Adrenaline in anaphylaxis treatment and self-administration: experience from an inner city emergency department.

BACKGROUND: Anaphylaxis is a life-threatening emergency of which reliable epidemiological data are lacking. This study aimed to analyze how quickly patients presenting with anaphylaxis were treated in emergency and whether treatment followed the European Academy of Allergy and Clinical Immunology (EAACI) guidelines. METHODS: Patient data were collected between April 2009 and April 2013. Emergency doctors completed a questionnaire for adult patients presenting at the emergency department (ED) of the St. Pierre hospital in Brussels with anaphylaxis. Inclusion criteria were based on the Sampson criteria of anaphylaxis. Data were analyzed using a Microsoft Excel database. RESULTS: About 0.04% (100/230878) of all emergency visits in adults presented with anaphylaxis. 64% of patients received their first medical help later than 30 min after symptom onset. 67% of patients received adrenaline, 85% oral antihistamines, and 89% received IV glucocorticosteroids. 46/100 patients were discharged directly from the ED, of which 87% received further medical prescriptions for self-administration: 67% corticosteroids, 83% antihistamines, and 9% intramuscular adrenaline. 74% were instructed to consult an allergologist for adequate diagnosis. 54/100 patients were hospitalized. CONCLUSION: The majority of patients were treated according to the EAACI guidelines for management of anaphylaxis, but only a minority received the recommended adrenaline auto-injector for self-administration at discharge. Because the majority of patients received medical help later than 30 min after symptom onset, adrenaline auto-injector prescription is a necessity. The low rate of doctors prescribing adrenaline auto-injectors in the ED setting underlines the need to train doctors of various backgrounds in prevention and treatment of anaphylaxis and the close collaboration with allergologists.

Anaphylaxis in an urban Belgian emergency department: epidemiology and aetiology.

OBJECTIVES: Anaphylaxis is an emergency condition of which reliable epidemiological data are lacking. This study focusses on epidemiology and aetiology of anaphylactic reactions in an urban Belgian emergency department (ED). METHODS: Patient data were collected from 04/2009 to 04/2013.During this period, emergency doctors completed a questionnaire for adult patients (>15 years) with anaphylaxis presenting at the ED. Inclusion criteria were based on the Sampson criteria of anaphylaxis. Data were analysed using a Microsoft Excel database. RESULTS: Anaphylaxis accounted for 0.04% of all emergency visits in this 4-year period. In both women and men, dyspnoea and urticaria were noted most frequently. 51.7% of cases were possibly elicited by foods, 46.1% by drugs and 3.4% by hymenoptera stings. Women more often reported allergic diseases in their personal history. 55.7% of patients, who had a history of allergy, reported a suspected food-related allergy, 24.6% a drug-related allergy and 8.2% a hymenoptera venom-related allergy. In 76.5% of patients who reported a history of food allergy, food was the presumed elicitor of anaphylaxis. For patients with history of drug allergy, 88.2% had a presumed drug anaphylaxis at the time of presentation at the ED. 81% of cases presented with grade 4 or 5 anaphylaxis. With increasing age, the severity of anaphylaxis increased. Higher tryptase levels correlated with a higher grade of anaphylaxis. CONCLUSION: In this Belgian urban population, foods and drugs were by far the most common suspected elicitors of anaphylaxis. Personal history of allergic diseases was present in more than half of the cases.