Making a SmartStart for peanut introduction to support food allergy prevention guidelines for infants.

Background: Food allergy affects up to 10% of Australian infants. It was hypothesized that if parents follow the Australasian Society of Clinical Immunology and Allergy guidelines, Australian food allergy rates may stabilize or decline. Objective: This project aimed to determine whether SmartStartAllergy influenced parental introduction of peanut by age 12 months, including in high-risk infants. Methods: SmartStartAllergy integrates with general practice management software to send text messages to parents via participating general practices. The intervention group participants were sent text messages when their child was aged 6, 9, and 12 months; the control group participants were parents of 12-month-old infants. When their child was aged 12 months, all participants completed a questionnaire regarding eczema and family history of atopy. Infants with severe eczema and/or a family history of atopy were considered high-risk. Results: Between 21 September 2018 and 26 April 2022, a total of 29,092 parents were enrolled in SmartStartAllergy as intervention (n = 18,090) and control (n = 11,002) group members The intervention group was more likely to introduce peanut by 12 months (crude odds ratio = 5.18; P < .0001; 95% CI = 4.35-6.16). After adjustment for the infants' level of risk and family history of atopy and food allergy, the intervention group was more likely to introduce peanut by 12 months of age (adjusted odds ratio = 5.34; P < .01; 95% CI = 4.48-6.37). Conclusion: SmartStartAllergy appears to be an effective tool for encouraging parental introduction of peanut. The ability to provide parents with credible allergy prevention information, along with the capacity to collect simple responses via text along with additional information via an online questionnaire, make this a useful public health tool.

Impact of public health interventions for food allergy prevention on rates of infant anaphylaxis.

BACKGROUND: Eleven percent of Australian infants have confirmed food allergy. We hypothesized earlier introduction may lead to higher rates of infant anaphylaxis, irrespective of whether the overall rate of food allergy in the population was ultimately reduced. OBJECTIVE: To determine whether a public health campaign, targeting earlier introduction of allergenic foods, affected rates of infant anaphylaxis. METHODS: Data were obtained from St John Ambulance (SJA) Western Australia and Western Australian emergency departments (ED) on infant (≤12 months) anaphylaxis over a 5-year period (July 1, 2015 to June 30, 2020). Adrenaline administration data were collected in the SJA dataset. Poisson regression was undertaken to assess trends in anaphylaxis over time. Segmented regression analysis was undertaken to assess differences in anaphylaxis rates before and after intervention. RESULTS: The SJA and ED datasets included 172 and 294 events, respectively, coded as infant anaphylaxis. Rates of infant anaphylaxis increased over time for both SJA and ED datasets, with a 1-year increase rate ratio of 1.21 (95% confidence interval, 1.09-1.35; P value < .01) and 1.11 (95% confidence interval, 1.02-1.20; P = .01), respectively. Segmented regression indicated no significant difference in rates after intervention. Adrenaline was not coded as being administered in 109 of the 172 anaphylaxis events. CONCLUSION: Rates of infant anaphylaxis increased over the 5-year reporting period; however, there was no clear increase related to the timing of the public health campaign implementation. Reported adrenaline use was suboptimal. Assessing rates of food allergy in all age groups is required to determine whether there has been an overall reduction in food allergy owing to the intervention.

Welcome back Kotter-Developing a National Allergy strategy for Australia.

Background: Allergic diseases have become an increasing health issue worldwide, being one of the fastest growing chronic diseases in Australia and other westernized countries. In 2013, allergic diseases were reported to affect 20% of the Australian population. Despite the high prevalence there was no national strategy to address these complex health issues, to enable the health system to manage the increasing number of patients. This project aimed to develop and implement a national strategy to improve allergy management in Australia, with a view of improving the quality of life of people living with or caring for someone with allergic diseases. Methods: The need for a national strategy to improve allergy management was identified. The Australasian Society of Clinical Immunology and Allergy (ASCIA) and Allergy & Anaphylaxis Australia (A&AA) worked together as partners to progress a national strategy using a theoretical model to underpin its development. Unrestricted education grants were sought to fund engagement with stakeholder organizations for both development and implementation summits. Several stages of advocacy were undertaken. Results: The National Allergy Strategy was developed as a partnership between ASCIA and A&AA. The Kotter's Change Management Model provided the basis for the steps undertaken to develop and implement the National Allergy Strategy. Two Allergy Summits, one for development and the other for implementation, were held. Several events were held to advocate for federal government funding. Five individual funding grants were achieved to implement National Allergy Strategy projects addressing the most urgent issues. Conclusion: The development of the National Allergy Strategy, a partnership between ASCIA and A&AA, was important in enabling successful advocacy for funding and implementation of important Australia-wide projects. The partnership has also helped facilitate engagement with key stakeholders to help advocate for funding and provide guidance and expertise in project implementation and resource development. The National Allergy Strategy has been successful in attracting funding to implement projects and develop resources urgently needed. The National Allergy Strategy has also provided a framework and a collaborative approach, for advocacy for further funding and future work to be undertaken.

Nip allergies in the Bub: a qualitative study for a public health approach to infant feeding for allergy prevention.

OBJECTIVE: To identify a brand, key messages and resources to underpin a public health approach to food allergy prevention. METHODS: A focus group design was used to explore perceptions and opinions of potential brands, infant feeding messages and resources for providing standardised food allergy prevention information. Focus groups were conducted in February 2018 using interview guides and were transcribed verbatim. A content analysis of the transcripts was undertaken using thematic analysis software. The University of Western Australia provided ethics approval: RA/4/20/4280. RESULTS: Seven focus groups with 39 participants were conducted. Four slogans and styles of imagery were considered. 'Nip Allergies in the Bub' was the most favoured slogan and images of babies with food were most favoured. Participant feedback was sought regarding messages and supporting messages were considered important. Participants were consulted about useful resources and a website was identified. CONCLUSIONS: Conducting focus groups assisted the selection of a brand, messages and resources to underpin a public health approach to implementing allergy prevention guidelines. IMPLICATIONS FOR PUBLIC HEALTH: This is the first focus group research undertaken for food allergy prevention. Identification of a meaningful brand, key messages and resources will support a public health approach to implementing allergy prevention guidelines.

An International First: Stakeholder Consensus Statement for Food Allergen Management in Packaged Foods and Food Service for Australia and New Zealand.

Food-allergic consumers encounter inadequate, confusing, and ambiguous allergen information for packaged and unpackaged foods. Key Australian and New Zealand allergy organizations convened multiple forums to facilitate discussions among consumers, food manufacturers, food retailers, regulatory bodies, researchers, and health professionals to develop a unified approach to improving food allergen management. The following stakeholder consensus statement provides a foundation for advocacy for improved food allergen management and safety. It is the responsibility of consumers to: 1. declare their food allergies and read food labels (including ingredient lists and allergen declaration statements), and 2. ultimately make their own judgment about the foods they choose to consume. We consider that to enable consumers to make informed decisions about their safety, It is the responsibility of packaged food manufacturers to: 1. follow robust allergen management practices including quantitative risk assessment, and 2. use clear, consistent labeling to inform consumers about that food's allergen content, including the possible presence of unintended allergens. It is the responsibility of food service establishments and providers to: 1. follow robust allergen management practices, and 2. ensure that staff understand and can inform consumers about the allergen content of the food they provide, including the possible presence of unintended allergens.

A systematic review of infant feeding food allergy prevention guidelines - can we AGREE?

Food allergy is a significant issue worldwide, particularly in Westernised countries. There is no clear explanation why food allergy appears to have increased so rapidly in recent years, particularly in young children, hence ongoing research to identify effective primary prevention strategies. Food allergy prevention guidelines for health professionals have been developed based on existing clinical trial evidence for effective translation and implementation. As these guidelines underpin clinical practice, it is important to ensure robust processes of development. We conducted a systematic review to identify food allergy prevention guidelines for health professional use; to compare the recommendations made by the identified guideline documents; and to assess the quality of the identified guideline documents. We searched Medline, EMBASE, CINAHL, Scopus, Global Health and Guidelines International Network for the period 1990 to 13 August 2019, to identify articles referring to English-language food allergy prevention guidelines or the guidelines themselves. A grey literature search of Google Scholar and reference checking was also undertaken. The guidelines were compared for recommendation similarities and differences. An Appraisal Guidelines for Research and Evaluation (AGREE II) appraisal was undertaken to assess guideline quality. The electronic database search yielded 1121 publications and reference checking identified an additional 16 publications. After title, abstract and full text screening, data extraction was undertaken on 156 publications and with additional reference checking, 28 food allergy prevention guidelines and advice documents were identified. Comparison of the recommendations within the guidelines and advice documents indicated the greatest variation in recommendations related to exclusive breastfeeding and timing of solid food introduction. Eight of the 10 guidelines and none of the 18 advice documents met the quality threshold set by the reviewers. Overall, documents specifically termed "guidelines" scored better than advice documents when assessed using the AGREE II tool. Variation in recommendations may create confusion for health professionals and result in inconsistent advice being provided to parents, and less translation of the evidence into actual food allergy reduction in the population. Appraisal using the AGREE II tool identified that there is considerable room for improvement in the development of guidelines and advice documents for food allergy prevention. The AGREE II appraisal identified common areas of poorer quality development and/or documentation of processes to inform future guideline development. Based on this study, we recommend the use of validated guideline development tools, to direct food allergy prevention guideline review or development. Use of the AGREE II tool, to direct the review and development of guidelines, is very likely to improve guideline quality.