Secondary prevention measures in anaphylaxis patients: Data from the anaphylaxis registry

Anaphylaxis in a country where Asia and Europe meet: Evaluation according to World Allergy Organization (WAO) and European Academy of Allergy and Clinical Immunology (EAACI) diagnostic criteria

Background

Anaphylaxis is an acute-onset, life-threatening clinical emergency involving more than one system. The World Allergy Organization (WAO) published anaphylaxis guidelines in 2020. The European Academy of Allergy and Clinical Immunology (EAACI) published anaphylaxis guidelines in 2021 and reviewed the diagnosis of anaphylaxis, risk factors, comorbid diseases, treatment management, and prevention studies.In this study, clinical features, demographic characteristics, risk factors, treatment management, and evaluations according to EAACI and WAO diagnostic criteria were analysed in patients diagnosed with anaphylaxis. In this way, it was aimed to provide a perspective on the diagnosis, etiology, and treatment management in patients with anaphylaxis and to open a window for new studies.

Methods

We retrospectively analysed the data recording system of patients who were evaluated with a history of systemic allergic reaction in the Allergy and Immunology outpatient clinic of our tertiary referral hospital in a ninety-month period between January 2016 and June 2023. The total number of patients admitted to our Allergy and Immunology Clinic between January 2016 and June 2023 was 14,9425. Among these patients, 1032 patients were evaluated in the outpatient clinic according to the ICD-10 (International Statistical Classification of Diseases and Related Health Problems) coding system and diagnosed as T78.2 Anaphylaxis by Allergy and Immunology Specialist. Each patient file was re-evaluated by the authors of the study and 689 eligible patients were included.

Results

Included in the study were 689 patients. The mean age of the patients was 46.2 ± 14.2 (35-57) years. 64.4% (n = 444) of the patients were female. Venom, drugs, and food were the 3 leading causes of anaphylaxis. In our study, younger age was determined as a statistically significant risk factor for food-induced anaphylaxis, female gender for drug-induced anaphylaxis and male gender for venom-induced anaphylaxis. (p < 0.001) If the cause of anaphylaxis can be identified, such as venom, drug or food, the frequency of anaphylaxis decreases statistically significantly compared to idiopathic anaphylaxis. (p < 0.001) The rate of acute hypotension, bronchospasm, or laryngeal involvement without skin involvement according to WAO and the rate of WAO severity classification grade 5 were significantly higher in patients who developed anaphylaxis due to venom compared to other patients (p < 0.001). The rate of Grade 3 in the EAACI classification was significantly higher in patients who developed anaphylaxis due to venom compared to other cases (p < 0.001).

Conclusion

Our study was conducted in a city such as Istanbul, which connects both Asian and European continents. Moreover, it is important because it was conducted in a centre with the highest number of Allergy and Immunology outpatients per year in our country. It is important because it gives the prevalence of anaphylaxis and emphasises the risk factors for each allergen separately.

Varying Approaches to Management of IgE-Mediated Food Allergy in Children Around the World

Food allergy is a chronic disease that affects individuals of all ages and is a significant public health problem globally. This narrative overview examines clinical management strategies for IgE-mediated food allergy in children around the world to understand variations in practice. Information was drawn from clinical practice guidelines, recent research, the websites of professional and governmental bodies with expertise in food allergy, and clinical experts from a broad cross-section of geographical regions. The structure and delivery of clinical services, allergen avoidance and food labeling, and resources to support the management of allergic reactions in the community are discussed in detail. The adoption of emerging food immunotherapies is also explored. Wide variations in clinical management of food allergy were apparent across the different countries. Common themes were continuing issues with access to specialist care and recognition of the need to balance risk reduction with dietary and social restrictions to avoid unnecessary detrimental impacts on the quality of life of food allergy sufferers. Findings highlight the need for standardized presentation of practice and priorities, and may assist clinicians and researchers when engaging with government and funding agencies to address gaps.

Overview of registries for anaphylaxis: a scoping review

OBJECTIVE

This review aimed to describe the scope and operational features of anaphylaxis registries, and to assess their contribution to improving knowledge of anaphylaxis and care of patients who experience anaphylaxis by measuring their research output.

INTRODUCTION

Structured data collection and reporting systems, such as registries, are needed to better understand the burden of anaphylaxis and to protect the growing number of patients with severe allergy. There is a need to characterize current anaphylaxis registries to identify their value in anaphylaxis surveillance, management, and research. Information synthesized in this review will provide knowledge on benefits and gaps in current registries, which may inform the implementation and global standardization of future anaphylaxis reporting systems.

INCLUSION CRITERIA

This scoping review considered literature describing registries worldwide that enroll patients who have experienced anaphylaxis. Published and gray literature sources were included if they described the scope and operational features of anaphylaxis registries.

METHODS

This review followed the JBI methodology for scoping reviews. Embase, MEDLINE, Scopus, and CINAHL were searched for relevant articles. Identified keywords and index terms were adapted for searches of gray literature sources, using Google advanced search functions. Only full-text studies in English were considered for inclusion. Two independent reviewers conducted title and abstract screening and those that did not meet the inclusion criteria were excluded. The full text of potentially relevant articles were retrieved; full-text screening and data extraction were also conducted by two independent reviewers. Any discrepancies were resolved through discussion or with a third reviewer. Tables and a narrative summary were used to describe and compare the scope and features (eg, inclusion criteria, patient demographics, clinical symptoms) of the identified anaphylaxis registries, and to outline their output to assess their contribution to research and clinical practice for anaphylaxis.

RESULTS

A total of 77 full-text publications and eight gray literature sources were used to extract data. The literature search identified 19 anaphylaxis registries, with sites in 28 countries including Europe, the United Kingdom, Canada, the United States, Korea, and Australia. The main purposes of the identified registries were to collect clinical data for research; provide clinical support tools to improve patient care; and operate as allergen surveillance systems to protect the wider community with allergies. Differences in inclusion and health care settings exist, with 11 collecting data on anaphylaxis of any cause, two on food reactions alone, three on fatal anaphylaxis, one on perioperative anaphylaxis, and two on allergic reactions (including anaphylaxis). Five registries enroll cases in allergy centers, five in hospital settings, one in schools, and others target a combination of general practitioners, specialists in emergency departments, and other relevant hospital departments and allergy outpatient clinics. Only three registries operate under a mandatory framework. A total of 57 publications were considered research outputs from registries. All registries except two have published studies from collected data, with the greatest number of articles published from 2019 to the present. Publications mostly addressed questions regarding demographic profile, causes and cofactors, severity, fatal reactions, and gaps in management.

CONCLUSIONS

This review demonstrated that anaphylaxis registries differ in their scope and operation, having been established for different purposes. Importantly, registries have contributed significantly to research, which has highlighted gaps in anaphylaxis management, provoking allergens, and informed targets for prevention for severe and fatal events. Beyond this, registries relay information about anaphylaxis to clinicians and regulatory bodies to improve patient care and protect the community. The ability to link registry data with other health datasets, standardization of data across registries, and incorporation of clinical care indicators to promote quality health care across the health system represent important targets for future systems.

The Ability to Use Epinephrine Autoinjector in Patients Who Receive Prescription Immediately after Anaphylaxis

BACKGROUND

Epinephrine autoinjector (EAI) is prescribed to prevent a fatal outcome in the case of a repeated anaphylactic reactions. We wanted to determine how adult patients who received their first prescription as part of an urgent treatment of an anaphylactic reaction or at their family physician were instructed on the use of EAI.

METHODS

Nurses assessing patients' knowledge asked the patient to demonstrate how to use the EAI training device. Patients who performed the critical steps correctly in 1 min were labelled as competent.

RESULTS

Forty-one patients (24% women, 46 ± 5 years) came for the allergy examination 116 ± 145 days after receiving a prescription for EAI. When prescribing, the doctor or nurse explained the instructions for the use of EAI to 63.4% patients, and 31.7 patients practiced the use of EAI using a training device. At the pharmacy, 22% received explanation and 7% also practiced using a training device. Fifty-four percent of patients were able to effectively administer EAI adrenaline within 1 min. Higher education level was associated with sufficient knowledge about the use of EAI (p = 0.026). At the time of the visit to the allergy specialist clinic, 61% of patients had EAI with them. The shelf life of EAI was known to 63% of patients.

CONCLUSIONS

The activities to increase the prescription rate of EAI immediately after treatment of anaphylactic episode are not sufficient to prevent severe outcome after the repeated episodes of anaphylaxis as nearly a half of patients are not able to use EAI correctly.

An Evaluation of the Drone Delivery of Adrenaline Auto-Injectors for Anaphylaxis: Pharmacists’ Perceptions, Acceptance, and Concerns

Anaphylaxis is a life-threatening condition where delays in medical treatment can be fatal. Such situations would benefit from the drone delivery of an adrenaline auto-injector such as EpiPen®. This study evaluates the potential risk, reward, and impact of drone transportation on the stability of adrenaline during episodes of anaphylaxis. Further, this study examines pharmacists’ perceptions on drone delivery—pharmacists approved the use of drones to deliver EpiPen® during emergencies but had concerns with drone safety and supply chain security. Laboratory simulated onboard drone conditions reflected typical missions. In these experiments, in vitro model and pharmaceutical equivalent formulations were subjected independently to 30 min vibrations at 5, 8.43, and 13.33 Hz, and temperature storage at 4, 25, 40, and 65 °C for 0, 0.5, 3, and 24 h. The chiral composition (an indicator of chemical purity that relates to molecular structure) and concentration of these adrenaline formulations were determined using ultraviolet (UV) and circular dichroism spectroscopy (CD). Adrenaline intrinsic stability was also explored by edge-of-failure experimentation to signpost the uppermost limits for safe transportation. During drone flight with EpiPen®, the temperature and vibration g-force were 10.7 °C and 1.8 g, respectively. No adverse impact on adrenaline was observed during drone flight and laboratory-simulated conditions shown by conformation to the British Pharmacopeia standards (p > 0.05 for CD and UV). This study showed that drone delivery of EpiPen® is feasible. There are more than 15,000 community pharmacies and ≈9000 GP surgeries spanning the UK, which are likely to provide achievable ranges and distances for the direct drone delivery of EpiPen®. The authors recommend that when designing future missions, in addition to medicine stability testing that models the stresses imposed by drone flight, one must conduct a perceptions survey on the relevant group of medical professionals, because their insights, acceptance, and concerns are extremely valuable for the design and evaluation of the mission.

EAACI Task force Clinical epidemiology of anaphylaxis: experts' perspective on the use of adrenaline autoinjectors in Europe

Background

Worldwide, guidelines recommend the use of adrenaline autoinjectors (AAIs) for self-medication in patients who experience severe allergic reaction. The European Medical Agency recommends the prescription of two AAIs, which should be carried by patients at all times. The European Academy of Allergy and Clinical Immunology guidelines propose to prescribe a second AAI under some defined conditions. In the present study, we aimed to examine the adherence to these guidelines and prescription behavior of allergy experts regarding the number of AAIs prescribed for a given patient.

Methods

A standardized questionnaire was applied to the participants of the 5th International Conference of the Network of Online Registration for Anaphylaxis (NORA e. V.). Twenty-six experts (medical doctors with at least 2 years of experience in the field of anaphylaxis) answered the questions regarding the number of autoinjectors prescribed and the reasons influencing their decisions.

Results

Sixty-eight percent of the experts usually prescribed one AAI, while 32% prescribed two. The pediatricians and physicians with less experience tended to prescribe two autoinjectors more frequently. The experts were more likely to prescribe two adrenaline autoinjectors if the patient was a child, had a previous severe reaction, had mastocytosis, asthma, cardiovascular disease, or high body weight, or lived far from the emergency department.

Conclusion

Our data confirm the lack of consensus regarding the number of AAIs to prescribe. Despite the European Medical Agency recommendation, the majority of allergy experts prescribed one autoinjector per patient. However, under distinct circumstances (e.g. mastocytosis, asthma, excess body weight, a history of severe anaphylaxis, or restricted access to immediate emergency), experts tended to prescribe more AAIs, which is in accordance with the European Academy of Allergy and Clinical Immunology guidelines.