BSACI guideline: prescribing an adrenaline auto-injector

Food allergy: a proposed new tool for educating children and young people and supporting them to self-manage

Self-managing food allergy in children and young people presents challenges for families as they attempt to find a balance between their child's safety and freedom. Nurses have an important role in providing education that supports children, young people and their parents to self-manage food allergy safely but not at the expense of the child or young person's social development. At Nottingham Children's Hospital, the allergy service and youth service have developed an education and support tool composed of three domains, 'awareness', 'checking' and 'emergency kit', forming the acronym ACE. The authors suggest that the ACE tool could be used by healthcare professionals as a framework for educating children and young people with food allergy and their parents, as well as by children and young people and their parents at home to risk assess and risk manage everyday situations and new scenarios or events.

Epinephrine autoinjectors for individuals with food allergy: Who, how many, and when to use

Background

Anaphylaxis is a serious allergic reaction that is effectively treated with epinephrine. Epinephrine autoinjectors are devices that contain fixed doses of medication that can be carried by patients at risk for anaphylaxis so that ready access to first line medication is available outside the medical setting.

Methods

This review will discuss recent studies evaluating patient characteristics to consider when prescribing epinephrine autoinjectors.

Results

Decisions regarding who should be prescribed epinephrine autoinjectors will depend on the type of allergy, as well as co-morbidities and other risk factors that can increase a patient's risk for poor outcomes.

Conclusion

Shared decision-making is essential when developing guidance regarding post-epinephrine management. Regular education during routine follow-up visits can reinforce knowledge and skills for managing food allergy reactions.

Who Needs Epinephrine? Anaphylaxis, Autoinjectors, and Parachutes

International guidelines stipulate that intramuscular (IM) epinephrine (adrenaline) is the first-line treatment for anaphylaxis, with an established good safety profile. The availability of epinephrine autoinjectors (EAI) has greatly facilitated the lay administration of IM epinephrine in community settings. However, key areas of uncertainty remain around epinephrine usage. These include variations in prescribing EAI, what symptoms should prompt epinephrine administration, whether emergency medical services (EMS) need to be contacted after administration, and whether epinephrine administered via EAI reduces mortality from anaphylaxis or improves quality of life measures. We provide a balanced commentary on these issues. There is increasing recognition that a poor response to epinephrine, particularly after 2 doses, is a useful marker of severity and the need for urgent escalation. It is likely that patients who respond to a single epinephrine dose do not require EMS activation or emergency department transfer, but data are needed to demonstrate the safety of this approach. Lastly, patients at risk of anaphylaxis must be counseled against over-reliance on EAI alone.

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.

Epinephrine autoinjectors: individualizing device and dosage to optimize anaphylaxis management in the community setting

Background: Anaphylaxis is the most severe manifestation of a systemic allergic reaction, and, in the community setting, the immediate administration of an epinephrine autoinjector (EAI) can be life-saving. Physicians are tasked with selecting the most appropriate EAI for each individual and counseling patients and/or their caregivers to maximize the likelihood of successful deployment of the EAI. Objective: To offer an evidence-based expert clinical perspective on how physicians might best tailor EAI selection to their patients with anaphylaxis. Methods: A group of eight adult and pediatric allergists with expertise in anaphylaxis management reviewed and assessed the published data and guidelines on anaphylaxis management and EAI device selection. Results: Personalized EAI selection is influenced by intrinsic individual factors, extrinsic factors such as the properties of the individual EAI (e.g., dose, needle length, overall design) as well as cost and coverage. The number and the variety of EAIs available have expanded in most jurisdictions in recent years, which provide a greater diversity of options to meet the characteristics and needs of patients with anaphylaxis. Conclusion: There currently are no EAIs with customizable dose and needle length. Although precise personalization of each patient's EAI remains an optimistic future aspiration, careful consideration of all variables when prescribing EAIs can support optimal management of anaphylaxis.

Risk factors for systemic reactions in typical cold urticaria: Results from the COLD-CE study

BACKGROUND

Cold urticaria (ColdU), that is, the occurrence of wheals or angioedema in response to cold exposure, is classified into typical and atypical forms. The diagnosis of typical ColdU relies on whealing in response to local cold stimulation testing (CST). It can also manifest with cold-induced anaphylaxis (ColdA). We aimed to determine risk factors for ColdA in typical ColdU.

METHODS

An international, cross-sectional study COLD-CE was carried out at 32 urticaria centers of reference and excellence (UCAREs). Detailed history was taken and CST with an ice cube and/or TempTest^® performed. ColdA was defined as an acute cold-induced involvement of the skin and/or visible mucosal tissue and at least one of: cardiovascular manifestations, difficulty breathing, or gastrointestinal symptoms.

RESULTS

Of 551 ColdU patients, 75% (n = 412) had a positive CST and ColdA occurred in 37% (n = 151) of the latter. Cold-induced generalized wheals, angioedema, acral swelling, oropharyngeal/laryngeal symptoms, and itch of earlobes were identified as signs/symptoms of severe disease. ColdA was most commonly provoked by complete cold water immersion and ColdA caused by cold air was more common in countries with a warmer climate. Ten percent (n = 40) of typical ColdU patients had a concomitant chronic spontaneous urticaria (CSU). They had a lower frequency of ColdA than those without CSU (4% vs. 39%, p = .003). We identified the following risk factors for cardiovascular manifestations: previous systemic reaction to a Hymenoptera sting, angioedema, oropharyngeal/laryngeal symptoms, and itchy earlobes.

CONCLUSION

ColdA is common in typical ColdU. High-risk patients require education about their condition and how to use an adrenaline autoinjector.

Use of multiple epinephrine doses in anaphylaxis: A systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Regulatory bodies recommend that all patients at risk of anaphylaxis be prescribed 2 epinephrine autoinjectors, which they should carry at all times. This is in contrast to some guidelines. The proportion of anaphylaxis reactions that are treated with multiple doses of epinephrine has not been systematically evaluated.

OBJECTIVE

Our aim was to undertake a systematic review and meta-analysis of published studies reporting epinephrine treatment for anaphylaxis in which data relating to the number of doses administered were available.

METHODS

We searched the Medline, Embase, and Cochrane databases for relevant studies reporting at least 10 anaphylaxis events (due to food or venom) from 1946 until January 2020. Data were extracted in duplicate for the meta-analysis, and the risk of bias was assessed. The study was registered under the PROSPERO identifier CRD42017069109.

RESULTS

A total of 86 studies (36,557 anaphylaxis events) met the inclusion criteria (20 of the studies [23%] were prospective studies; 64 [74%] reported reactions in the community, and 22 [26%] included food challenge data). Risk of bias was assessed as low in 50 studies. Overall, 7.7% of anaphylaxis events from any cause (95% CI = 6.4-9.1) were treated with multiple doses of epinephrine. When only epinephrine-treated reactions for which subsequent doses were administered by a health care professional were considered, 11.1% of food-induced reactions (95% CI = 9.4-13.2) and 17.1% of venom-induced reactions (95% CI = 11.3-25.0) were treated with more than 1 epinephrine dose. Heterogeneity was moderate to high in the meta-analyses, but at sensitivity analysis this estimate was not affected by study design or anaphylaxis definition.

CONCLUSION

Around 1 in 10 anaphylaxis reactions are treated with more than 1 dose of epinephrine.

Multicenter real-world experience with epinephrine 0.5 mg dosing for anaphylaxis with allergen immunotherapy

Aim: To determine the safety and efficacy of 0.5 mg intramuscular (IM) epinephrine for the treatment of subcutaneous allergen immunotherapy induced anaphylaxis. Patients & methods: Retrospective chart review of patients who received 0.5 mg of IM epinephrine for treatment of anaphylaxis from subcutaneous allergen immunotherapy at two outpatient allergy and immunology practices. Results: Thirty-eight patients received 0.5 mg IM epinephrine. Eleven patients (29%) required a second dose, and two patients (5%) required a third dose of IM epinephrine. Sixteen patients (42%) were transferred to the emergency department with ongoing symptoms. All had eventual resolution of anaphylaxis. There were no adverse reactions or fatalities. Conclusion: IM epinephrine at a dose of 0.5 mg is safe and effective for treatment of anaphylaxis from subcutaneous allergen immunotherapy.

BSACI 2021 guideline for the management of egg allergy

This guideline advises on the management of patients with egg allergy. Most commonly egg allergy presents in infancy, with a prevalence of approximately 2% in children and 0.1% in adults. A clear clinical history will confirm the diagnosis in most cases. Investigation by measuring egg-specific IgE (by skin prick testing or specific IgE assay) is useful in moderate-severe cases or where there is diagnostic uncertainty. Following an acute allergic reaction, egg avoidance advice should be provided. Egg allergy usually resolves, and reintroduction can be achieved at home if reactions have been mild and there is no asthma. Patients with a history of severe reactions or asthma should have reintroduction guided by a specialist. All children with egg allergy should receive the MMR vaccine. Most adults and children with egg allergy can receive the influenza vaccine in primary care, unless they have had anaphylaxis to egg requiring intensive care support. Yellow Fever vaccines should only be considered in egg-allergic patients under the guidance of an allergy specialist. This guideline was prepared by the Standards of Care Committee (SOCC) of the British Society for Allergy and Clinical Immunology (BSACI) and is intended for allergists and others with a special interest in allergy. The recommendations are evidence based. Where evidence was lacking, consensus was reached by the panel of specialists on the committee. The document encompasses epidemiology, risk factors, diagnosis, treatment, prognosis and co-morbid associations.

Evidence update for the treatment of anaphylaxis

The Resuscitation Council UK has updated its Guideline for healthcare providers on the Emergency treatment of anaphylaxis. As part of this process, an evidence review was undertaken by the Guideline Working Group, using an internationally-accepted approach for adoption, adaptation, and de novo guideline development based on the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) evidence to decision (EtD) framework, referred to as GRADE-ADOLOPMENT. A number of significant changes have been made, which will be reflected in the updated Guideline. These include: emphasis on repeating intramuscular adrenaline doses after 5 min if symptoms of anaphylaxis do not resolve; corticosteroids (e.g. hydrocortisone) no longer being routinely recommended for the emergency treatment of anaphylaxis; interventions for reactions which are refractory to initial treatment with adrenaline; a recommendation against the use of antihistamines for the acute management of anaphylaxis; and guidance relating to the duration of observation following anaphylaxis, and timing of discharge.

A study to assess current approaches of allergists in European countries diagnosing and managing children and adolescents with peanut allergy

RATIONALE

Food allergy is documented to result in considerable morbidity, negative impact on quality of life, and substantial medical care costs. Although anecdotal data suggest widely varying practices in the diagnosis and management of food allergies, the diversity and relative frequency of these practices have not been documented.

METHODS

A questionnaire was developed evaluating allergists' management approaches of individuals with peanut allergy (PA) in Germany (DE), France (FR), and the United Kingdom (UK).

RESULTS

Here, we report the survey results from a total of 109 allergists from DE, FR and the UK. They reported to confirm PA at initial diagnosis using skin prick test (≥60%), while allergists from DE and FR reported using allergen-specific IgE testing more (>86%) compared to the UK (<50%). At initial diagnosis, oral food challenge was used less in DE (13%) and FR (14%) and very rarely in the UK (3%) to confirm diagnosis. Recognition of acute reactions, use of adrenaline auto-injectors and allergen avoidance were reported to be discussed with the patient/caregiver at the initial office visit by most allergists (>75%). Half of the responders reported assessing the patient's quality of life. 63% allergists reported retesting for PA resolution at a later date, with 45% allergists indicated to recommend ingestion of a normal serving of peanut regularly upon resolution. Lack of effective PA treatment was reported to be a 'very significant' barrier for optimal PA treatment, with allergists being less than 'moderately familiar' with data from clinical trials testing new treatments options for PA. Lastly, allergists stated that the severity of patient's PA ranked as the most important factor in their decision to recommend oral immunotherapy for PA treatment.

CONCLUSIONS

This survey provides essential insights into the practice of allergists and highlights some areas that would inform strategies for education and improving PA healthcare.

Management of anaphylaxis in the dental practice: an update

Anaphylaxis is a severe and potentially life-threatening allergic reaction that can occur in the dental practice. There are a number of dental-related causes including mouthwashes, local anaesthetics, latex and antibiotics. The dental team must be able to respond effectively and manage the life-threatening situation appropriately following Resuscitation Council UK guidelines. The timely administration of adrenaline is life-saving; any delays can lead to a poor outcome. With the current national supply issues with adrenaline auto-injector devices, there is an expectation that GDPs should be competent at drawing up adrenaline from an ampoule and administrating it intramuscularly. The aim of this article is to provide an update on the management of anaphylaxis in the dental practice with particular reference to the procedure for intramuscular injection of adrenaline.

Increasing incidence of anaphylaxis in Hong Kong from 2009 to 2019-discrepancies of anaphylaxis care between adult and paediatric patients

BACKGROUND

Anaphylaxis has been increasing in developed countries but there is very little published data on the burden of anaphylaxis and the pattern of adrenaline autoinjector (AAI) prescription from Asia. We aim to determine the incidence rates of anaphylaxis and prescription rates of AAI over the past decade in Hong Kong.

METHODS

Using a centralized electronic database of Hong Kong's sole public-funded healthcare provider, we obtained and analysed all patients between 2009 and 2019 with physician-reported diagnosis of anaphylaxis. Incidence rates were calculated using population statistics as the denominator. Patients' prescriptions on discharge were collected to determine the AAI prescription rates.

RESULTS

The overall 10-year estimated incidence rate of anaphylaxis was 3.57 per 100,000 person-years. An increasing trend over time across both paediatric and adult populations from 2009 to 2014 was found, which remained stable until 2019. This was more marked among the paediatric population (paediatric vs adult incidence rate ratio in 2019: 3.51 [95% CI 1.12-2.66] vs 1.82 [95% CI 1.05-1.60]). There was an overall increasing rate of AAI prescription for patients admitted for anaphylaxis, but the overall AAI prescription rate was less than 15% and was significantly less likely to be prescribed for the adult compared to paediatric patients (36.5% vs. 89.4%, p < 0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

An increasing trend of anaphylaxis incidence rates over the past decade is evident in Asian populations, with a discrepantly low rate of AAI prescription, particularly in the adult patients.

Medical emergencies in the dental practice poster: revised and updated

Medical emergencies can occur in the dental practice. The posters 'Medical Emergencies in the Dental Practice' and 'Emergency Drugs in the Dental Practice' have been designed to help dental care professionals to respond effectively and safely to a medical emergency. They have been updated and completely revised in line with current national guidelines and recommendations. The 'Medical Emergencies in the Dental Practice' poster is available as an insert in this issue of the British Dental Journal. Both posters are available to download from https://www.bda.org/advice/Pages/Patient-care.aspx .

Improving adrenaline autoinjector adherence: A psychologically informed training for healthcare professionals

BACKGROUND

Clinicians draw on instructional approaches when training patients with anaphylaxis to use adrenaline autoinjectors, but patient use is poor. Psychological barriers to these behaviours exist but are not considered routinely when training patients to use autoinjectors. Health Psychology principles suggest exploring these factors with patients could improve their autoinjector use.

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the impact of a 90-minute workshop training clinicians in strategies and techniques for exploring and responding to psychological barriers to autoinjector use with patients. Attendees' knowledge, confidence and likelihood of using the strategies were expected to improve.

METHODS

Impact was evaluated using a longitudinal mixed-method design. Twenty-nine clinicians (general and specialist nurses, general practitioners, and pharmacists) supporting patients with anaphylaxis in UK hospitals and general practice attended. Self-rated knowledge, confidence, and likelihood of using the strategies taught were evaluated online 1 week before, 1 to 3, and 6 to 8 weeks after the workshop. Clinicians were invited for telephone interview after attending to explore qualitatively the workshop impact.

RESULTS

χ2 analyses were significant in most cases (P < .05), with sustained (6-8 weeks) improvements in knowledge, confidence, and likelihood of using the strategies taught. Thematic analysis of interview data showed the workshop enhanced attendees' knowledge of the care pathway, understanding of patient's experience of anaphylaxis as psychological not purely physical, and altered their communication with this and other patient groups. However, interviewees perceived lack of time and organisational factors as barriers to using the strategies and techniques taught in clinical contexts.

CONCLUSION

Training clinicians in psychologically informed strategies produce sustained improvements in their confidence and knowledge around patient autoinjector education, and their likelihood of using strategies in clinical practice.

CLINICAL RELEVANCE

Exploring psychological barriers should be part of training patients with anaphylaxis in autoinjector use.

Prevalence of anaphylaxis and prescription rates of epinephrine auto-injectors in urban and rural areas of Korea

BACKGROUND/AIMS

Despite the clinical importance anaphylaxis and the recent increase in its occurrence, studies regarding the epidemiology of anaphylaxis, risk factors for anaphylaxis, and epinephrine auto-injector (EAI) prescription status for patients with anaphylaxis remain poorly described. Thus, we investigated the prevalence of anaphylaxis and prescription rates of EAI in urban and rural areas in Korea.

METHODS

We used data from the 2010 to 2014 Health Insurance Review and Assessment database. Anaphylaxis was identified through physician-certified diagnoses using the International Classification of Diseases 10th (ICD-10) codes (T780, T782, T805, T886). Data on prescription rates of EAI were collected from the Korea Orphan & Essential Drug Center, the only pharmacy exclusively dealing with EAI in Korea. The prescription rates of EAI were defined as the number of EAI prescribed against the number of patients with anaphylaxis.

RESULTS

The prevalence of anaphylaxis over the 5-year period was 0.023%. The annual prevalence of anaphylaxis increased over the 5-year period. Anaphylaxis was more common in males than in females (54% vs. 46%) and in the population aged 50 to 59 years old. For regional analysis, urban areas showed a relatively lower prevalence of anaphylaxis (17.3 per 100,000 individuals) along with higher prescription rates (12.0%) of EAI for patients with anaphylaxis. In contrast, rural areas showed a relatively higher prevalence of anaphylaxis (28.8 per 100,000 individuals) along with lower prescription rates (3.1%) of EAI.

CONCLUSION

The prevalence of anaphylaxis has increased annually in Korea. There were regional differences in the prevalence of anaphylaxis and prescription rates of EAI between urban and rural areas in Korea.

Recognition and management of food allergy in children

Incidence of food allergy has been increasing and is more commonly seen in children. Allergic reactions can vary, with symptoms ranging from mild to severe. This article aims to explore the immunological mechanisms involved in food allergy, as well as distinguishing between immunoglobulin E (IgE) mediated and non-IgE-mediated reactions. Careful diagnosis of the allergic child is essential and the article describes validated tests carried out in this process. Adopting a multidisciplinary approach to the management of children with allergies is vital because it ensures patients and carers are supported, empowered and therefore able to enjoy an improved quality of life.

Myths, facts and controversies in the diagnosis and management of anaphylaxis

Anaphylaxis is a serious systemic allergic reaction that is rapid in onset and may cause death. Despite numerous national and international guidelines and consensus statements, common misconceptions still persist in terms of diagnosis and appropriate management, both among healthcare professionals and patient/carers. We address some of these misconceptions and highlight the optimal approach for patients who experience potentially life-threatening allergic reactions.

Common causes of emergency department visits for anaphylaxis in Korean community hospitals: A cross-sectional study

Anaphylaxis can cause death and requires immediate management. For prevention and education programs for anaphylaxis, it is important to be aware of the common triggering factors. We investigated the triggers of anaphylaxis in the emergency departments (EDs) of community hospitals in Korea.Patients who visited the EDs of 7 community hospitals for anaphylaxis from January 1, 2012 to December 31, 2016 were enrolled. Anaphylaxis was defined according to the World Allergy Organization criteria and identified via a thorough review of the medical records of patients who were diagnosed with anaphylaxis (ICD-10 codes: T780, T782, T805, and T886) at the ED or administered epinephrine in the ED. Triggers of anaphylaxis were also evaluated by a review of the medical records.We identified 1021 ED visits for anaphylaxis. The incidence of anaphylaxis ED visits was 0.08%. The triggers of ED visits for anaphylaxis were bee venom (55.0%), foods (21.3%), and drugs (13.2%); 9.6% of cases were idiopathic. However, food was the most common trigger among the patients aged <20 years old. The frequency of ED visits for anaphylaxis was highest in summer (47.9%), followed by autumn (28.2%), spring (12.3%), and winter (11.6%). The incidence of anaphylaxis ED visits was highest in August, during which bee venom was the trigger for 80% of anaphylaxis cases. For the 55 patients with repeat ED visits for anaphylaxis, Bee venom was also the most common trigger.The number of ED visits for anaphylaxis showed marked seasonal variation, peaking in summer. Bee venom was the most common trigger for adults and the main reason for seasonal variations of anaphylaxis ED visits in Korean community hospitals.

BSACI guideline for the diagnosis and management of peanut and tree nut allergy

Peanut nut and tree nut allergy are characterised by IgE mediated reactions to nut proteins. Nut allergy is a global disease. Limited epidemiological data suggest varying prevalence in different geographical areas. Primary nut allergy affects over 2% of children and 0.5% of adults in the UK. Infants with severe eczema and/or egg allergy have a higher risk of peanut allergy. Primary nut allergy presents most commonly in the first five years of life, often after the first known ingestion with typical rapid onset IgE-mediated symptoms. The clinical diagnosis of primary nut allergy can be made by the combination of a typical clinical presentation and evidence of nut specifc IgE shown by a positive skin prick test (SPT) or specific IgE (sIgE) test. Pollen food syndrome is a distinct disorder, usually mild, with oral/pharyngeal symptoms, in the context of hay fever or pollen sensitisation, which can be triggered by nuts. It can usually be distinguish clinically from primary nut allergy. The magnitude of a SPT or sIgE relates to the probability of clinical allergy, but does not relate to clinical severity. SPT of ≥ 8 mm or sIgE ≥ 15 KU/L to peanut is highly predictive of clinical allergy. Cut off values are not available for tree nuts. Test results must be interpreted in the context of the clinical history. Diagnostic food challenges are usually not necessary but may be used to confirm or refute a conflicting history and test result. As nut allergy is likely to be a long-lived disease, nut avoidance advice is the cornerstone of management. Patients should be provided with a comprehensive management plan including avoidance advice, patient specific emergency medication and an emergency treatment plan and training in administration of emergency medication. Regular re-training is required.

Effective method for drug injection into subcutaneous tissue

Subcutaneous injection of drug solution is widely used for continuous and low dose drug treatment. Although the drug injections have been administered for a long time, challenges in the design of injection devices are still needed to minimize the variability, pain, or skin disorder by repeated drug injections. To avoid these adverse effects, systematic study on the effects of injection conditions should be conducted to improve the predictability of drug effect. Here, the effects of injection conditions on the drug permeation in tissues were investigated using X-ray imaging technique which provides real-time images of drug permeation with high spatial resolution. The shape and concentration distribution of the injected drug solution in the porcine subcutaneous and muscle tissues are visualized. Dynamic movements of the wetting front (WF) and temporal variations of water contents in the two tissues are quantitatively analyzed. Based on the quantitative analysis of the experimental data, the permeability of drug solution through the tissues are estimated according to permeation direction, injection speed, and tissue. The present results would be helpful for improving the performance of drug injection devices and for predicting the drug efficacy in tissues using biomedical simulation.

Perioperative considerations for the food-allergic pediatric patient

Patients with a history of food allergy and food intolerance are common in the pediatric population and are encountered frequently in the perioperative setting by pediatric anesthesiologists. Perioperatively, food allergy can present on a spectrum ranging from minor acute urticaria to more severe hypovolemia and anaphylactic shock. Allergy to foods including fruits, fish, egg, soy, and peanut are most concerning for their potential to cross-react with perioperative medications. There is little in the anesthesia literature that focuses on the perioperative management of children with food allergies. This educational review will provide a brief overview of classic immunoglobulin E (IgE)-mediated food allergies, less common non-IgE food allergies, and present perioperative considerations for these patients. An audio summary of this topic is included as Supplementary Audio S1.

Prescription rates of adrenaline auto-injectors for children in UK general practice: a retrospective cohort study

BACKGROUND

Adrenaline auto-injectors (AAI) should be provided to individuals considered to be at high risk of anaphylaxis. There is some evidence that the rate of AAI prescription is increasing, but the true extent has not been previously quantified.

AIM

To estimate the trends in annual GP-issued prescriptions for AAI among UK children between 2000 and 2012.

DESIGN AND SETTING

Retrospective cohort study using data from primary care practices that contributed to The Health Improvement Network (THIN) database.

METHOD

Children and young people aged between 0-17 years of age with a prescription for AAIs were identified, and annual AAI device prescription rates were estimated using Stata (version 12).

RESULTS

A total of 1.06 million UK children were identified, providing 5.1 million person years of follow-up data. Overall, 23 837 children were deemed high risk by their GPs, and were prescribed 98 737 AAI devices. This equates to 4.67 children (95% confidence interval [CI] = 4.66 to 4.69), and 19.4 (95% CI = 19.2 to 19.5) devices per 1000 person years. Between 2000 and 2012, there has been a 355% increase in the number of children prescribed devices, and a 506% increase in the total number of AAI devices prescribed per 1000 person years in the UK. The number of devices issued per high-risk child during this period has also increased by 33%.

CONCLUSION

The number of children being prescribed AAI devices and the number of devices being prescribed in UK primary care between 2000 and 2012 has significantly increased. A discussion to promote rational prescribing of AAIs in the NHS is needed.

Penicillin allergy-getting the label right

Penicillinⁱ allergy is a potentially serious adverse reaction that impacts on antibacterial treatment options. Although it is commonly reported and recorded in medical records, only a minority of patients with a label of penicillin allergy actually have the condition confirmed. The term 'allergy' may be incorrectly applied to adverse reactions that do not have an immunological basis and inappropriate labelling of penicillin allergy can lead to the unnecessary avoidance of penicillins and other beta-lactam antibacterials. Here, we discuss key features that help to distinguish patients at low or high risk of having a true penicillin allergy, summarise what is known about the risk of allergic reactions to other beta-lactam antibacterials in patients with penicillin allergy and discuss the steps to consider when assessing a label of penicillin allergy.