathway for antibiotic allergy evaluation (58.6%) and unfamiliarity of the indications for oral provocation testing (55%) were the most common reported barriers to penicillin allergy de-labelling. Fifty-one per cent would rather 'play it safe' than explore penicillin allergy confirmation as it is felt that alternative treatments were readily available.

CONCLUSIONS

The deficiency in antibiotic allergy-focused history among paediatric clinicians highlights the need for better allergy education across all clinical grades. Pragmatic algorithms and clear referral pathways could address barriers faced by non-allergists in de-labelling incorrect penicillin allergy.

Pediatric Antibiotic Prescribing and Utilization Practices for RTIs at Private Urgent Care Centers

Data on pediatric antibiotic prescribing and utilization practices at urgent care centers (UCC) remain limited. In this study, an electronic medical record-based review of UCC encounters for respiratory tract infections (RTI) of patients belonging to one mid-sized pediatric practice was performed. Antibiotic prescribing and guideline adherence were compared between UCCs that were staffed exclusively by pediatric-trained providers to those staffed otherwise. Of a total of 457 RTI visits, 330 (72%) occurred at the pediatric UCC. Across all bacterial RTIs, 82% of encounters at the pediatric UCC were guideline-adherent versus 59% at nonpediatric UCCs (P < .001). At nonpediatric UCCs, pharyngitis was the most common RTI encounter diagnosis (40%), and full streptococcal management guideline adherence was 41%. While 93% of RTI-UCC encounters for <2 years were at pediatric UCCs, the majority of children >10 presented to nonpediatric UCCs. RTI guideline education to UCCs should be a focus of ambulatory stewardship efforts.

Improving drug allergy label accuracy by supervised safety- and protocol-driven evaluation

Introduction: Drug allergies are often self-reported but of unknown accuracy. We carried out a prospective study to examine the utility and safety of formal allergology evaluation, and to identify factors associated with accurate drug allergy labels. Method: All patients who underwent drug allergy evaluation in our clinic during the study period were recruited. Baseline demographics, characteristics of index hypersensitivity reaction and outcomes of evaluation were recorded. Results: A total of 331 patients from March 2019 to June 2021 completed drug allergy evaluation to index drugs of concern. There were 123 (37%) male patients, and the mean age was 49 years (standard deviation 17). There were 170 beta-lactam antibiotics, 53 peri-operative drugs, 43 others, 38 non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs, and 27 non-beta-lactam antibiotic evaluations. Index reaction occurred within 5 years in 165 (50%) patients, with latency of less than 4 hours in 125 (38%) patients. The most common index reactions were rash, angioedema and urticaria. There were 57 (17%) evaluations stratified as low risk, 222 (67%) moderate risk, and 52 (16%) high risk based on multidisciplinary consensus. Allergy label was found to be false (negative drug evaluation) in 248 (75%) patients, while 16/237 (7%) skin tests, 44/331 (13%) in-clinic graded challenge, and 23/134 (17%) home prolonged challenges were positive (true drug allergy). The most common evaluation reactions were rash and urticaria. No cases of anaphylaxis were elicited. Conclusion: Seventy-five percent of drug allergy labels are inaccurate. Risk-stratified, protocolised allergy evaluation is safe. Prolonged drug challenge increases the sensitivity of drug allergy evaluation and should therefore be performed when indicated. Keywords: Drug allergy, drug hypersensitivity, graded challenge, prolonged drug provocation, skin testing

Antimicrobial Stewardship in Total Joint Arthroplasty: Outcomes of a Collaborative Program Implementation

INTRODUCTION

Antimicrobial stewardship has been cited as a crucial component of orthopaedic surgical care; however, limited high-quality data exist to guide antibiotic use across the total joint arthroplasty continuum. Antimicrobial stewardship program (ASP) implementation and evaluation is needed in this space.

METHODS

We pursued a prospective, sequential cohort study of an interprofessional ASP for total joint arthroplasty (TJA) formed in late 2017 at the study institution. Twelve total evidence-based recommendations for protocol change were issued, with 11 accepted and implemented across three project phases spanning March 2018 to December 2019. The primary study outcome was the rate of optimal preoperative intravenous antibiotic selection as assessed for Baseline versus Postintervention time periods. Secondary outcomes included individual antibiotic utilization rates. Descriptive statistics were pursued for institutional surgical site infection (SSI) and postoperative acute kidney injury (AKI) rates across the affected time frame. A cost-benefit analysis of the ASP was estimated from the institutional perspective.

RESULTS

The rate of optimal preoperative antibiotic selection increased from 64.9% in the Baseline Period (February 2018, n = 57) to 95.4% in the Postimplementation period (June 2018 to December 2019, n = 1,220) (P < 0.001). The rates of second-line preoperative antibiotics and total perioperative antibiotic exposures decreased. Total SSI and AKI rates in primary elective TJA seemed to decrease from calendar year 2018 to 2019 (deep SSI 1.00% to 0.22%, superficial SSI 0.66% to 0.00%, and AKI 1.97% to 1.03%). The institution realized an estimated $197,050 cost savings per 1000 TJA procedures.

DISCUSSION

A comprehensive ASP for TJA was associated with an increased use of optimal preoperative antibiotic selection, decreased total antibiotic exposures, and cost savings, without apparent detriment to SSI or AKI rates.