Appropriateness of epinephrine use in ED patients with anaphylaxis.

BACKGROUND: Studies have demonstrated low rates of emergency department (ED) epinephrine administration for anaphylaxis patients, suggestive of ED undertreatment of anaphylaxis. Our study assessed the appropriateness of ED epinephrine administration in anaphylaxis management. METHODS: A prospective observational study was conducted involving ED patients presenting with possible allergic reactions. Patients and ED providers completed questionnaires regarding the suspected trigger, signs and symptoms, and prehospital treatment. Two board-certified allergists-immunologists independently reviewed the questionnaires, as well as electronic health records, to determine whether the cases represented anaphylaxis and whether ED epinephrine administration was appropriate. RESULTS: Among 174 patients enrolled in the study, 61 (35%) were confirmed to have anaphylaxis. Overall, 47 anaphylaxis patients (77%) received epinephrine either before ED arrival or in the ED. In the latter situation, 24 anaphylaxis patients (39%) received epinephrine and 37 (61%) did not. Of the patients who received ED epinephrine, the allergists-immunologists determined that its administration was appropriate in all cases (95% confidence interval [CI], 83%-100%). Among the 37 patients who did not receive ED epinephrine, the allergists-immunologists determined that nonadministration of epinephrine was appropriate in 36 patients (97%; 95% CI, 84%-100%). The allergists-immunologists determined that overall, ED management was appropriate for 60 (98%) of 61 patients with anaphylaxis (95% CI, 90%-100%). CONCLUSIONS: Although more than 60% of anaphylaxis patients did not receive epinephrine in the ED, the allergists-immunologists deemed ED management appropriate in 98% of total cases. Previous retrospective studies may underestimate the appropriateness of ED anaphylaxis management, particularly when prehospital epinephrine administration is not reported.

Predictors of Repeat Epinephrine Administration for Emergency Department Patients with Anaphylaxis.

BACKGROUND: Risk factors that predict which patients with anaphylaxis might require repeat doses of epinephrine are poorly understood. OBJECTIVE: The objective of this study was to identify risk factors associated with the need for multiple doses of epinephrine during an anaphylactic reaction. METHODS: Patients were included if they met diagnostic criteria for anaphylaxis on presentation to the emergency department (ED) at our academic medical center between April 2008 and February 2014. Data were collected on allergic history, presenting signs and symptoms, anaphylaxis management, and disposition. Univariable and multivariable analyses were performed to estimate associations between possible risk factors and the need for multiple doses. RESULTS: Of 582 ED patients with anaphylaxis, 45 (8%) required multiple doses of epinephrine. By multivariable analysis, factors associated with the need for repeat doses were a history of anaphylaxis (odds ratio [OR], 2.5 [95% CI, 1.3-4.7]; P = .005), the presence of flushing or diaphoresis (OR, 2.4 [95% CI, 1.3-4.5]; P = .007), and the presence of dyspnea (OR, 2.2 [95% CI, 1.0-5.0]; P = .046). Patients who received more than 1 dose were more likely to be admitted to the general medical floor (OR, 2.8 [95% CI, 1.1-7.2]; P = .03) or intensive care unit (OR, 7.6 [95% CI, 3.7-15.6]; P < .001). CONCLUSION: Patients with a history of anaphylaxis, flushing or diaphoresis, or dyspnea may require multiple doses of epinephrine to treat anaphylactic reactions. Patients who require more than 1 dose are more likely to be admitted to the hospital, thus increasing health care resource utilization.

Burden of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease: healthcare costs and beyond.

Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) is a progressive and debilitating respiratory condition that leads to significant burden, both medically and financially. It affects millions of people worldwide and causes significant morbidity and mortality. Most detailed information related to its prevalence, morbidity, and mortality comes from high-income countries, but 90% of COPD-related deaths occur in low- and middle-income countries. Cigarette smoking is the main risk factor for developing COPD, but other risk factors do exist and need to be recognized. A majority of morbidity and mortality as well as health care costs occur from acute exacerbations of COPD with a known phenotype of patients being "frequent exacerbators." Health care costs for COPD are not only from treatment of exacerbations, such as hospitalization, but also medication costs for maintenance therapy and outpatient treatment. COPD has been linked with many comorbidities leading to significant burden of disease. The goal of this review is to evaluate the overall burden of disease including prevalence, morbidity, mortality, health care costs, and economic costs.

A multifaceted intervention for patients with anaphylaxis increases epinephrine use in adult emergency department.

BACKGROUND: Studies have documented inconsistent emergency anaphylaxis care and low compliance with published guidelines. OBJECTIVE: To evaluate anaphylaxis management before and after implementation of an emergency department (ED) anaphylaxis order set and introduction of epinephrine autoinjectors, and to measure the effect on anaphylaxis guideline adherence. METHODS: A cohort study was conducted from April 29, 2008, to August 9, 2012. Adult patients in the ED who were diagnosed with anaphylaxis were included. ED management, disposition, self-injectable epinephrine prescriptions, allergy follow-up, and incidence of biphasic reactions were evaluated. RESULTS: The study included 202 patients. The median age of the patients was 45.3 years (interquartile range, 31.3-56.4 years); 139 (69%) were women. Patients who presented after order set implementation were more likely to be treated with epinephrine (51% vs 33%; odds ratio [OR] 2.05 [95% CI, 1.04-4.04]) and admitted to the ED observation unit (65% vs 44%; OR 2.38 [95% CI, 1.23-4.60]), and less likely to be dismissed home directly from ED (16% vs 29%, OR 0.47 [95% CI, 0.22-1.00]). Eleven patients (5%) had a biphasic reaction. Of these, 5 (46%) had the biphasic reaction in the ED observation unit; 1 patient was admitted to the intensive care unit. Six patients (55%) had reactions within 6 hours of initial symptom resolution, of whom 2 were admitted to the intensive care unit. CONCLUSIONS: Significantly higher proportions of patients with anaphylaxis received epinephrine and were admitted to the ED observation unit after introduction of epinephrine autoinjectors and order set implementation. Slightly more than half of the biphasic reactions occurred within the recommended observation time of 4 to 6 hours. Analysis of these data suggests that the multifaceted approach to changing anaphylaxis management described here improved guideline adherence.

Successful outpatient graded administration of trimethoprim-sulfamethoxazole in patients without HIV and with a history of sulfonamide adverse drug reaction.

BACKGROUND: The outcomes of trimethoprim-sulfamethoxazole (TMP-SMX) desensitization have been widely reported in the HIV literature but less so in the non-HIV literature. OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the safety and efficacy of graded administration of TMP-SMX in patients without HIV and with a history of TMP-SMX adverse drug reaction (ADR). METHODS: A retrospective chart review, 2004-2012, of all the patients without HIV seen in the Division of Allergic Diseases and with a history of TMP-SMX ADR who underwent outpatient graded administration of TMP-SMX was conducted. The medical record was reviewed for age, sex, details of the initial ADR to TMP-SMX, an indication for TMP-SMX administration, and outcome. Patients also were contacted by telephone, and medical records were reviewed to determine long-term outcomes. RESULTS: Seventy-two patients (46 women [64%]; mean [SD] age, 57.7 ± 13.89 years]) were included. The most common patient-reported reactions to TMP-SMX were rash 39 (54%), and hives 9 (13%). TMP-SMX administration was needed for the following indications: prophylaxis (62 [86%]) and treatment of infection (10 [14%]). Forty-three of the patients (60%) underwent a 1-day TMP-SMX administration protocol. Thirty-five of the 43 (81%) underwent a 6-step (90 minutes to 6 hours) protocol and 7 of the 43 (16%) underwent a novel 14-step TMP-SMX protocol. Twenty-nine (40%) underwent a >1-day TMP-SMX administration protocol. Our overall success rate was 90% (mean duration of 11 months). Ninety-eight percent of the patients successfully completed a 1-day graded administration protocol, and 76% successfully completed a >1-day protocol. TMP-SMX was stopped in 8 patients because of the ADR. CONCLUSION: We report the largest case series of successful outpatient graded administration of TMP-SMX with both 1-day and >1-day protocols, which have shown to be safe and well tolerated in patients without HIV and with a history of sulfonamide ADR.

Antihypertensive medication use is associated with increased organ system involvement and hospitalization in emergency department patients with anaphylaxis.

BACKGROUND: Risk factors for increased anaphylaxis severity are poorly understood. Angiotensin-converting enzyme (ACE) inhibitors have been associated with severe anaphylactic reactions in patients with hymenoptera venom allergy. Studies evaluating the association between beta-blockers and severe anaphylaxis have been conflicting. OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the association between antihypertensive medication use and increased anaphylaxis severity. METHODS: We included emergency department anaphylaxis patients aged 18 years and older. Markers of severe anaphylaxis were defined as (1) syncope, hypotension, or hypoxia; (2) signs and symptoms involving 3 or more organ systems; and (3) hospitalization. Antihypertensive medications evaluated included beta-blockers, ACE inhibitors, calcium channel blockers, angiotensin receptor blockers, and diuretics. Simple and multiple logistic regression analyses were conducted to estimate the association between antihypertensive medication use and markers of increased anaphylaxis severity. RESULTS: Among 302 patients with anaphylaxis, 55 (18%) had syncope, hypoxia, or hypotension, 57 (19%) required hospitalization, and 139 (46%) had 3 or more organ system involvement. After adjusting for age, gender, suspected trigger, and preexisting lung disease, beta-blocker, ACE-inhibitor, diuretic, or antihypertensive medication use in aggregate remained associated with both 3 or more organ system involvement and need for hospital admission. The adjusted associations between antihypertensive medication use in aggregate and 3 or more organ system involvement yielded an odds ratio of 2.8 (95% CI, 1.5-5.2; P=.0008) and with hospitalization an odds ratio of 4.0 (95% CI, 1.9-8.4; P=.0001). CONCLUSIONS: In emergency department anaphylaxis patients, antihypertensive medication use is associated with increased organ system involvement and increased odds of hospital admission, independent of age, gender, suspected trigger, or preexisting lung disease.

Anaphylaxis: diagnostic criteria and epidemiology.

Evaluation of anaphylaxis is a common reason for emergency department referral to an allergist. Establishing unified diagnostic criteria has been an evolving process with the most recent definition proposed by the Second Symposium on the Definition and Management of Anaphylaxis convened by the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Disease and the Food Allergy and Anaphylaxis Network. Proper identification of these patients in the emergency department allows for the opportunity to dispense potentially life-saving epinephrine autoinjectors, provide education, and allergist referral. Future epidemiological studies are likely to be impacted as the definition of anaphylaxis becomes more unified.

Evaluation of national institute of allergy and infectious diseases/food allergy and anaphylaxis network criteria for the diagnosis of anaphylaxis in emergency department patients.

BACKGROUND: Diagnostic criteria were proposed at the Second Symposium on the Definition and Management of Anaphylaxis convened by the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases/Food Allergy and Anaphylaxis Network (NIAID/FAAN). Validation is needed before these criteria can be widely adapted into clinical practice. OBJECTIVE: Our aim was to retrospectively assess the diagnostic accuracy of the NIAID/FAAN criteria for the diagnosis of anaphylaxis in emergency department (ED) patients. METHODS: A retrospective cohort study of ED patients presenting from April to October 2008 was conducted. Patients given a diagnosis of an allergic reaction or anaphylaxis and a subset of patients with related diagnoses were included. Electronic medical records were reviewed and data were abstracted to determine whether the NIAID/FAAN criteria were met. Records were also independently reviewed in a blinded fashion by 2 experienced attending allergists. Final diagnosis by allergists was considered the reference standard. RESULTS: Of 214 patients, 86 (40.2%) met the NIAID/FAAN criteria for anaphylaxis. Allergists gave 61 (28.5%) patients diagnoses of anaphylaxis, 59 (96.7%) of whom satisfied the NIAID/FAAN criteria. The interrater agreement between allergists was substantial (κ = 0.77). The test characteristics of the NIAID/FAAN criteria were as follows: sensitivity, 96.7% (95% CI, 88.8% to 99.1%); specificity, 82.4% (95% CI, 75.5% to 87.6%); positive predictive value, 68.6% (95% CI, 58.2% to 77.4%); negative predictive value, 98.4% (95% CI, 94.5% to 99.6%); positive likelihood ratio, 5.48; and negative likelihood ratio, 0.04. CONCLUSIONS: These results suggest that the NIAID/FAAN criteria are highly sensitive but less specific and are likely to be useful in the ED for the diagnosis of anaphylaxis.

Anaphylaxis in emergency department patients 50 or 65 years or older.

BACKGROUND: Anaphylaxis is a potentially life-threatening allergic reaction commonly managed in the emergency department (ED). Data describing patients 50 or 65 years or older with anaphylaxis are limited. OBJECTIVE: To describe the presentation and management of patients with anaphylaxis who were 50 or 65 years or older and to compare these findings with those of younger patients. METHODS: A consecutive cohort study of patients presenting to an ED with approximately 80,000 visits per year was conducted. Patients who met diagnostic criteria for anaphylaxis from April 2008 to June 2010 were included. Data were collected on suspected causes, signs and symptoms, management, ED disposition, and follow-up. RESULTS: The study included 220 patients. Food was the most common suspected cause of anaphylaxis for patients younger than 50 (42.2%) or 65 years (38.5%) but was much less common in patients 50 (14.8%, P < .001) or 65 years or older (14.3%, P = .01). Cardiovascular symptoms were more likely to occur in older patients (≥50 years old, 55.6% vs 30.1%, P < .001; ≥65 years old, 64.3% vs 32.3%, P = .002). Patients 50 or 65 years or older were less likely to be dismissed home directly from the ED (≥50 years old, 35.2% vs 56.6%, P = .006; ≥65 years old, 32.1% vs 54.2%, P = .03) and were less likely to be prescribed self-injectable epinephrine (≥50 years old, 40.7% vs 63.3%, P = .004; ≥65 years old, 32.1% vs 61.5%, P = .003). CONCLUSIONS: In ED patients presenting with anaphylaxis, age of 50 or 65 years or older is associated with a decreased likelihood of food-induced anaphylaxis, increased likelihood of experiencing cardiovascular symptoms, decreased dismissal to home directly from the ED, and decreased prescriptions for self-injectable epinephrine.

How well does patient self-report predict asthma medication possession? Implications for medication reconciliation and adherence assessment.

BACKGROUND: Self-report is the most commonly used method for collecting information regarding asthma medication possession and adherence in clinical practice. OBJECTIVE: To determine the agreement between self-report and pharmacy claims data for asthma medication possession. METHODS: This is a retrospective study that examined pharmacy claims data 12 months before and after participants completed a structured asthma survey. This study was performed in a sample of health care workers and dependents >17 years old in a large, self-insured Midwestern United States health care center. The main outcome measure was agreement (kappa calculation) between self-report and pharmacy claims data of asthma medication possession. RESULTS: Self-report of asthma medication use agreed moderately with pharmacy claims data for short-acting albuterol (κ=0.47 ± 0.03), salmeterol (κ=0.79 ± 0.04), and montelukast (κ=0.69 ± 0.03) but only slightly for inhaled corticosteroids (κ=0.18 ± 0.03) and prednisone (κ=0.10 ± 0.03) (n=1050 respondents). Both under self-reporting and over self-reporting were common with inhaled corticosteroids (14.4% and 23.1%, respectively) and varied significantly by specific drug type. CONCLUSIONS: Self-report moderately agrees with asthma medication possession for most adult asthma patients, though the agreement differs considerably between and within asthma medication classes.

Factors associated with repeated use of epinephrine for the treatment of anaphylaxis.

BACKGROUND: Studies looking at the use of repeated doses of epinephrine in patients experiencing anaphylaxis are limited. OBJECTIVE: To determine which patients are most likely to receive repeated doses of epinephrine during anaphylaxis management. METHODS: A population-based study with medical record review was conducted. All patients seen during the study period who met the criteria for the diagnosis of anaphylaxis were included. RESULTS: The cohort included 208 patients (55.8% female). Anaphylaxis treatment included epinephrine in 104 patients (50.0%). Repeated doses were used in 27 patients (13.0%), 13 (48.1%) of them female. The median age of those who received repeated doses was 18.9 (interquartile range, 10-34) years vs 31.1 (interquartile range, 15-41) years for those who did not receive repeated doses (P = .06). The inciting agents were food (29.6%), insects (11.1%), medications (22.2%), others (7.4%), and unknown (29.6%). Patients who received repeated doses were more likely to have wheezing (P = .03), cyanosis (P = .001), hypotension and shock (P = .03), stridor and laryngeal edema (P = .007), nausea and emesis (P = .04), arrhythmias (P < .01), and cough (P = .04) and less likely to have urticaria (P = .049). They were more likely to be admitted to the hospital than patients who did not receive repeated doses (48.2% vs 15.6%; P < .001). There was no significant difference in the history of asthma between patients who received repeated doses and those who did not (P = .17). CONCLUSIONS: Of the patients, 13.0% received repeated epinephrine doses. Patients were younger and were likely to present with wheezing, cyanosis, arrhythmias, hypotension and shock, stridor, laryngeal edema, cough, nausea, and emesis and less likely to have urticaria. A history of asthma did not predict use of repeated doses of epinephrine. Our results help identify high-risk patients who may benefit from carrying more than 1 dose of epinephrine.

Visual representation of National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Disease and Food Allergy and Anaphylaxis Network criteria for anaphylaxis.

We present a user-friendly visual representation of The National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Disease and the Food Allergy and Anaphylaxis Network criteria so as to enhance recognition of anaphylaxis and active teaching and learning.

Formulating an effective and efficient written asthma action plan.

Written asthma action plans (WAAPs) are recommended by national and international guidelines to help patients recognize and manage asthma exacerbations. Despite this recommendation, many patients with asthma do not have a WAAP. In addition, WAAPs vary widely in their readability and usability. To promote issuance and patient use, the WAAP should clearly define the decision (action) points, expected response, and expected time of response. The WAAP should also be easily integrated into a physician's busy practice. Herein, we describe the key elements of an effective WAAP, including concise, detailed recommendations regarding asthma exacerbation recognition (patient self-monitoring) and treatment.

The etiology and incidence of anaphylaxis in Rochester, Minnesota: a report from the Rochester Epidemiology Project.

BACKGROUND: Reported incidences of anaphylaxis range from 3.2 to 20 per 100,000 population. The incidence and trend over time has meaningful public health implications but has not been well characterized because of a lack of a standard definition and deficiencies in reporting of events. OBJECTIVE: We sought to determine the incidence and cause of anaphylaxis over a 10-year period. METHODS: We performed a population-based incidence study that was conducted in Rochester, Minnesota, from 1990 through 2000. Anaphylaxis episodes were identified on the basis of symptoms and signs of mast cell and basophil mediator release plus mucocutaneous, gastrointestinal tract, respiratory tract, or cardiovascular system involvement. RESULTS: Two hundred eleven cases of anaphylaxis were identified (55.9% in female subjects). The mean age was 29.3 years (SD, 18.2 years; range, 0.8-78.2 years). The overall age- and sex-adjusted incidence rate was 49.8 (95% CI, 45.0-54.5) per 100,000 person-years. Age-specific rates were highest for ages 0 to 19 years (70 per 100,000 person-years). Ingested foods accounted for 33.2% (70 cases), insect stings accounted for 18.5% (39 cases), medication accounted for 13.7% (29 cases), radiologic contrast agent accounted for 0.5% (1 case), "other" causes accounted for 9% (19 cases), and "unknown" causes accounted for 25.1% (53 cases). The "other" group included cats, latex, cleaning agents, environmental allergens, and exercise. There was an increase in the annual incidence rate during the study period from 46.9 per 100,000 persons in 1990 to 58.9 per 100,000 persons in 2000 (P = .03). CONCLUSION: The overall incidence rate is 49.8 per 100,000 person-years, which is higher than previously reported. The annual incidence rate is also increasing. Food and insect stings continue to be major inciting agents for anaphylaxis.

The ABCs of asthma control.

The new asthma guidelines have introduced impairment and risk assessments into the management of asthma. Impairment assessment is based on symptom frequency and pulmonary function, whereas risk assessment is based on exacerbation frequency and severity. These 2 measures determine the initial severity of asthma in the untreated patient as well as the degree of control in asthma once treatment has been initiated. The focus on asthma control is important because the attainment of control correlates with a better quality of life and reduction in health care use. We describe 4 easy steps to achieving asthma control in the ambulatory practice setting: (1) a standardized assessment of asthma symptoms using a 5-question assessment tool called the Asthma Control Test, (2) a simple mnemonic that provides a systematic review of the comorbidities and clinical variables that contribute to uncontrolled asthma, (3) directed patient education, and (4) a schedule for ongoing care. Most if not all patients can achieve good control of their asthma with optimal care through an active partnership with their health care professionals.