Variation in diagnosis and management of allergic reactions among emergency medicine and allergy immunology providers.

Background: Children with anaphylaxis often emergently present for treatment. Providers' adherence to the principles of optimal management according to the most recent national guidelines is unknown. Objective: To assess the variation in management approaches for allergic reactions and anaphylaxis between allergy/immunology (AI) and emergency medicine (EM) providers. Methods: This was a cross-sectional survey study of AI and EM providers in the University of Colorado affiliated hospitals and Colorado Asthma and Allergy Society. The survey consisted of six cases of patients with allergic reactions, with four cases that represented patients with anaphylaxis that resolved by the time of discharge. For each vignette, the participants were asked about preferred initial therapy, adjunctive therapies, monitoring, outpatient prescription medications, and discharge instructions provided. Survey derivation and validation was accomplished by a multidisciplinary team of experts by using a modified Delphi process. Results: A total of 413 clinicians were contacted, of whom 194, (47%) responded, including 69 pediatric EM, 50 general EM, and 49 AI providers, and 26 did not identify a provider type. There were no statistically significant differences in correct recognition of anaphylaxis between the AI and EM providers. For each case, statistically significant differences were noted in the use of corticosteroids during and after resolution of anaphylaxis: AI providers reported giving fewer prescriptions than did the EM providers for corticosteroids in all cases of anaphylaxis (p < 0.001). The AI providers were less likely to prescribe scheduled antihistamines than were the EM providers in half of the cases (p < 0.02). Conclusion: Across the specialties, there were high rates of recognition of epinephrine as first-line treatment for anaphylaxis. The majority of the EM providers prescribed scheduled corticosteroids and antihistamines after resolution of anaphylaxis, whereas most of the AI providers did not prescribe scheduled corticosteroids. Analysis of the current data suggests against the routine use of corticosteroids in the management of anaphylaxis, particularly continued use after resolution of symptoms. AI involvement in the creation of EM and hospital protocols for allergic reactions could improve overall care.

A Multidisciplinary Quality Improvement Initiative to Facilitate Penicillin Allergy Delabeling Among Hospitalized Pediatric Patients.

BACKGROUND: Penicillin allergy is reported in up to 10% of the general population; however, >90% of patients reporting an allergy are tolerant. Patients labeled as penicillin allergic have longer hospital stays, increased exposure to suboptimal antibiotics, and an increased risk of methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus and Clostridioides difficile. The primary aim with our quality improvement initiative was to increase penicillin allergy delabeling to at least 10% among all hospitalized pediatric patients reporting a penicillin allergy with efforts directed toward patients determined to be low risk for true allergic reaction. METHODS: Our quality improvement project included several interventions: the development of a multidisciplinary clinical care pathway to identify eligible patients, workflow optimization to support delabeling, an educational intervention, and participation in our institution's quality improvement incentive program. Our interventions were targeted to facilitate appropriate delabeling by the primary hospital medicine team. Statistical process control charts were used to assess the impact of this intervention pre- and postpathway implementation. RESULTS: After implementation of the clinical pathway, the percentage of patients admitted to hospital medicine delabeled of their penicillin allergy by discharge increased to 11.7%. More than one-half of those delabeled (51.2%) received a penicillin-based antimicrobial at time of discharge. There have been no adverse events or allergic reactions requiring emergency medication administration since pathway implementation. CONCLUSIONS: Our quality improvement initiative successfully increased the rate of penicillin allergy delabeling among low-risk hospitalized pediatric patients, allowing for increased use of optimal antibiotics.

It's Time to Start Phenotyping Our Patients with Asthma.

Advances in the management of pediatric asthma, including biologics, offer practitioners the ability to tailor therapies to individual patients. However, asthma treatment guidelines have not kept up with current studies. This review explores the current literature incorporating the use of phenotyping in pediatric patients with asthma to provide precision therapy. Biomarkers can be used to more accurately predict the development of asthma, identify features that may be associated with difficult-to-control or severe asthma, and forecast response to therapies. Biomarkers and other phenotypic data can also be helpful in patients with uncontrolled, severe asthma in the selection of a biologic therapy.

Management of acute attacks of hereditary angioedema: role of ecallantide.

Hereditary angioedema (HAE) is characterized as an episodic swelling disorder with autosomal dominant inheritance. Clinical features include nonpitting edema of external or mucosal body surfaces, and patients often present with swelling of the extremities, abdominal pain, and swelling of the mouth and throat, which can lead to asphyxiation. Patients with HAE classically have no associated urticaria, which is often referred to as nonhistaminergic angioedema. Treatment for HAE involves long-term prophylaxis, short-term prophylaxis, and management of acute attacks. Up until the past few years, acute HAE episodes were predominately treated with supportive measures. Three classes of medications have recently been approved by the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) for the management of acute HAE attacks. Ecallantide, a recombinant protein that acts as a reversible inhibitor of kallikrein, is currently indicated for acute attacks of HAE in those aged ≥12 years. In two randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, multicenter trials, EDEMA3 and EDEMA4, patients treated with 30 mg of ecallantide demonstrated statistically significant improvement in symptoms compared to those on placebo. In addition to its use as treatment for HAE, ecallantide has been used off label in the management of nonhistaminergic angioedema, not due to HAE. Ecallantide has shown promise in the treatment of these other forms; however, data are limited to mainly case reports at this time. Ecallantide is generally a safe and well-tolerated medication; however, based on reports of anaphylaxis, ecallantide does contain a black box warning. Due to the risk of anaphylaxis, ecallantide cannot be self-administered and must be given by a health care professional. Overall, ecallantide is a safe and effective medication for the treatment of acute attacks of HAE.