Return to sender: the need to re-address patient antibiotic allergy labels in Australia and New Zealand

Study protocol for PREPARE: a phase II feasibility/safety randomised controlled trial on PeRiopErative Penicillin AlleRgy TEsting

INTRODUCTION

Patient-reported antibiotic allergy labels (AALs) are common. These labels have been demonstrated to have a negative impact on use of appropriate antibiotics and patient-related health outcomes. These patients are more likely to receive suboptimal antibiotics, have increased rates of surgical site infections and are more likely to be colonised with multidrug-resistant organisms. Increasing recognition that antibiotic allergy forms a key part of good antimicrobial stewardship has led to calls for greater access to antibiotic allergy assessment.PREPARE is a pilot randomised controlled trial of beta-lactam allergy assessment and point of care delabelling in perioperative patients utilising a validated antibiotic allergy assessment tool that has been repurposed into a smartphone application. The aim of the study is to assess the feasibility and safety of this approach in the perioperative outpatient setting.

METHODS AND ANALYSIS

Adult participants requiring elective surgery and are likely to require prophylactic intravenous antibiotics will be recruited. During the intervention phase, participants will be randomised to the intervention or control arm, with control patients receiving usual standard of care. Those randomised to intervention undertake a risk assessment via the smartphone application, with those deemed low risk proceeding to direct oral provocation with either a penicillin or cephalosporin. Study outcomes will be evaluated in the postintervention phase, 30 and 90 days after surgery.Feasibility of intervention delivery and recruitment will be reported as proportions with respective 95% CIs. Participants who experience an antibiotic adverse event will be reported by group with respective 95% CIs and compared using modified Poisson regression model with robust SE estimation.

ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION

This protocol has received approval from the Austin Health human research and ethics committee, Heidelberg, Victoria, Australia (HREC/17/Austin/575). Results will be disseminated via publication in peer-reviewed journals as well as presentation at international conferences.

TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER

ACTRN12620001295932.

Penicillin allergy SHACK: Survey of hospital and community knowledge

AIM

Penicillin allergy accounts for the majority of all reported adverse drug reactions in adults and children. Foregoing first-line antibiotic therapy due to penicillin allergy label is associated with an increased prevalence of infections by resistant organisms and longer hospitalisation. Clinician awareness of allergy assessment, referral indications, management of allergy and anaphylaxis is therefore vital but globally lacking. We aim to assess the knowledge of penicillin allergy, assessment and management in Western Australian health professionals.

METHODS

An anonymous survey was distributed to pharmacists, nurses and physicians within Western Australian paediatric and adult Hospitals, Community and General Practice.

RESULTS

In total, 487/611 were completed and included in the statistical analysis. Only 62% (301/487) of respondents routinely assessed for patient medication allergies. Of those who assessed allergy, 9% (28/301) of respondents met the Australian standards for allergy assessment. Only 22% (106/487) of participants correctly cited all indications for management with adrenaline in anaphylaxis to antibiotics and 67% (197/292) of physicians rarely or never referred to an allergy service. Paediatric clinicians had an increased understanding of allergy assessment and anaphylaxis management. Recent penicillin allergy education within a 5-year period led to significant improvements in allergy knowledge.

CONCLUSION

Overall, knowledge, assessment and management of penicillin allergies among practitioners in Western Australia are currently inadequate in adults and paediatric clinicians to provide safe and effective clinical care. The implementation of a targeted education program for WA health professionals is urgently required and is expected to improve clinician knowledge and aid standardised penicillin assessment (de-labelling) practices.

Standardized testing and written communication improve patient understanding of beta-lactam allergy testing outcomes: A multicenter, prospective study

Background

Historical penicillin allergy is commonly reported, but the lack of standardized allergy clinic practices may diminish the ability to delabel beta-lactam allergy appropriately.

Objective

We sought to improve beta-lactam allergy testing and patient understanding of their antibiotic allergy status by standardizing testing and communication practices between 7 adult and pediatric hospital centers.

Methods

Phase 1 prospectively described the beta-lactam allergy testing practices at each center. Following this, practice was standardized to achieve a defined panel of skin testing reagents, pro forma result letters for patients and referring doctors, and provision of medical alert jewelry to those with confirmed allergy. Testing outcomes and patient perception regarding allergy status 8 weeks postassessment were compared before (phase 1) and after standardization (phase 2). Primary outcomes were the percentage of participants delabeled after testing, and concordance rates between participant perception of their allergy status and their status as determined by the treating physician at 8-week follow-up.

Results

Of 195 adult and pediatric participants (median age, 50 years; 21.5% <18 years; 36.9% males), 75% were delabeled of their beta-lactam allergy. No patient experienced anaphylaxis related to any beta-lactam delabeling testing. In phase 1, 75% of participants received written results, 52% were informed verbally, and 48% received results in more than 1 form. All phase 2 participants received written results (P < .01), 61% received verbal results from a physician as well (P > .05). At 8-week follow-up, 54% of phase 1 participants had concordant perceptions of their allergy status as the testing team versus 91.6% in phase2 (P < .001). Of the 17 participants who were delabeled and treated with a beta-lactam antibiotic during the 8-week follow-up period, there were no reported allergic reactions, although 1 participant experienced anaphylaxis following exposure to amoxicillin-clavulanic acid 1 year after delabeling.

Conclusions

Standardization of testing and written patient information improved short-term patient perception of beta-lactam allergy status.

Antimicrobial stewardship in Australia: the role of qualitative research in programme development

Antimicrobial stewardship (AMS) in Australia is supported by a number of factors, including enabling national policies, sectoral clinical governance frameworks and surveillance programmes, clinician-led educational initiatives and health services research. A One Health research programme undertaken by the National Centre for Antimicrobial Stewardship (NCAS) in Australia has combined antimicrobial prescribing surveillance with qualitative research focused on developing antimicrobial use-related situational analyses and scoping AMS implementation options across healthcare settings, including metropolitan hospitals, regional and rural hospitals, aged care homes, general practice clinics and companion animal and agricultural veterinary practices. Qualitative research involving clinicians across these diverse settings in Australia has contributed to improved understanding of contextual factors that influence antimicrobial prescribing, and barriers and facilitators of AMS implementation. This body of research has been underpinned by a commitment to supplementing 'big data' on antimicrobial prescribing practices, where available, with knowledge of the sociocultural, technical, environmental and other factors that shape prescribing behaviours. NCAS provided a unique opportunity for exchange and cross-pollination across the human and animal health programme domains. It has facilitated synergistic approaches to AMS research and education, and implementation of resources and stewardship activities. The NCAS programme aimed to synergistically combine quantitative and qualitative approaches to AMS research. In this article, we describe the qualitative findings of the first 5 years.

Burden of antibiotic allergy labels in Australian aged care residents: Findings from a national point-prevalence survey

OBJECTIVE

To determine the prevalence of antibiotic allergy labels (AALs) in Australian aged care residents and to describe the impact of labels on antibiotic prescribing practices.

DESIGN

Point-prevalence survey.

SETTING

Australian residential aged care facilities.

PARTICIPANTS

We surveyed 1,489 residents in 407 aged care facilities.

METHODS

Standardized data were collected on a single day between June 1 and August 31, 2018, for residents prescribed an antibiotic. An AAL was reported if it was documented in the resident's health record. Resident-level data were used to calculate overall prevalence, and antibiotic-level data were used to report relative frequency of AALs for individual antibiotics and classes.

RESULTS

Among 1,489 residents, 356 (24%) had 1 or more documented AALs. The AALs for penicillin (28.3%), amoxicillin or amoxicillin/clavulanic acid (10.5%), cefalexin (7.2%), and trimethoprim (7.0%) were most commonly reported. The presence of an AAL was associated with significantly less prescribing of penicillins (OR, 0.43; 95% CI, 0.31-0.62; P < .001) and significantly more prescribing of lincosamides (OR, 4.81; P < .001), macrolides (OR, 2.03; P = .007), and tetracyclines (OR, 1.54; P = .033). Of residents with AALs, 7 residents (1.9%) were prescribed an antibiotic that was listed on the allergy section of their health record.

CONCLUSIONS

A high prevalence of AALs was observed among residents of Australian aged care facilities, comparable to the prevalence of AALs in high-risk hospitalized patients. Significant increases in prescribing of lincosamide, macrolide, and tetracycline agents poses a potential risk to aged populations, and future studies must evaluate the benefits of AAL delabelling programs tailored for aged care settings.

Antimicrobial anaphylaxis: the changing face of severe antimicrobial allergy

OBJECTIVES

The epidemiology, clinical characteristics and outcomes of antimicrobial-associated anaphylaxis remain ill-defined. We sought to examine antimicrobial anaphylaxis with regard to: (i) the frequency of implicated antimicrobials; (ii) attributable mortality; and (iii) referral for definitive allergy assessment.

METHODS

This was conducted through a national retrospective multicentre cohort study at five Australian tertiary hospitals (January 2010 to December 2015). Cases of antimicrobial anaphylaxis were identified from ICD-10 coding and adverse drug reaction committee databases.

RESULTS

There were 293 participants meeting the case definition of antimicrobial anaphylaxis and 310 antimicrobial anaphylaxis episodes. Of 336 implicated antimicrobials, aminopenicillins (62/336, 18.5%) and aminocephalosporins (57/336, 17%) were implicated most frequently. ICU admission occurred in 43/310 (13.9%) episodes; however, attributable mortality was low (3/310, 1%). The rate of anaphylaxis to IV antibiotics was 3.5 (95% CI=2.9-4.3) per 100 000 DDDs and the rate of hospital-acquired anaphylaxis was 1.9 (95% CI=2.1-3.3) per 100 000 occupied bed-days. We observed overall low rates of hospital discharge documentation (222/310, 71.6%) and follow-up by specialist allergy services (73/310, 23.5%), which may compromise medication safety and antimicrobial prescribing in future.

CONCLUSIONS

This study demonstrated that a high proportion of severe immediate hypersensitivity reactions presenting or acquired in Australian hospitals are secondary to aminopenicillins and aminocephalosporins. Overall rates of hospital-acquired anaphylaxis, predominantly secondary to cephalosporins, are low, and also associated with low inpatient mortality.

Knowledge gaps of drug allergy in children: a survey of primary care doctors

INTRODUCTION

There is still lack of knowledge of drug allergy in children. Proper knowledge and management of drug hypersensitivity reactions is important to physicians.

AIM

To evaluate the approach of primary care doctors regarding drug allergy in children.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

A total of 195 primary care doctors were questioned in various parts of Lithuania from 2015 to 2016. An original questionnaire was used. The incidence of a suspected drug allergy, culprit drugs, the clinical pattern and management of the suspected drug hypersensitivity were analysed.

RESULTS

The majority of primary care doctors (74.4%) reported a suspected drug allergy. The main suspected drugs were antibiotics (95.2%) and nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (32.4%). Skin symptoms (skin rash (100%) and itching (82.1%)) were the main symptoms of the suspected drug allergy. The vast majority of doctors (93.8%) withdrew the use of a suspected drug and 68.3% of respondents prescribed an alternative drug. The fact that skin tests, blood tests and provocation tests could be used in a drug allergy workup were indicated by 43.6% of doctors. Most doctors (69.2%) knew about the opportunity to test children for drug allergy in Lithuania and 41.4% of doctors referred patients for the further drug allergy workup.

CONCLUSIONS

The majority of primary care doctors reported a suspected drug allergy in children. The most common suspected drugs were antibiotics and skin symptoms were the main symptoms. Most doctors knew about the possibility to test for the drug allergy but only less than half of them referred patients for the drug allergy workup.

Implementation of a pharmacist-led penicillin allergy de-labelling service in a public hospital

BACKGROUND

Inaccurate allergy labelling results in inappropriate antimicrobial management of the patient, which may affect clinical outcome, increase the risk of adverse events and increase costs. Inappropriate use of alternative antibiotics has implications for antimicrobial stewardship programmes and microbial resistance.

METHODS

All adult inpatients labelled as penicillin allergic were identified and screened for eligibility by the study pharmacist. An accurate allergy and medication history was taken. Patients were 'de-labelled', underwent oral challenge or were referred to an immunology clinic, if study criteria were met. All patients included in the study were followed-up 1 year after intervention.

RESULTS

Two hundred and fifty eligible patients with a label of 'penicillin allergy' were identified. The prevalence of reported penicillin allergy at Middlemore Hospital was 11%. We found that 80% of study patients could be 'de-labelled'. Of those, 80% were 'de-labelled' after an interview with the pharmacist alone, 16% had an uneventful oral challenge and 4% were deemed to be inappropriately labelled after referral to an immunology clinic. Appropriately labelled patients accounted for 20% of the study population. Changes to inpatient antibiotic therapy were recommended in 61% of 'de-labelled' patients, of which no patients had adverse events after commencing on penicillin antibiotics. At the 1 year follow-up, 98% of patients who were 'de-labelled' had no adverse events to repeated administration of penicillin antibiotics.

CONCLUSIONS

This study showed that a pharmacist-led allergy management service is a safe option to promote antimicrobial stewardship and appropriate allergy labelling.

The democratization of de-labeling: a review of direct oral challenge in adults with low-risk penicillin allergy

INTRODUCTION

Penicillin antibiotic allergy labels (AALs) are common and lead to significant negative health and health system outcomes. Direct oral challenge offers a rapid and cost-effective way of removing inaccurate AALs and improving outcomes.

AREAS COVERED

A narrative review (Medline, May 2020) of direct oral challenge in low-risk penicillin allergy in adults is described, and the evidence for the safety and efficacy of this approach in inpatients, outpatients, and special patient groups is presented.

EXPERT OPINION

Whilst the current literature demonstrates the safety and efficacy of direct oral challenge in de-labeling low-risk penicillin allergy in adults, novel approaches are needed to improve access to antibiotic allergy assessment and address the growing global need.

A Survey on Knowledge Gaps in Assessment and Management of Severe Drug Hypersensitivity Reactions: Multicenter Cross-Sectional Study of Australian Health Care Providers

Severe drug hypersensitivity reactions (DHRs) are often encountered by health care professionals (HCPs). We evaluated knowledge of doctors and pharmacists in the assessment and management of severe DHRs using a structured questionnaire. A cross-sectional study was conducted in 4 metropolitan hospital networks in Melbourne, Australia. A 13-question, scenario-based multiple-choice questionnaire to assess specific knowledge domains in drug hypersensitivity syndrome recognition, causality attribution, cross-reactivity patterns, appropriate diagnostic tests, and therapy was administered to HCPs of various vocation and specialty groups. Data were analyzed according to profession, self-reported experience, and preparedness in managing severe DHRs. Two hundred thirty-eight participants (45.0% senior doctors, 24.4% junior doctors, and 30.7% pharmacists) across a range of subspecialties achieved an overall median score of 7 (IQR, 5-8)-overall 55.6% correct responses to all questions-with senior doctors outperforming junior doctors and pharmacists (P < .001). The best performance by all participants was in DHR syndrome recognition (60.9%), and the poorest was in diagnostics/therapy (52.0%). HCP group and experience level were significantly associated with better performance in the knowledge domains of cross-reactivity and diagnostics/therapy (P = .003 and < .001, respectively), but not in the domains of syndrome recognition and causality attribution (P > .05). Levels of self-reported preparedness in DHR management were not associated with performance rates in any of the knowledge domains. This study demonstrated significant knowledge gaps in the recognition and management of severe drug hypersensitivity reactions. Targeted multidisciplinary education of staff caring for these patients is needed to improve knowledge gaps.

Development and Validation of a Penicillin Allergy Clinical Decision Rule

IMPORTANCE

Penicillin allergy is a significant public health issue for patients, antimicrobial stewardship programs, and health services. Validated clinical decision rules are urgently needed to identify low-risk penicillin allergies that potentially do not require penicillin skin testing by a specialist.

OBJECTIVE

To develop and validate a penicillin allergy clinical decision rule that enables point-of-care risk assessment of patient-reported penicillin allergies.

DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS

In this diagnostic study, a multicenter prospective antibiotic allergy-tested cohort of 622 patients from 2 tertiary care sites in Melbourne, Australia (Austin Health and Peter MacCallum Cancer Centre) was used for derivation and internal validation of a penicillin allergy decision rule. Backward stepwise logistic regression was used to derive the model, including clinical variables predictive of a positive penicillin allergy test result. Internal validation of the final model used bootstrapped samples and the model scoring derived from the coefficients. External validation was performed in retrospective penicillin allergy-tested cohorts consisting of 945 patients from Sydney and Perth, Australia, and Nashville, Tennessee. Patients who reported a penicillin allergy underwent penicillin allergy testing using skin prick, intradermal, or patch testing and/or oral challenge (direct or after skin testing). Data were collected from June 26, 2008, to June 3, 2019, and analyzed from January 9 to 12, 2019.

MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES

The primary outcome for the model was any positive result of penicillin allergy testing performed during outpatient or inpatient assessment.

RESULTS

From an internal derivation and validation cohort of 622 patients (367 female [59.0%]; median age, 60 [interquartile range{IQR}, 48-71] years) and an external validation cohort of 945 patients (662 female [70.1%]; median age, 55 [IQR, 38-68] years), the 4 features associated with a positive penicillin allergy test result on multivariable analysis were summarized in the mnemonic PEN-FAST: penicillin allergy, five or fewer years ago, anaphylaxis/angioedema, severe cutaneous adverse reaction (SCAR), and treatment required for allergy episode. The major criteria included an allergy event occurring 5 or fewer years ago (2 points) and anaphylaxis/angioedema or SCAR (2 points); the minor criterion (1 point), treatment required for an allergy episode. Internal validation showed minimal mean optimism of 0.003 with internally validated area under the curve of 0.805. A cutoff of less than 3 points for PEN-FAST was chosen to classify a low risk of penicillin allergy, for which only 17 of 460 patients (3.7%) had positive results of allergy testing, with a negative predictive value of 96.3% (95% CI, 94.1%-97.8%). External validation resulted in similar findings.

CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE

In this study, PEN-FAST was found to be a simple rule that accurately identified low-risk penicillin allergies that do not require formal allergy testing. The results suggest that a PEN-FAST score of less than 3, associated with a high negative predictive value, could be used by clinicians and antimicrobial stewardship programs to identify low-risk penicillin allergies at the point of care.

Antibiotic allergy

Antibiotics are the commonest cause of life-threatening immune-mediated drug reactions that are considered off-target, including anaphylaxis, and organ-specific and severe cutaneous adverse reactions. However, many antibiotic reactions documented as allergies were unknown or not remembered by the patient, cutaneous reactions unrelated to drug hypersensitivity, drug-infection interactions, or drug intolerances. Although such reactions pose negligible risk to patients, they currently represent a global threat to public health. Antibiotic allergy labels result in displacement of first-line therapies for antibiotic prophylaxis and treatment. A penicillin allergy label, in particular, is associated with increased use of broad-spectrum and non-β-lactam antibiotics, which results in increased adverse events and antibiotic resistance. Most patients labelled as allergic to penicillins are not allergic when appropriately stratified for risk, tested, and re-challenged. Given the public health importance of penicillin allergy, this Review provides a global update on antibiotic allergy epidemiology, classification, mechanisms, and management.

The Safety and Efficacy of an Oral Penicillin Challenge Program in Cancer Patients: A Multicenter Pilot Study

Antibiotic allergies are reported by up to 1 in 4 cancer patients, almost 50% of which are considered low risk and precede the cancer diagnosis. We demonstrate the successful and safe implementation of a pilot oral penicillin challenge program for cancer patients with low-risk penicillin allergies, increasing the use of penicillin and narrow-spectrum beta-lactams post-testing.

Antibiotic allergy labels-the impact of taking a clinical history

BACKGROUND

Many patients admitted to hospital have an antibiotic allergy (AAL) documented in their medical record. In many of these, the reaction is not a hypersensitivity reaction or may no longer be relevant. Despite this, the label adversely affects patient care directly in terms of antibiotic selection, and indirectly in terms of patient costs and the development of antimicrobial resistance.

AIMS

To estimate the prevalence of AALs in a cohort of hospitalised patients, to investigate the feasibility of de-labelling through re-challenge based solely upon clinical grounds.

DESIGN

This is a cross-sectional study conducted over a 6-month period on adult inpatients. An allergy history was taken from each patient and compared with medical record data regarding allergy. Antibiotic selection data were collected (if relevant). It was then determined whether immediate de-labelling was appropriate, if direct provocation test (DPT) could be relatively safely performed, and if antibiotic selection was appropriate.

RESULTS

Three thousand eight hundred and fifty five patients were screened, 553 (14.35%) had an AAL, and 352 were interviewed. There were 426 AALs; 276 (64.8%) towards a penicillin. After taking a detailed clinical history of the type of reaction, approximately 20% could be immediately de-labelled and educated (non-allergic, non-severe reactions) and another 38% with either a definite or vague history of mild cutaneous reaction would be suitable for an attempt at clinical de-labelling DPT.

CONCLUSIONS

These simple measures to 'de-label' patients appropriately, would increase the quality of care of this group known to have higher costs, infection with more resistant bacteria and worse health outcomes that 'non-labelled' patients.

The 3 Cs of Antibiotic Allergy-Classification, Cross-Reactivity, and Collaboration

Antibiotic allergy labeling is highly prevalent and negatively impacts patient outcomes and antibiotic appropriateness. Reducing the prevalence and burden of antibiotic allergies requires the engagement of key stakeholders such as allergists, immunologists, pharmacists, and infectious diseases physicians. To help address this burden of antibiotic allergy overlabeling, we review 3 key antibiotic allergy domains: (1) antibiotic allergy classification, (2) antibiotic cross-reactivity, and (3) multidisciplinary collaboration. We review the available evidence and research gaps of currently used adverse drug reaction classification systems, antibiotic allergy cross-reactivity, and current and future models of antibiotic allergy care.

Impact of an Integrated Antibiotic Allergy Testing Program on Antimicrobial Stewardship: A Multicenter Evaluation

Background

Despite the high prevalence of patient-reported antibiotic allergy (so-called antibiotic allergy labels [AALs]) and their impact on antibiotic prescribing, incorporation of antibiotic allergy testing (AAT) into antimicrobial stewardship (AMS) programs (AAT-AMS) is not widespread. We aimed to evaluate the impact of an AAT-AMS program on AAL prevalence, antibiotic usage, and appropriateness of prescribing.

Methods

AAT-AMS was implemented at two large Australian hospitals during a 14-month period beginning May 2015. Baseline demographics, AAL history, age-adjusted Charlson comorbidity index, infection history, and antibiotic usage for 12 months prior to testing (pre-AAT-AMS) and 3 months following testing (post-AAT-AMS) were recorded for each participant. Study outcomes included the proportion of patients who were "de-labeled" of their AAL, spectrum of antibiotic courses pre- and post-AAT-AMS, and antibiotic appropriateness (using standard definitions).

Results

From the 118 antibiotic allergy-tested patients, 226 AALs were reported (mean, 1.91/patient), with 53.6% involving 1 or more penicillin class drug. AAT-AMS allowed AAL de-labeling in 98 (83%) patients-56% (55/98) with all AALs removed. Post-AAT, prescribing of narrow-spectrum penicillins was more likely (adjusted odds ratio [aOR], 2.81, 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.45-5.42), as was narrow-spectrum β-lactams (aOR, 3.54; 95% CI, 1.98-6.33), and appropriate antibiotics (aOR, 12.27; 95% CI, 5.00-30.09); and less likely for restricted antibiotics (aOR, 0.16; 95% CI, .09-.29), after adjusting for indication, Charlson comorbidity index, and care setting.

Conclusions

An integrated AAT-AMS program was effective in both de-labeling of AALs and promotion of improved antibiotic usage and appropriateness, supporting the routine incorporation of AAT into AMS programs.