Management of penicillin allergy in primary care: a qualitative study with patients and primary care physicians

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.

Residual protein analysis by SDS-PAGE in clinically manufactured BM-MSC products

Residual substances that are considered hazardous to the recipient must be removed from final cellular therapeutic products manufactured for clinical purposes. In doing so, quality rules determined by competent authorities (CAs) for the clinical use of tissue- and cell-based products can be met. In our study, we carried out residual substance analyses, and purity determination studies of trypsin and trypsin inhibitor in clinically manufactured bone marrow-derived mesenchymal stromal/stem cell products, using the sodium dodecyl sulfate-polyacrylamide gel electrophoresis (SDS-PAGE) method. Despite being a semiquantitative method, SDS-PAGE has several benefits over other methods for protein analysis, such as simplicity, convenience of use, and affordability. Due to its convenience and adaptability, SDS-PAGE is still a commonly used method in many laboratories, despite its limits in dynamic range and quantitative precision. Our goal in this work was to show that SDS-PAGE may be used effectively for protein measurement, especially where practicality and affordability are the major factors. The results of our study suggest a validated method to guide tissue and cell manufacturing sites for making use of an agreeable, accessible, and cost-effective method for residual substance analyses in clinically manufactured cellular therapies.

Use of oral penicillin challenge in low-risk penicillin allergy

Overview of: Copaescu AM, Vogrin S, James F, et al. Efficacy of a clinical decision rule to enable direct oral challenge in patients with low-risk penicillin allergy: The PALACE randomized clinical trial. JAMA Intern Med 2023;183:944-52.

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.

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.

An interdisciplinary student-led multifaceted intervention addressing overuse of broad-spectrum antibiotics for patients with penicillin allergies

BACKGROUND

Though 15% of hospitalized patients have a documented penicillin (PCN) allergy, fewer than 1% have an IgE-mediated reaction that necessitates avoidance of β-lactam antibiotics.

OBJECTIVE

Our interdisciplinary team of medical and nursing students led and executed a two-pronged quality improvement intervention to reduce prescribing of non-β-lactam antibiotics (NBLs) for patients with reported PCN allergies. To the best of our knowledge, this is the first multidisciplinary student-led intervention aimed at educating providers on low-risk penicillin allergy and encouraging best antibiotic prescribing practices.

DESIGN AND PARTICIPANTS

The intervention took place from June 2021 to February 2022. We developed and provided clinician education modules, including peer-to-peer information sharing and in-person small group discussions, as well as clinical decision support (CDS) strategies through the electronic medical record (EMR). The target population was attendings, residents, nurse practitioners, and physician assistants on the hospital medicine service at a large urban academic tertiary care center. We followed the SQUIRE 2.0 guidelines for reporting on quality improvement.

MAIN MEASURES

Primary outcome measures included number of NBL prescriptions and use of nonspecific descriptors (e.g., "other" or "unknown") for PCN allergy reaction type, and were compared with a pre-intervention period.

KEY RESULTS

The percent of β-lactam prescriptions for patients with a PCN allergy after the intervention increased from 19 to 23% (p = 0.006). For patients with a low severity PCN allergy, the percent of β-lactam prescriptions increased from 20 to 28% (p = 0.001). There was a significant decrease in nonspecific PCN allergy reaction type from 23% in the pre-intervention period to 20% post-intervention (p = 0.012).

CONCLUSIONS

An intervention focused on educating prescribers and CDS strategies delivered through the EMR increased appropriate β-lactam prescribing for patients with a documented low-risk PCN allergy and reduced the use of nonspecific PCN allergy reaction type in EMR documentation.

Quality Improvement to Engage General Pediatrics in Reducing Inaccurate Penicillin Allergy Labels

OBJECTIVE

To remove inaccurate penicillin allergy labels in the general pediatric clinic setting.

METHODS

From October 2017 through December 2021, this collaborative, quality improvement project used education, feedback, electronic health record alerts, and the introduction of oral amoxicillin challenges in a general pediatric clinic setting with the primary aim of decreasing the proportion of penicillin allergy labeled patients. Control charts were used to track the relationship between interventions and improvements in referral rates to allergy clinic, removal of the allergy label at clinic visits and the overall proportion of clinic patients labeled as PCN allergic.

RESULTS

Referral rates to allergy clinic for penicillin allergy labeled patients increased from a baseline mean of 1.9% to 20.4%. The proportion of PCN allergy labeled patients who had the label removed during a pediatric clinic visit increased from a baseline of 1.1% to 6.6%. The overall proportion of penicillin allergy labeled clinic patients decreased from a baseline of 3.4% to 2.2%.

CONCLUSION

With adequate education and collaboration with allergists, general pediatric practitioners can play a significant role in removing inaccurate penicillin allergy labels. Pediatricians can remove some of the burden placed on allergists by evaluating low risk patients in the primary care setting while referring higher risk patients to the specialist.