Complexity of case mix in a regional allergy service

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

Background

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

Methods

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

Results

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

Conclusion

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

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

Development of an allergy management support system in primary care

Background

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

Methods

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

Results

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

Conclusion

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

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

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

Sublingual immunotherapy: World Allergy Organization position paper 2013 update

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

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

The standard of care for allergies within a primary care (PC) setting has a strong influence on disease prevention and control, quality of life, and patient satisfaction. The level of knowledge of allergic diseases and the accessibility to regular follow-up are essential. EAACI and IPCRG conducted a survey to evaluate the actual status of care for allergic diseases in PC. Access to allergy and asthma specialist treatment was identified as the greatest 'unmet need'. The average waiting time between a referral and being seen in a public health service is usually >6 weeks. Referring the patients to an 'organ' specialist is much easier compared with referral to an allergist. Most PCPs have access to blood tests for total and specific IgE. Skin prick testing is available in only half of the cases, while provocation tests, allergen quantification in homes, and a dietician service are even less available. 20.6% of practices do not have access to allergy tests at all. Other issues raised were low political or general public awareness, lack of understanding by the patients of their allergic disease, the need to invest in PC, and to achieve sufficient competence at the appropriate level of care.