Adherence with epinephrine autoinjector prescriptions in primary care

Adrenaline Auto-Injectors for Preventing Fatal Anaphylaxis

Anaphylaxis affects up to 5% of people during their lifetime. Although anaphylaxis usually resolves without long-term physical consequences, it can result in anxiety and quality of life impairment. Rarely and unpredictably, community anaphylaxis can cause rapid physiological decompensation and death. Adrenaline (epinephrine) is the cornerstone of anaphylaxis treatment, and provision of adrenaline autoinjectors (AAI) has become a standard of care for people at risk of anaphylaxis in the community. In this article, we explore the effectiveness of AAIs for preventing fatal outcomes in anaphylaxis, using information drawn from animal and human in vivo studies and epidemiology. We find that data support the effectiveness of intravenous adrenaline infusions for reversing physiological features of anaphylaxis, typically at doses from 0.05 to 0.5 μg/kg/min for 1-2 h, or ~ 10 μg/kg total dose. Intramuscular injection of doses approximating 10 μg/kg in humans can result in similar peak plasma adrenaline levels to intravenous infusions, at 100-500 pg/mL. However, these levels are typically short-lived following intramuscular adrenaline, and pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic outcomes can be unpredictable. Epidemiological data do not support an association between increasing AAI prescriptions and reduced fatal anaphylaxis, although carriage and activation rates remain low. Taken together, these data suggest that current AAIs have little impact on rates of fatal anaphylaxis, perhaps due to a lack of sustained and sufficient plasma adrenaline concentration. Effects of AAI prescription on quality of life may be variable. There is a need to consider alternatives, which can safely deliver a sustained adrenaline infusion via an appropriate route.

Prevalence and predictors of primary nonadherence to medications prescribed in primary care

BACKGROUND

Most research on medication adherence has focused on secondary nonadherence and persistence to therapy. Medication prescriptions that are never filled by patients (primary nonadherence) remain understudied in the general population.

METHODS

We linked prescribing data from primary care electronic medical records to comprehensive pharmacy dispensing claims between January 2013 and April 2019 in British Columbia (BC) to estimate primary nonadherence, defined as failure to dispense a new medication or its equivalent within 6 months of the prescription date. We used hierarchical multivariable logistic regression to determine prescriber, patient and medication factors associated with primary nonadherence among community-dwelling patients in primary care.

RESULTS

Among 150 565 new prescriptions to 34 243 patients, 17% of prescriptions were never filled. Primary nonadherence was highest for drugs prescribed mostly on an as-needed basis, including topical corticosteroids (35.1%) and antihistamines (23.4%). In multivariable analysis, primary nonadherence was lower for prescriptions issued by male prescribers (odds ratio [OR] 0.66, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.50-0.88). Primary nonadherence decreased with patient age (OR 0.91, 95% CI 0.90-0.92 for each additional 10 years) but increased with polypharmacy among patients aged 65 years or older. Patients filled more than 82% of their medication prescriptions within 2 weeks after their primary care provider visit.

INTERPRETATION

The prevalence of primary nonadherence to new prescriptions was 17%. Interventions to address primary nonadherence could target older patients with multiple medication use and within the first 2 weeks of the prescription issue date.

Primary medication nonadherence in a large primary care population: Observational study from Manitoba

OBJECTIVE

To analyze primary medication nonadherence across several prescription indications and test the predictors of drug nonadherence in an adult primary care population.

DESIGN

Retrospective observational study using primary care provider prescriptions linked to pharmacy-based dispensing data from 2012 to 2014.

SETTING

Manitoba.

PARTICIPANTS

Patients in the Manitoba Primary Care Research Network.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

Prevalence of primary medication nonadherence by drug class. Multivariable logistic regression models were used to test the associations of patient demographic and clinical or provider characteristics with primary medication nonadherence. The C statistic was used to assess the models' discriminative performance.

RESULTS

A total of 91,660 unique prescriptions were assessed from a cohort of more than 200,000 patients. Primary medication nonadherence ranged from 13.7% (antidepressants) to 30.3% (antihypertensives). In conditions that typically present symptomatically (eg, infections, anxiety) nonadherence ranged from 13.7% to 17.5%. The range was 21.2% to 30.0% for medications related to asymptomatic conditions or those typically detected by screening. The discriminative performance of the models based on patient demographic, clinical, or provider characteristics was weak.

CONCLUSION

Primary medication nonadherence is common, occurring more often in asymptomatic conditions. The poor predictability of the models suggests that caution is required when considering characteristic-based interventions or prediction tools to improve primary medication nonadherence.

Anaphylaxis and epinephrine autoinjector use in pediatric patients with cutaneous mastocytosis

BACKGROUND/OBJECTIVES

Mastocytosis is a complex disorder presenting with a broad clinical spectrum. In this study, we aimed to evaluate the frequency of systemic symptoms, necessity of the usage of epinephrine autoinjectors (EAI), and factors affecting the use of EAI among pediatric patients with cutaneous mastocytosis (CM).

METHODS

The study population was composed of 53 patients with CM. The clinical data were collected from the medical files. A questionnaire about the patient's anaphylaxis experiences and treatment attitudes toward EAI was performed.

RESULTS

Thirty-three of 53 patients were male (62.3%), and the median age of the study participants was 80 months. Anaphylaxis was reported in two patients (3.7%). One of the patients had drug-induced anaphylaxis, and the other had venom-induced anaphylaxis. Three patients (5.6%) reported a personal history of EAI use due to systemic symptoms. Patients with higher serum tryptase level and cases of familial mastocytosis had more systemic symptoms (P = .012 and P = .010, respectively). The patient rate of compliance with EAI for prescription filling and carrying the EAI was 88.7% and 79.2% respectively. 41.5% of parents were hesitant to use EAI when necessary, although they were trained for the use of it by medical staff.

CONCLUSIONS

The rate of anaphylaxis in patients with CM in the current study wassignificant and justifies prescribing EAI. Detailed education and counseling on EAI usage are needed to reduce parental hesitancy.

Digital technology for anaphylaxis management impact on patient behaviour: A randomized clinical trial

BACKGROUND

Epinephrine is the first-line treatment for anaphylaxis. Patients at risk should always carry an epinephrine autoinjector (EAI). Several EAI gaps have been identified. We sought to evaluate satisfaction using a medical device (digital technology comprising an EAI smart case connected to a mobile APP) with functions that overcome most of the EAI limitations and to determine whether patient behaviour and anaphylaxis management improve with its use.

METHODS

This was a randomized, open-label, crossover clinical trial in a tertiary hospital involving patients with history of anaphylaxis carrying an EAI. The study was conducted in two three-month periods, one with and one without the medical device. The primary endpoint was satisfaction with the medical device. Usability, adherence, anxiety and anaphylaxis episodes were evaluated as secondary endpoints.

RESULTS

A total of 100 patients were included (mean age 38.1 years, 74% female), and 95 completed the trial. The satisfaction visual analogue scale (VAS) after using the medical device was higher than before its use (89.1 [95% CI, 60.2-99.1] vs 56.3 [95% CI, 48.1-81.4]; P < .0001). The adherence VAS improved from 59.7 (95% CI, 54.0-65.3) to 88.6 (95% CI, 84.2-92.9) (P < .0001). Overall, 90% patients found the medical device easy to use. Patients' anxiety decreased from 52.2% to 29.3% (P < .001). Seven episodes of anaphylaxis occurred during the study, all in patients without the medical device (P = .025). Eighty-eight per cent of patients felt more involved in the management of anaphylaxis when using the medical device.

CONCLUSION

This is the first clinical trial evaluating digital technology for EAIs, showing a change of behaviour in patients at risk of anaphylaxis, increasing satisfaction, improving adherence, and reducing anxiety, with good usability.

Self-injectable epinephrine: doctors' attitude and patients' adherence in real-life

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Epinephrine is the only life-saving treatment of anaphylaxis. Prescription and administration rates of self-injectable epinephrine are generally low. It is unclear whether this is because of availability, low prescription rates, fear of using epinephrine, or a combination of these issues.

RECENT FINDINGS

This review focuses on what self-injectable epinephrine devices (SIED), such as auto-injectors and prefilled syringes, are preferred by patients and healthcare professionals (HCP). Our findings suggest that a device's ease to use, proper and frequent training on its operability, and availability have an impact on preferences and adherence to treatment with SIEDs. After prescribing a patient with a SIED, clinicians should emphasize its use in anaphylaxis, educate patients/caregivers to identify anaphylaxis and on how to use the SIED, and encourage constant practicing with training devices.

SUMMARY

Epinephrine is the sole recommended anaphylaxis treatment and SIEDs are of critical usefulness in the community setting. Further studying of these devices is needed to optimize education for HCPs and patients and their accessibility to SIEDs.

Adherence to adrenaline autoinjector prescriptions in patients with anaphylaxis

This study evaluates adherence to adrenaline autoinjector prescriptions in a cohort of well-characterized anaphylaxis patients. The overall retrieval rate was 76% with the highest rate in patients with severe anaphylaxis. Special attention is needed in patients with unknown elicitors and in young adults, comprising the largest proportion of non-adherent patients.

Trial registration No intervention performed. Retrospective data used with permission from the Danish Data Protection Agency and Regional Committees on Health Research Ethics

Epinephrine auto-injector carriage and use practices among US children, adolescents, and adults

BACKGROUND

Previous studies have suggested that epinephrine auto-injector (EAI) carriage and emergency use practices could be suboptimal for patients prescribed these devices for anaphylaxis management.

OBJECTIVE

To characterize EAI prescription fill rates, carriage, and use practices and associated factors and perceived barriers to recommended anaphylaxis management behaviors in US children, adolescents, and adults.

METHODS

Survey data were collected for adults (n = 450) and parents of children (n = 255) and adolescents (n = 212) who had been prescribed an EAI. Of eligible participants, survey completion rates were higher than 90%. A multiple-group structural equation model was fit to test adjusted associations.

RESULTS

Most patients (89%) filled their EAI prescriptions; however, of those who did not, the most commonly cited barriers to filling prescriptions were no history of reactions (26%) and EAI cost (25%). Forty-four percent carried at least 1 EAI "all the time" and 24% carried multiple EAIs. Sixty-five percent of respondents reported a personal history of EAI use. Most adults (52%) reported that an EAI was not used, although it would have been beneficial during their most severe allergic reaction. The most frequently given reasons for not using an EAI among respondents owning one were that an EAI was not available (45%) followed by their allergy was undiagnosed at the time (35%). To improve clinical anaphylaxis management, 61% of patients desired more effective patient education and 47% desired more time dedicated to patient education during the physician visit.

CONCLUSION

These data suggest that current anaphylaxis management practices are suboptimal but could be facilitated through lowering EAI-related out-of-pocket costs and improving patient education efforts.