Impact of a clinical guideline for prescribing antibiotics to inpatients reporting penicillin or cephalosporin allergy

Comparative Performance of 4 Penicillin-Allergy Prediction Strategies in a Large Cohort

BACKGROUND

A safe and pragmatic guide for labelling and delabelling patients with suspected penicillin allergy is mandatory.

OBJECTIVE

To compare the performance of 4 penicillin-allergy prediction strategies in a large independent cohort.

METHODS

We conducted a retrospective study for subjects presenting between January 2014 and December 2021 at the University Hospital of Montpellier, with a history of hypersensitivity to penicillins. The outcome targeted by the study was a positive penicillin-allergy test.

RESULTS

Of the 1,884 participants included, 382 (20.3%) had positive penicillin-allergy tests. The ENDA (European Network on Drug Allergy) and Blumenthal strategies yielded relatively high sensitivities and low specificities and, by design, did not misclassify any positive subjects with severe index reactions. The PEN-FAST <3 score had a negative predictive value of 90% (95% confidence interval [95% CI] 88%-91%), with a sensitivity of 66% (95% CI 62%-71%) and a specificity of 73% (95% CI 71%-75%), and incorrectly delabelled 18 subjects with anaphylaxis and 15 with other severe nonimmediate reactions. For the adapted Chiriac score, the specificity corresponding to 66% sensitivity was 73% (95% CI 70%-75%). Conversely, at a 73% specificity threshold, the sensitivity was 65% (95% CI, 61%-70%). Attempts to improve these prediction algorithms did not substantially enhance performance.

CONCLUSIONS

The ENDA and Blumenthal strategies are safe for high-risk subjects, but their delabelling effectiveness is limited, leading to unnecessary avoidance. Conversely, the PEN-FAST and Chiriac scores are performant in delabelling, but more frequently misclassify high-risk subjects with positive penicillin-allergy tests. Selection of the most appropriate tool requires careful consideration of the target population and the desired goal.

Predicting Penicillin Allergy: A United States Multicenter Retrospective Study

BACKGROUND

Using the reaction history in logistic regression and machine learning (ML) models to predict penicillin allergy has been reported based on non-US data.

OBJECTIVE

We developed ML positive penicillin allergy testing prediction models from multisite US data.

METHODS

Retrospective data from 4 US-based hospitals were grouped into 4 datasets: enriched training (1:3 case-control matched cohort), enriched testing, nonenriched internal testing, and nonenriched external testing. ML algorithms were used for model development. We determined area under the curve (AUC) and applied the Shapley Additive exPlanations (SHAP) framework to interpret risk drivers.

RESULTS

Of 4777 patients (mean age 60 [standard deviation: 17] years; 68% women, 91% White, and 86% non-Hispanic) evaluated for penicillin allergy labels, 513 (11%) had positive penicillin allergy testing. Model input variables were frequently missing: immediate or delayed onset (71%), signs or symptoms (13%), and treatment (31%). The gradient-boosted model was the strongest model with an AUC of 0.67 (95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.57-0.77), which improved to 0.87 (95% CI: 0.73-1) when only cases with complete data were used. Top SHAP drivers for positive testing were reactions within the last year and reactions requiring medical attention; female sex and reaction of hives/urticaria were also positive drivers.

CONCLUSIONS

An ML prediction model for positive penicillin allergy skin testing using US-based retrospective data did not achieve performance strong enough for acceptance and adoption. The optimal ML prediction model for positive penicillin allergy testing was driven by time since reaction, seek medical attention, female sex, and hives/urticaria.

Removing penicillin allergy label in a hospitalized adolescent with a remote penicillin and recent cephalosporin allergy

Background: β-Lactam antibiotics are widely used with increased utilization in hospitalized patients. Of this population, as high as 10-20% report an allergy to β-lactam antibiotics but <5% are at risk of developing clinically significant immunoglobulin E- or T-lymphocyte-mediated reactions. Most of the time, these reported allergies are present during an illness with no previous inquiry of their validity, which makes investigation and possible removal of this allergy label a challenge. Methods: We report a 16-year-old boy who presented with 1 week of night sweats, chills, headaches, and fatigue, followed by 1 day of fever and right knee swelling and who was diagnosed with septic bursitis. Due to concern of a penicillin allergy label, the patient was started on a cefepime infusion. Five minutes into the infusion, the patient reported puffy eyes and itchy throat, followed by a witnessed cascading flat nonpruritic erythematous rash from head to shoulders. This rash went away in 3 minutes after stopping the infusion and the patient being given 50 mg of intravenous diphenhydramine and 10 mg of oral dexamethasone. He was subsequently diagnosed with a cefepime allergy. Results: Allergy/immunology was the speciality consulted, and, by using a screening questionnaire, the patient's reported penicillin allergy was determined to be low risk. Subsequent 1-step oral challenge was the key to providing the patient with the necessary antibiotic course to resolve his infection. Conclusion: Multiple reported antibiotic allergies lead to poor antibiotic stewardship that causes impactful health and financial burden on the patient and health-care system. It is thus important to have an evidence-based systematic approach to de-label penicillin antibiotic allergy labels to reduce these potential harms.

How to Define and Manage Low-Risk Drug Allergy Labels

Risk stratification in drug allergy implies that specific risk categories (eg, low, moderate, and high) classify historical drug hypersensitivity reactions. These risk categories can be based on reaction phenotypic characteristics, the timing of the reaction and evaluation, the required reaction management, and individual characteristics. Although a multitude of frameworks have been described in the literature, particularly for penicillin allergy labels, there has yet to be a global consensus, and approaches continue to vary between allergy centers. Immune-mediated drug allergies can sometimes be confirmed using skin testing, but a negative drug challenge is required to demonstrate tolerance and remove the allergy from the electronic health record ("delabel" the allergy). Even for quintessential IgE-mediated drug allergy, penicillin allergy, recent data reveal that a direct oral challenge, without prior skin testing, is an appropriate diagnostic strategy in those who are considered low-risk. Drug allergy pathogenesis and clinical manifestations may vary depending on the culprit drug, and as such, the optimal approach should be based on risk stratification that considers individual patient and reaction characteristics, the likely hypersensitivity reaction phenotype, the drug class, and the patient's clinical needs. This article will describe low-risk drug allergy labels, focusing on β-lactam and sulfonamide antibiotics, nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs, iodinated contrast media, and common chemotherapeutics. This review will also address practical management approaches using currently available risk stratification and clinical decision tools.

Penicillin Allergy Evaluation Should Be Performed Proactively in Patients With a Penicillin Allergy Label

Penicillin allergy is the most common drug allergy in the US population. A penicillin allergy label is associated with poor patient outcomes including increased hospital length of stay, increased perioperative infections, and overall increased mortality. A penicillin allergy evaluation accurately identifies approximately 9 of 10 patients who, despite reporting a history of penicillin allergy, can receive penicillins safely. Penicillin allergy evaluations should be offered proactively to healthy patients during routine visits, including children and pregnant women, in advance of antibiotic need.

Penicillin allergy de-labelling by non-allergists: a comparison of testing protocols

Optimizing penicillin allergy de-labelling (PADL) to ensure patients with an incorrect penicillin allergy record are de-labelled with minimal patient harm is important for antibiotic stewardship. The heterogeneity of inclusion and exclusion criteria in the published penicillin allergy testing protocols risks suboptimal delivery of PADL. We compared the similarities and the differences between non-allergist-delivered PADL testing protocols and make suggestions for harmonization. The observed variation in testing practice has two broad elements: (i) definitions and terminology; and (ii) differences in the acceptability of perceived risk. All direct drug provocation testing (DDPT) protocols included patients with benign delayed rash as eligible for testing, although the remoteness of the rash, and the terminology used to describe the rash, differed. Patients with features of potential IgE reactions were excluded from most DDPT protocols, but not all of them. There was differing advice on how to manage patients who had subsequently tolerated penicillin since the index reaction and differences in which patients were considered ineligible for DDPT due to acuity of illness, comorbidities and concomitant medications. Standardization of the terminology used in penicillin allergy testing protocols and consensus on inclusion and exclusion criteria are required for safe and efficient PADL delivery at scale by non-allergists.

Penicillin Allergy Impact and Management

There is international evidence that penicillin allergies are associated with inferior prescribing and patient outcomes. A host of tools now exist from assessment (risk assessment tools, clinical decision rules) to delabeling (the removal of a beta-lactam allergy via testing or medical reconciliation) to reduce the impact of these "labels" in the hospital and community setting, as a primary antimicrobial stewardship intervention.

Approach for delabeling beta-lactam allergy in children

A considerable number of pediatric patients treated with beta-lactam (BL) antibiotics develop delayed onset of skin rashes during the course of treatment. Although the most frequent cause of these symptoms is infectious, many cases are labeled as allergic reactions to these drugs. BL allergy labels could have a negative impact, as they imply avoidance of this group of drugs and the use of second-line antibiotics, leading to a potential increase in adverse effects and the utilization of less effective therapies. This constitutes a major public health concern and economic burden, as the use of broad-spectrum antibiotics can result in multidrug-resistant organisms and prolonged hospital stays. Therefore, it is crucial to delabel patients during childhood to avoid false labeling in adult life. Although the label of BL allergy is among the most frequent causes of allergy referral, its management remains controversial, and new diagnostic perspectives are changing the paradigm of managing BL allergies in children. Traditionally, drug provocation testing (DPT) was exclusively performed in patients who had previously obtained negative results from skin tests (STs). However, the sensitivity of STs is low, and the role of in vitro testing in the pediatric population is not well defined. Recent studies have demonstrated the safety of direct DPT without prior ST or serum tests for pediatric patients who report a low-risk reaction to BLs, which is cost-effective. However, there is still a debate on the optimal allergic workup to be performed in children with a benign immediate reaction and the management of children with severe cutaneous adverse drug reactions. In this review, we will discuss the impact of the label of BL allergy and the role of the different tools currently available to efficiently address BL allergy delabeling in children.

[Antibiotic allergies: targeted approach in suspected β‑lactam allergy]

Allergic reactions to antibiotics belong to hypersensitivity drug reactions and can trigger both immunoglobulin E-mediated symptoms and T cell-mediated symptoms. Skin manifestations are the most common symptoms. Although reporting a penicillin allergy results in considerable restrictions in the treatment of acute infections, which may be associated with poor treatment outcomes, in most cases the label 'penicillin allergy' is not called into question or critically reviewed. However, in 85-90% of patients, 'penicillin allergy' constitutes a mislabeling of a non-specific intolerance reaction that does not pose a risk to the patient when re-exposed to penicillins. Careful history taking, an evaluation of manifestations in the past, and easy-to-perform initial diagnostic steps are crucial in differentiating non-specific intolerance reactions from penicillin allergy sensu stricto. Thus, a penicillin de-labeling strategy allows for optimized antibiotic therapy in the event of a future infection. Although allergic cross-reactivity between different β‑lactam antibiotics can occur, the risk for a severe cross-reactivity is dependent on chemical properties of the specific β‑lactam. Published cross-reactivity tables can help in risk stratification and choice of alternative β‑lactam agents.

Analysis of a beta-lactam allergy assessment protocol challenging diverse reported allergies managed by an antimicrobial stewardship program

Objective

To assess the safety and efficacy of a novel beta-lactam allergy assessment algorithm managed by an antimicrobial stewardship program (ASP) team.

Design

Retrospective analysis.

Setting

One quaternary referral teaching hospital and one tertiary care teaching hospital in a large western Pennsylvania health network.

Patients or participants

Patients who received a beta-lactam challenge dose under the beta-lactam allergy assessment algorithm.

Interventions

A beta-lactam allergy assessment protocol was designed and implemented by an ASP team. The protocol risk stratified patients' reported allergies to identify patients appropriate for a challenge with a beta-lactam antibiotic. This retrospective analysis assessed the safety and efficacy of this protocol among patients receiving a challenge dose from November 2017 to July 2021.

Results

Over a 45-month period, 119 total patients with either penicillin or cephalosporin allergies entered the protocol. Following a challenge dose, 106 (89.1%) patients were treated with a beta-lactam. Eleven patients had adverse reactions to a challenge dose, one of which required escalation of care to the intensive care unit. Of the patients with an unknown or low-risk reported allergy, 7/66 (10.6%) had an observed adverse reaction compared to 3/42 (7.1%) who had an observed reaction with a reported high-risk or anaphylactic allergy.

Conclusions

Our implemented protocol was safe and effective, with over 90% of patients tolerating the challenge without incident and many going on to receive indicated beta-lactam therapy. This protocol may serve as a framework for other inpatient ASP teams to implement a low-barrier allergy assessment led by ASP teams.

Impact of an Inpatient Allergy Guideline on β-Lactam and Alternative Antibiotic Use

BACKGROUND

A guideline identifying when inpatients with penicillin or cephalosporin antibiotic allergy labels (PCAAL) can receive β-lactam antibiotics increased β-lactam receipt at a large northeastern US health care system.

OBJECTIVE

To report outcomes of implementing a similar guideline and electronic order set (OS) at an independent academic health care system.

METHODS

Penicillin/cephalosporin receipt (percentage of inpatients receiving full doses) and alternative antibiotic use (days of therapy per 1000 patient-days [DOT/1000PD]) were compared over 3 periods before (February 1, 2017, to January 31, 2018) and after guideline implementation (February 1, 2018, to January 31, 2019), and after OS implementation (February 1, 2019, to January 31, 2020) among inpatients with PCAAL admitted on medical services with access to guideline/OS and education (Medical-PCAAL, n = 8721), surgical services with access to guideline/OS without education (Surgical-PCAAL, n = 5069), and obstetrics/gynecology services without interventions (Ob/Gyn-PCAAL, n = 798) and inpatients without PCAAL admitted on the same services (Medical-No-PCAAL, n = 50,840; Surgical-No-PCAAL, n = 29,845; Ob/Gyn-No-PCAAL, n = 6109). χ2 tests were used to compare categorical variables, and analysis of variance was used to compare continuous and interrupted time series analyses (ITSA) to investigate the guideline/OS implementation effect on penicillin/cephalosporin receipt.

RESULTS

In the Medical-PCAAL group, penicillin/cephalosporin receipt increased (58%-68%, P < .001), specifically for cefazolin (8%-11%, P = .02) and third- to fifth-generation cephalosporins (43%-48%, P = .04), and aztreonam use decreased (12 DOT/1000PD, P = .03). In the Medical-No-PCAAL group, penicillin/cephalosporin receipt increased (88%-90%, P = .004), specifically for penicillin (40%-44%, P < .001), without changes in aztreonam use. Significant changes were not observed in these outcomes on surgical or obstetrics/gynecology services. Per ITSA, guideline/OS implementation was associated with increased penicillin/cephalosporin receipt in the Medical-PCAAL group only.

CONCLUSION

Guideline and OS implementation was associated with improved antibiotic stewardship on inpatient services that also received allergy education.

The Who, What, When, and Where of Inpatient Direct Oral Penicillin Challenge-Implications for Health Services Implementation

Inpatient direct oral challenge programs are increasingly deployed as part of antimicrobial stewardship initiatives to reduce the burden and impacts of penicillin allergy labels on antibiotic prescribing. Using data from a prospective, multicenter cohort inpatient penicillin allergy program, we identify the key targets for delabeling to aid health service implementation.

Penicillin allergy delabeling: Opportunities for implementation and dissemination

Although existing as a safety measure to prevent iatrogenic harm, unconfirmed penicillin allergy labels have a negative impact on personal and public health. One downstream effect of unconfirmed penicillin allergy is the continued emergence and transmission of resistant bacteria and their associated health care costs. Recognizing the consequences of inaccurate penicillin allergy labels, professional and public health organizations have started promoting the adoption of proactive penicillin allergy evaluations, with the ultimate goal of removing the penicillin allergy label when the allergy is disproved, also known as penicillin allergy "delabeling." A penicillin allergy evaluation includes a comprehensive allergy history often followed by drug challenge, sometimes with preceding skin testing. Currently, penicillin allergy delabeling is largely carried out by allergy specialists in outpatient settings. Penicillin allergy delabeling is performed on inpatients, albeit rarely, often at the time of need, as a point-of-care procedure. Access to penicillin allergy evaluation services is limited. Recent studies demonstrate the feasibility of expanding penicillin allergy evaluations and delabeling to internists, pediatricians, emergency medicine physicians, infectious diseases specialists, and clinical pharmacists. However, reducing the impact of mislabeled penicillin allergy will require comprehensive efforts and new investments. In this review, we summarize the current practices of penicillin allergy delabeling and discuss expansion opportunities for penicillin allergy delabeling as quality improvement.

Impact of a Documented Penicillin Allergy on Antibiotic Selection in Pediatric Patients With Osteomyelitis

Penicillin allergy labels are common in hospitalized patients, and there is a frequent misconception that these patients cannot receive cephalosporins. Through retrospective review, we found that patients with reported penicillin allergies were significantly less likely to receive first-line therapy for acute hematogenous osteomyelitis.

[Antibiotic allergies: targeted approach in suspected β‑lactam allergy]

Allergic reactions to antibiotics belong to hypersensitivity drug reactions and can trigger both immunoglobulin E-mediated symptoms and T cell-mediated symptoms. Skin manifestations are the most common symptoms. Although reporting a penicillin allergy results in considerable restrictions in the treatment of acute infections, which may be associated with poor treatment outcomes, in most cases the label 'penicillin allergy' is not called into question or critically reviewed. However, in 85-90% of patients, 'penicillin allergy' constitutes a mislabeling of a non-specific intolerance reaction that does not pose a risk to the patient when re-exposed to penicillins. Careful history taking, an evaluation of manifestations in the past, and easy-to-perform initial diagnostic steps are crucial in differentiating non-specific intolerance reactions from penicillin allergy sensu stricto. Thus, a penicillin de-labeling strategy allows for optimized antibiotic therapy in the event of a future infection. Although allergic cross-reactivity between different β‑lactam antibiotics can occur, the risk for a severe cross-reactivity is dependent on chemical properties of the specific β‑lactam. Published cross-reactivity tables can help in risk stratification and choice of alternative β‑lactam agents.

The effectiveness of interventions that support penicillin allergy assessment and delabeling of adult and pediatric patients by nonallergy specialists: a systematic review and meta-analysis

OBJECTIVES

Penicillin allergy records are often incorrect and may result in harm. We aimed to systematically review the effectiveness and safety of nonallergist health care worker delivery of penicillin allergy delabeling.

METHODS

We searched EMBASE/MEDLINE/CINAHL (Ovid), PsycInfo, Web of Science, and Cochrane CENTRAL from inception to January 21, 2022 and unpublished studies and gray literature. The proportion of patients allergic to penicillin delabeled and harmed was calculated using random-effects models.

RESULTS

Overall, 5019 patients were delabeled. Using allergy history alone, 14% (95% confidence interval [CI], 9-21%) of 4350 assessed patients were delabeled without reported harm. Direct drug provocation testing resulted in delabeling in 27% (95% CI, 18-37%) of 4207 assessed patients. Of the 1373 patients tested, 98% were delabeled (95% CI, 97-99%), and nonserious harm was reported in 1% (95% CI, 0-2%). Using skin testing, followed by drug provocation testing, 41% (95% CI, 24-59%) of 2890 assessed patients were delabeled. Of the 1294 tested patients, 95.0% (95% CI, 90-99%) were delabeled, and the reported harm was low (0%; (95% CI 0-1%).

CONCLUSION

Penicillin allergy delabeling by nonallergists is efficacious and safe. The proportion of assessed patients who can be delabeled increases with the complexity of testing method, but substantial numbers can be delabeled without skin testing.

Digital Antibiotic Allergy Decision Support Tool Improves Management of β-Lactam Allergies

BACKGROUND

Frontline providers frequently make time-sensitive antibiotic choices, but many feel poorly equipped to handle antibiotic allergies.

OBJECTIVE

We hypothesized that a digital decision support tool could improve antibiotic selection and confidence when managing β-lactam allergies.

METHODS

A digital decision support tool was designed to guide non-allergist providers in managing patients with β-lactam allergy labels. Non-allergists were asked to make decisions in clinical test cases without the tool, and then with it. These decisions were compared using paired t tests. Users also completed surveys assessing their confidence in managing antibiotic allergies.

RESULTS

The tool's algorithm was validated by confirming its recommendations aligned with that of five allergists. Non-allergist providers (n = 102) made antibiotic management decisions in test cases, both with and without the tool. Use of the tool increased the proportion of correct decisions from 0.41 to 0.67, a difference of 0.26 (95% CI, 0.22-0.30; P < .001). Users were more likely to give full-dose antibiotics in low-risk situations, give challenge doses in medium-risk situations, and avoid the antibiotic and/or consult allergy departments in high-risk situations. A total of 98 users (96%) said the tool would increase their confidence when choosing antibiotics for patients with allergies.

CONCLUSIONS

A point-of-care clinical decision tool provides allergist-designed guidance for non-allergists and is a scalable system for addressing antibiotic allergies, irrespective of allergist availability. This tool encouraged appropriate antibiotic use in low- and medium-risk situations and increased caution in high-risk situations. A digital support tool should be considered in quality improvement and antibiotic stewardship efforts.

Administration of β-lactam antibiotics to patients with reported penicillin allergy in the emergency department

BACKGROUND

β-lactam antibiotics are amongst the most commonly prescribed medications in the Emergency Department (ED) due to their role in empiric sepsis therapy; however, inferior therapeutic options are often utilized due to a reported allergy; penicillin (PCN) being most frequent. In the United States, 10% of the population endorses an allergic reaction to PCN while <1% experience IgE-mediated reactions. This study aimed to evaluate the frequency and outcome of patients in the ED whose PCN allergies were challenged with β-lactam antibiotics.

METHODS

We conducted a retrospective chart review of patients in the ED at an academic medical center aged ≥18, and who received a β-lactam despite a reported PCN allergy between January 2015 and December 2019. Patients who did not receive a β-lactam or did not report a PCN allergy prior to administration were excluded. The primary outcome was the frequency of IgE-mediated reactions in response to β-lactam administration. A secondary outcome assessed the frequency of continuation of β-lactams upon admission from the ED.

RESULTS

819 patients were included (66% female) with prior reported PCN reactions: hives (22.5%), rash (15.4%), swelling (6.2%), anaphylaxis (3.5%), other (12.1%), or undocumented on medical electronic record (40.3%). No patients experienced an IgE-mediated reaction to the β-lactam administered in the ED. Previously reported allergies had no effect on the continuation of β-lactams when admitted or discharged (OR: 1, 95% CI: 0.7-1.44). Patients who had a history of an IgE-mediated penicillin allergy were frequently continued (77%) on a β-lactam after leaving the ED via admission or discharge.

CONCLUSION

β-lactam administration in patients with previously reported PCN allergies did not result in any IgE-mediated reactions nor in an increase in adverse reactions. Our data contributes to the body of evidence that supports the administration of β-lactams to patients with documented PCN allergies.

Study protocol for PREPARE: a phase II feasibility/safety randomised controlled trial on PeRiopErative Penicillin AlleRgy TEsting

INTRODUCTION

Patient-reported antibiotic allergy labels (AALs) are common. These labels have been demonstrated to have a negative impact on use of appropriate antibiotics and patient-related health outcomes. These patients are more likely to receive suboptimal antibiotics, have increased rates of surgical site infections and are more likely to be colonised with multidrug-resistant organisms. Increasing recognition that antibiotic allergy forms a key part of good antimicrobial stewardship has led to calls for greater access to antibiotic allergy assessment.PREPARE is a pilot randomised controlled trial of beta-lactam allergy assessment and point of care delabelling in perioperative patients utilising a validated antibiotic allergy assessment tool that has been repurposed into a smartphone application. The aim of the study is to assess the feasibility and safety of this approach in the perioperative outpatient setting.

METHODS AND ANALYSIS

Adult participants requiring elective surgery and are likely to require prophylactic intravenous antibiotics will be recruited. During the intervention phase, participants will be randomised to the intervention or control arm, with control patients receiving usual standard of care. Those randomised to intervention undertake a risk assessment via the smartphone application, with those deemed low risk proceeding to direct oral provocation with either a penicillin or cephalosporin. Study outcomes will be evaluated in the postintervention phase, 30 and 90 days after surgery.Feasibility of intervention delivery and recruitment will be reported as proportions with respective 95% CIs. Participants who experience an antibiotic adverse event will be reported by group with respective 95% CIs and compared using modified Poisson regression model with robust SE estimation.

ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION

This protocol has received approval from the Austin Health human research and ethics committee, Heidelberg, Victoria, Australia (HREC/17/Austin/575). Results will be disseminated via publication in peer-reviewed journals as well as presentation at international conferences.

TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER

ACTRN12620001295932.

Advances in the Understanding of Drug Hypersensitivity: 2012 Through 2022

Over the last decade there have been key advances in understanding mechanisms, risk, and consequences of both true immunological drug hypersensitivity and unverified drug allergy labels that have changed clinical practice. This has been facilitated by the widespread adoption of electronic health records (EHRs). The vast majority of EHR drug allergy labels are unverified and cause significant morbidity from unnecessary avoidance of optimal drug therapy. There has also been significant movement in our understanding of mechanisms of drug hypersensitivity that, in addition to advancing our understanding of the pathogenesis of immediate and delayed reactions, have guided preventive efforts, diagnostic procedures, and clinical management. More widespread adoption, including scale-up of "allergy" delabeling and appropriate management, specifically for antibiotics, opiates, radiocontrast, chemotherapeutics, biologics, and nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory medications, will be necessary to improve patient outcomes over the next decade. This will require further engagement and collaboration between primary care health care providers, allergists, and other specialists.

Penicillin Allergy Label Is Associated With Worse Clinical Outcomes in Bacterial Pneumonia

BACKGROUND

Penicillins (PCNs) are a first-line treatment option for bacterial pneumonia. PCN allergy label can delay antimicrobial treatment and result in the use of alternative antibiotic regimens risking an inadequate response to treatment and potentially increased adverse drug reactions.

OBJECTIVE

To investigate the impact of PCN allergy label on clinical outcomes of bacterial pneumonia.

METHODS

This retrospective cohort study used TriNetX, a web-based tool for population cohort research, to identify adult patients with and without PCN allergy label diagnosed with bacterial pneumonia. Cohorts were matched for baseline demographics and chronic medical conditions. The 30-day risks of hospitalization, acute respiratory failure, intubation, need for intensive level of care, and mortality were compared. Antibiotics used and their possible adverse reactions were explored.

RESULTS

After matching, there were 68,748 patients in each cohort. Patients with bacterial pneumonia with PCN allergy label had higher risks of hospitalization (risk ratio [RR], 1.23; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.22-1.24), acute respiratory failure (RR, 1.14; 95% CI, 1.12-1.15), intubation (RR, 1.18; 95% CI, 1.13-1.22), intensive level of care (RR, 1.11; 95% CI, 1.08-1.14), and mortality (RR, 1.08; 95% CI, 1.04-1.13) compared with patients without PCN allergy label. Patients with PCN allergy label had decreased use of PCNs and cephalosporins and increased utilization of other antibiotic classes compared with patients without PCN allergy label. PCN allergy label was also associated with increased risk of adverse drug reactions.

CONCLUSION

PCN allergy label is associated with worse clinical outcomes in bacterial pneumonia, and risk mitigation strategies should be considered.

Improving antimicrobial stewardship with penicillin allergy testing: a review of current practices and unmet needs

Penicillin allergy, the most frequently reported drug allergy, has been associated with suboptimal antibiotic therapy, increased antimicrobial resistance, increased rates of Clostridioides difficile colonization and infection, as well as extended hospital length of stay and increased cost. Although up to 10% of all patients may report penicillin allergy, most penicillin allergies are not confirmed. As such, most patients with a penicillin allergy can still safely use penicillin and related drugs following a more precise assessment. Herein, we review the current practices and unmet needs in penicillin allergy testing. The diagnostic algorithm is mostly based on a clinical history assessment followed by in vivo testing, i.e. skin test and/or drug challenge. As these tests are labour and resource intensive, there is increased interest in point-of-care penicillin allergy de-labelling solutions incorporated into Antimicrobial Stewardship Programmes including digital assessment tools. These can be locally parameterized on the basis of characteristics of target populations, incidence of specific allergies and local antibiotic usage to perform clinical risk stratification. Safely ruling out any residual risk remains essential and in vivo drug challenge and/or skin testing should be systematically encouraged. Gradual understanding and convergence of the risk stratification of the clinical presentation of penicillin allergy is enabling a wider implementation of this essential aspect of antimicrobial stewardship through digitalized decision tools and in vivo testing. More research is needed to deliver point of care in vitro diagnostic tools to democratize this de-labelling practice, which would be highly beneficial to patient care. This progress, together with better education of patients and clinicians about the availability, efficacy and safety of penicillin allergy testing, will increase the dissemination of penicillin allergy assessment as an important component of Antimicrobial Stewardship Programmes.

Negative impact of penicillin allergy labels on antibiotic use in hospitalized patients in Chinese Mainland

Background

Penicillin allergy labels have gained increasing global attention. However, to date, there are no data on the influence of penicillin allergy labels on patients in Chinese mainland.

Methods

This retrospective study reviewed the electronic health record (EHR) of hospitalized patients between June 1, 2018 and May 31, 2019. Patients with a penicillin allergy record were included in the allergy group. Every allergy patient was matched with 4 control patients by using propensity score-based matching to make sure the following were balanced: age, sex, date of admission, and the main diagnosis. We estimated the prevalence of penicillin allergy labels and compared the antibiotic prescription patterns and other clinical outcomes between the 2 groups.

Results

A total of 5691 patients and 22 585 patients were included in the allergy group and control group, respectively. The prevalence of penicillin allergy labels among the hospitalized patients in this study was 4.00%. Compared to the control group, significantly fewer patients in the allergy group were prescribed penicillins and most cephalosporins, while a larger proportion of allergy patients received clindamycin (10.02% vs 5.41%, p < 0.001) and some higher-class antibiotics, such as monobactams (1.81% vs 0.54%, p < 0.001), carbapenems (5.80% vs 4.98%, p = 0.014), macrolides (0.60% vs 0.25%, p < 0.001), and quinolones (17.62% vs 12.40%, p < 0.001). Allergy patients also had longer hospital stays and a greater need to consult infection specialists.

Conclusion

The prevalence of penicillin allergy labels was 4.00% in Chinese hospitalized patients. Penicillin allergy labels could cause irrational antibiotic prescribing, prolonged hospital stays, and greater consultation needs.

Safety of Cefazolin Test Dose in Patients with Penicillin Allergy Just Prior Cardiac Device Implantation: A Single Center Experience

Background

Cephalosporins are the cornerstone of cardiac device infection prophylaxis. Owing to fears of cross-reactivity, penicillin-allergic patients are exposed to potentially more-toxic drugs, with decreased efficacy. We evaluated the safety of a cefazolin test dose (CTD) in self-reported penicillin-allergic patients.

Methods

In this single-centre study, we evaluated consecutive patients with chart documentation of penicillin allergy undergoing cardiac device implantation, over a 2-year period. A CTD was performed if no cephalosporin allergy or severe anaphylactic reaction to penicillin had been documented. Patients were given 2 doses of 100 mg IV cefazolin, and if no allergic reaction occurred after 5 minutes, the full dose (1800 mg) was administered in the electrophysiology laboratory just before the implantation procedure.

Results

A total of 2200 patients were included. The frequency of reported penicillin allergy was 9.3% (n = 204). In 80% of cases, the type of allergic reaction was not reported in medical notes or was unknown by the patient. A CTD was performed in 67.6% of patients with a penicillin allergy (n = 138). A total of 5 adverse events occurred (3.6% of patients [95% confidence interval, 1.1%-6.1%]) — 4 skin rashes and 1 tongue edema. These 5 patients became asymptomatic after antihistaminic and corticosteroid IV treatment. Even if the test dose was negative, 79% of patients also were administered vancomycin before the procedure, as it requires a 1-hour infusion prior to the CTD in the implantation procedure room.

Conclusion

A CTD in most penicillin-allergic patients appears to be safe and allows its use per recommended guidelines.

Increasing Cefazolin Use for Perioperative Antibiotic Prophylaxis in Penicillin-Allergic Children

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES

Cefazolin, a first-generation cephalosporin, is the most commonly recommended antibiotic for perioperative prophylaxis to reduce surgical site infections. Children with a reported penicillin allergy often receive an alternative antibiotic because of a common misunderstanding of the cross-reactivity between these antibiotics. This use of alternative antibiotics in surgical populations have been associated with increased infections, antibiotic resistance, and health care costs. We aimed to increase the percentage of patients with nonsevere penicillin-class allergies who receive cefazolin for antibiotic prophylaxis.

METHODS

A multidisciplinary team conducted this quality improvement initiative, with a series of 3 plan-do-study-act cycles aimed at children with nonsevere penicillin-class allergies undergoing surgical procedures that require antibiotic prophylaxis. The primary outcome measure was the percentage of surgical encounters among patients with nonsevere penicillin-class allergies who received cefazolin as antibiotic prophylaxis. Statistical process control charts were used to measure improvement over time.

RESULTS

Approximately 400 children were involved in this project. There was special cause variation and a shift in the center line from 60% to 80% of eligible patients receiving cefazolin for antibiotic prophylaxis, which was sustained for the duration of the project. In the last month, 90% of eligible patient received cefazolin, surpassing our goal of 85%. This improvement has been sustained in the 5 months after project completion. We had no cases of severe allergic reactions in the operating room.

CONCLUSIONS

Our multidisciplinary education-focused interventions were associated with a significant increase in the use of cefazolin for perioperative antibiotic prophylaxis in patient with penicillin allergies.

Improving Antibiotic Stewardship for Inpatients with Reported Beta-Lactam Allergies and Limited Access to Penicillin Skin Testing

BACKGROUND

Penicillin allergy is commonly reported, but true allergy is rare. Inpatients with reported beta-lactam allergy are often treated with alternative antibiotics. Penicillin skin testing (PST) is not universally available for inpatients.

METHODS

We designed a four-phase quality improvement project aimed to increase the percentage of inpatients on medical services with reported beta-lactam allergy who safely receive beta-lactam antibiotics at two hospitals with limited access to PST. First, we updated our hospital guideline to allow for cephalosporin graded challenge without antecedent PST. Second, we educated physicians, physician assistants, and nurses about the new guideline and beta-lactam allergy classification and management. Third, we designed a pocket card to reinforce the education. Last, we used antimicrobial stewardship software to screen our daily census to identify opportunities to improve management of patients with reported beta-lactam allergies.

RESULTS

We observed a 29.2% increase in the percentage of patients who received beta-lactam antibiotics (excluding carbapenems) among those with reported beta-lactam allergy, from 42.2% (470/1,115) at baseline to 54.5% (379/696), p < 0.001, during the project period. There was a decrease in the use of alternative antibiotics, no change in hospital-onset Clostridioides difficile cases, and no increase in the number of infectious disease or allergy consults. The number of graded challenges increased during the project period, without any anaphylaxis events.

CONCLUSION

A multiphase quality improvement project aimed to improve management of beta-lactam allergies and access to graded challenges led to an increase in beta-lactam utilization without an increase in anaphylaxis, even with limited access to PST.

Promoting β-lactam utilization through suppression of electronic medical record cross-allergy alerts

DISCLAIMER

In an effort to expedite the publication of articles related to the COVID-19 pandemic, AJHP is posting these manuscripts online as soon as possible after acceptance. Accepted manuscripts have been peer-reviewed and copyedited, but are posted online before technical formatting and author proofing. These manuscripts are not the final version of record and will be replaced with the final article (formatted per AJHP style and proofed by the authors) at a later time.

PURPOSE

Current literature surrounding management of patients with reported β-lactam allergies focuses on allergy delabeling. Standard clinical decision support tools have not been optimized to be compatible with the currently accepted cross-reaction rate of 1% to 2%. This potentially promotes use of non-β-lactam antibiotics, which are often not first-line therapy and may carry increased risks. The impact of electronic medical record (EMR) clinical decision support tool optimization on utilization of β-lactam antibiotics in β-lactam-allergic patients was evaluated.

METHODS

A retrospective pre-post β-lactam cross-allergy EMR alert suppression quality improvement intervention cohort study of β-lactam-allergic adult inpatients prescribed antibiotics was conducted. Preintervention baseline data were collected for an initial cohort admitted during September 2018. The intervention, in which clinical decision support rules were updated to display β-lactam cross-sensitivity allergy alerts only for β-lactam-allergic patients with documentation of organization-defined high-severity reactions of anaphylaxis, hives, and shortness of breath, was implemented August 20, 2019. The postintervention cohort included patients admitted during September 2019.

RESULTS

A 91% increase in the percentage of β-lactam-allergic patients who received a β-lactam agent at any time during their admission was noted after the intervention (26.6% vs 51%, P < 0.001). Statistically significant decreases in prescribing of alternative antibiotic classes were seen for fluoroquinolones (decrease from 45.3% to 26%, P < 0.001), aminoglycosides (decrease from 9.4% to 2.9%, P = 0.002), and aztreonam (decrease from 30% to 16.7%, P < 0.001).

CONCLUSION

EMR β-lactam cross-allergy alert optimization consistent with current literature significantly improved the utilization of alternative β-lactam subclasses, mostly through β-lactam prescribing as initial therapy in β-lactam-allergic patients.

Drug Allergy Delabeling Programs: Recent Strategies and Targeted Populations

Drug allergy delabeling programs have become an essential element of antibiotic stewardship. Development of delabeling programs involves careful selection of target patient population, thoughtful design of delabeling approach, stakeholder engagement, assembly of key team members, implementation, and evaluation of clinical and safety outcomes. Recent programs have targeted patients thought to be most likely to benefit from removal of inaccurate antibiotic allergy labels, those with β-lactam antibiotic allergies and high-risk populations likely to need β-lactam antibiotics as first-line treatment. This review provides an overview of current risk stratification methods and β-lactam cross-reactivity data and summarizes how different inpatient and outpatient delabeling programs have used these concepts in delabeling algorithms. β-Lactam delabeling programs for inpatients, pediatric patients, and programs utilizing telehealth have been implemented with good outcomes. This review also focuses on delabeling programs for high-risk populations likely to benefit from first-line β-lactam antibiotics. These populations include perioperative, prenatal, and immunocompromised patients. Delabeling programs have been successful in the inpatient and outpatient settings at enabling appropriate antibiotic use. This article reviews delabeling strategies utilized by these programs with a focus on highlighting elements key to their success and future areas for innovation.

Antibiotic Use in Patients With β-Lactam Allergies and Pneumonia: Impact of an Antibiotic Side Chain-Based Cross-Reactivity Chart Combined With Enhanced Allergy Assessment

BACKGROUND

β-lactam antibiotics with dissimilar R-group side chains are associated with low cross-reactivity. Despite this, patients with β-lactam allergies are often treated with non-β-lactam alternative antibiotics. An institutional β-lactam side chain-based cross-reactivity chart was developed and implemented to guide in antibiotic selection for patients with β-lactam allergies.

METHODS

This single-center, retrospective cohort study analyzed the impact of the implementation of the cross-reactivity chart for patients with pneumonia. Study time periods were defined as January 2013 to October 2014 prior to implementation of the chart (historical cohort) and January 2017 to October 2018 (intervention cohort) following implementation. The primary outcome was the incidence of β-lactam utilization between time periods. Propensity-weighted scoring and interrupted time-series analyses compared outcomes.

RESULTS

A total of 341 and 623 patient encounters were included in the historical and intervention cohorts, respectively. There was a significantly greater use of β-lactams in the intervention cohort (70.4% vs 89.3%; P < .001) and decreased use of alternative therapy (58.1% vs 36%; P < .001). There was no difference in overall allergic reactions between cohorts (2.4% vs 1.6%; P = .738) or in reactions caused by β-lactams (1.3% vs 0.9%; P = .703). Inpatient mortality increased (0% vs 6.4%; P < .001); however, no deaths were due to allergic reactions. Healthcare facility-onset Clostridioides difficile infections decreased between cohorts (1.2% vs 0.2%; P = .032).

CONCLUSIONS

Implementation of a β-lactam side chain-based cross-reactivity chart and enhanced allergy assessment was associated with increased use of β-lactams in patients with pneumonia without increasing allergic reactions.

Surgical Antibiotic Prophylaxis in an Era of Antibiotic Resistance: Common Resistant Bacteria and Wider Considerations for Practice

The increasing incidence of antimicrobial resistance (AMR) presents a global crisis to healthcare, with longstanding antimicrobial agents becoming less effective at treating and preventing infection. In the surgical setting, antibiotic prophylaxis has long been established as routine standard of care to prevent surgical site infection (SSI), which remains one of the most common hospital-acquired infections. The growing incidence of AMR increases the risk of SSI complicated with resistant bacteria, resulting in poorer surgical outcomes (prolonged hospitalisation, extended durations of antibiotic therapy, higher rates of surgical revision and mortality). Despite these increasing challenges, more data are required on approaches at the institutional and patient level to optimise surgical antibiotic prophylaxis in the era of antibiotic resistance (AR). This review provides an overview of the common resistant bacteria encountered in the surgical setting and covers wider considerations for practice to optimise surgical antibiotic prophylaxis in the perioperative setting.

A Simple Algorithmic Approach Allows the Safe Use of Cephalosporin in "Penicillin-Allergic" Patients without the Need for Allergy Testing

BACKGROUND

Patients who report a penicillin allergy are often given second-line antibiotic prophylaxis during total joint arthroplasty (TJA), with only a minority of patients undergoing additional consultations and allergy testing. In an effort to increase the use of cephalosporin prophylaxis in TJA, the present study aimed to assess the effectiveness of a simple, protocol-driven penicillin allergy screening program without the need for additional work-up.

METHODS

Following implementation of a questionnaire-based screening protocol in May 2019, all patients scheduled for primary TJA were risk-stratified into low or high-risk categories. The low-risk cohort received cefazolin, and the high-risk cohort received non-cefazolin antibiotics. Patients were monitored prospectively, and data on antibiotic usage and adverse outcomes were documented. The protocol group (n = 2,078) was propensity score matched 1:1 with a control group that included patients who underwent TJA in the same institution prior to implementation of the protocol. The primary end point was the efficacy of the protocol in reducing unnecessary use of non-cephalosporin antibiotics for prophylaxis. Secondary outcomes included the rate of surgical site infections and allergic reactions to the administered antibiotic.

RESULTS

A total of 357 patients (17.2%) reported a penicillin allergy in the protocol group compared with 310 patients (14.9%) with a recorded allergy in the control group (p = 0.052). The number of patients who received non-cephalosporin antibiotics was significantly lower in the protocol group (5.7% compared with 15.2% in the control group; p < 0.001), whereas there was no difference in the rate of total allergic reactions (0.8% compared with 0.7%, respectively; p = 0.857). Of the 239 low-risk patients (66.9%) in the protocol group, only 3 (1.3%) experienced a mild cutaneous reaction following cefazolin administration. There were no differences in the rates of superficial wound, deep periprosthetic, or Clostridioides difficile infections between the protocol and control groups.

CONCLUSIONS

A simple screening protocol allowed two-thirds of patients with a self-reported allergy to receive cefazolin without the need for additional consultations or testing. We believe this protocol can be safely implemented to increase the rate of cefazolin usage without a corresponding increase in the number of allergic reactions.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Therapeutic Level II. See Instructions for Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence.

The effects of beta-lactam allergy relabeling on antibiotic prescribing practices

BACKGROUND

Beta-lactam antibiotic allergy labels are highly prevalent but rarely indicate an allergic intolerance. These patient-reported allergies lead to broad-spectrum antibiotic use, conferred resistance, increased expense, and adverse effects.

OBJECTIVE

To implement and assess the impact of a history-based clinical guideline that directs antibiotic management and beta-lactam allergy relabeling for patients reporting beta-lactam allergies.

METHODS

Patients with beta-lactam allergy labels were identified by our trained multidisciplinary team in diverse clinical settings. This quality improvement project was conducted to evaluate the safety and impact of the guideline on antibiotic use by comparing prescribing practices before and after guideline implementation.

RESULTS

A total of 79 patients with beta-lactam allergies were identified (penicillins-90%, cephalosporins-10%). After guideline implementation, outcomes of allergy relabeling included the following: (1) complete removal, indicating an unlikely true allergy (27%); (2) updated to detail successfully tolerated beta-lactam courses (48%); or (3) no change made to current label (25%). Beta-lactam antibiotic courses before and after guideline implementation compared with total antibiotic courses: allergy removed (44% vs 70%; P < .001), allergy updated (32% vs 68%; P < .001), and no change (27% vs 41%; P = .08). Compared with before guideline implementation, beta-lactam antibiotics were 3 times more likely to be prescribed after allergy assessment (odds ratio, 3.22; 95% confidence interval, 2.4-4.3; P < .05).

CONCLUSION

The implementation of the beta-lactam allergy clinical guideline resulted in most patients' allergy labels being removed or advantageously updated. These allergy label changes correlated with a substantial increase in the percentage of beta-lactam antibiotics prescribed. After guideline implementation, beta-lactam antibiotics had a 3-fold increased odds of being prescribed independent of allergy label outcome.

Allergic Reactions Captured by Voluntary Reporting

BACKGROUND

The epidemiology of hospital adverse reactions (ARs), particularly allergic reactions, or hypersensitivity reactions (HSRs), is poorly defined. To determine priorities for allergy safety in healthcare, we identified and described safety reports of allergic reactions.

METHODS

We searched the safety report database of a large academic medical center from April 2006 to March 2016 using 101 complete, truncated, and/or misspelled key words related to allergic symptoms, treatments, and culprits (e.g., medications, foods). Patient and event data were summarized for ARs and two types of ARs, HSRs and side effects/toxicities.

RESULTS

Among 9111 key word search-identified events, 876 (10%) were ARs, of which 436 (5%) were HSRs and the remaining 440 (5%) were side effect reactions or toxicities. Whereas the most common HSRs were simple cutaneous reactions (83%), the following severe immediate HSRs were also identified: shortness of breath (16%), anaphylaxis (14%), and angioedema (12%). Most HSRs were caused by drugs (81%), with antibiotics (26%), particularly β-lactams (11%), and vancomycin (8%), commonly implicated. Other causes of drug HSRs included contrast agents (24%), chemotherapeutics (7%), and opioids (6%). Nondrug HSRs were from blood products (8%), latex (3%), and devices (3%). Food reactions were rarely identified (1%).

CONCLUSIONS

We identified ARs, HSRs, and side effects/toxicities, contained in a decade of safety reports at an academic medical center. Allergy safety in the healthcare setting should target approaches to common and severe reactions, with a focus on the safe administration of β-lactams, vancomycin, contrast agents, chemotherapeutics, and opioids. Priority nondrug HSR culprits include blood products, latex, and devices.

Key use cases for artificial intelligence to reduce the frequency of adverse drug events: a scoping review

Adverse drug events (ADEs) represent one of the most prevalent types of health-care-related harm, and there is substantial room for improvement in the way that they are currently predicted and detected. We conducted a scoping review to identify key use cases in which artificial intelligence (AI) could be leveraged to reduce the frequency of ADEs. We focused on modern machine learning techniques and natural language processing. 78 articles were included in the scoping review. Studies were heterogeneous and applied various AI techniques covering a wide range of medications and ADEs. We identified several key use cases in which AI could contribute to reducing the frequency and consequences of ADEs, through prediction to prevent ADEs and early detection to mitigate the effects. Most studies (73 [94%] of 78) assessed technical algorithm performance, and few studies evaluated the use of AI in clinical settings. Most articles (58 [74%] of 78) were published within the past 5 years, highlighting an emerging area of study. Availability of new types of data, such as genetic information, and access to unstructured clinical notes might further advance the field.

Immediate and Delayed Hypersensitivity Reactions to Beta-Lactam Antibiotics

Beta-lactam antibiotics are the most commonly reported drug allergy in adults and children. More than 95% of those with reported allergy labels to beta lactams are not confirmed when subjected to allergy testing. Beta lactam antibiotics are associated with a wide spectrum of immediate and delayed drug hypersensitivity reactions. The latency period to symptoms and clinical presentation aids in the causality assessment. Risk stratification based on diagnosis and timing then allows for appropriate management and evaluation. Skin prick testing, intradermal testing and oral challenge are well established for evaluation of immediate reactions. Delayed intradermal testing, patch testing and oral challenge can also be considered for evaluation of mild to moderate delayed reactions. Cross-reactivity between beta-lactams appears to be driven most commonly by a shared R1 side-chain. Standardized algorithms, protocols and pathways are needed for widespread implementation of a pragmatic and effective approach to patients reporting beta lactam allergy.

Implementation and Impact of a β-Lactam Allergy Assessment Protocol in a Veteran Population

Background

Approximately 10% of the US population reports having a β-lactam allergy, although nearly 90% do not have a true immunoglobulin E (IgE)-mediated reaction. This misconception results in using nonpreferred antibiotics, leading to antimicrobial resistance and treatment failure. To evaluate, clarify, and clear β-lactam allergies, we implemented a pharmacist-driven β-lactam allergy assessment (BLAA) protocol and penicillin allergy clinic (PAC). The purpose of this study was to illustrate the BLAA process, including the pharmacist-run PAC, and assess the impact on allergy clearance.

Methods

Clinical pharmacy specialists (CPS) evaluated hospitalized veterans with β-lactam allergies, using the BLAA protocol. Eligible patients could later be seen in PAC. This was a retrospective observational review of the BLAA protocol to assess recommendations for β-lactam antibiotic use and PAC outcomes.

Results

Between November 2017 and February 2020, 278 patients were evaluated, and 32 were seen in the clinic. The most common allergen was penicillin, and the most reported reaction was a rash (27%) or pruritus and urticaria (18%). Through PAC and the BLAA protocol, 86 patients (31%) were cleared for allergy removal, and 188 (68%) were cleared for alternative β-lactams. The evaluation revealed that 274 patients (99%) were eligible to receive a β-lactam antibiotic, and only 4 patients (1%) were recommended for avoidance of all β-lactams.

Conclusions

These findings highlight the utility of the pharmacist-driven BLAA protocol. We illustrated that most patients with documented β-lactam allergies were eligible for alternative β-lactams. The implementation of the BLAA protocol and pharmacist-run PAC facilitated allergy clearance and has the potential to promote alternative β-lactam use.

A Quality Improvement Initiative to Improve Primary Care Referral Rates for Penicillin Allergy Delabeling

BACKGROUND

10% of the U.S. population report a penicillin allergy but >90% can ultimately tolerate penicillin. Confirmation of these allergies in the pediatric population may improve future health outcomes and decrease costs. Referring patients for confirmatory testing is the first step in clarifying penicillin allergies.

OBJECTIVE

Utilizing an educational session and a Best Practices Advisory (BPA) in the electronic medical record (EMR) to increase the number of referrals of patients with listed penicillin allergies from the UCSD Academic General Pediatrics (AGP) clinics to Rady Children's Hospital Allergy clinics.

METHODS

An educational session with attendings and three Plan-Do-Study-Act (PDSA) cycles were completed utilizing a best practice advisory (BPA) alert which triggered for all patients with a documented penicillin-class drug allergy to draw attention and facilitate referral. The BPA was modified at each PDSA cycle based on physician input.

RESULTS

At baseline, 1.9% of referrals to Allergy Clinic were for penicillin-class drug allergies. Following an attending physician educational session, the percentage increased to 13.7%. The BPA was implemented with further increase to 27.8% of all allergy referrals over the course of three PDSA cycles. Not all patients with penicillinclass drug allergies were referred and the reasons were documented when the physicians dismissed the BPA. 35% of the time, physicians did not refer because of time constraints as opposed to patient/parent disinterest which was 8% of the time.

CONCLUSION

Referrals to the allergist for confirmatory testing in patients with listed penicillin allergies increased by more than 10 fold. This study illustrates successful tools to support delabeling.

Sexually Transmitted Infections Treatment Guidelines, 2021

These guidelines for the treatment of persons who have or are at risk for sexually transmitted infections (STIs) were updated by CDC after consultation with professionals knowledgeable in the field of STIs who met in Atlanta, Georgia, June 11-14, 2019. The information in this report updates the 2015 guidelines. These guidelines discuss 1) updated recommendations for treatment of Neisseria gonorrhoeae, Chlamydia trachomatis, and Trichomonas vaginalis; 2) addition of metronidazole to the recommended treatment regimen for pelvic inflammatory disease; 3) alternative treatment options for bacterial vaginosis; 4) management of Mycoplasma genitalium; 5) human papillomavirus vaccine recommendations and counseling messages; 6) expanded risk factors for syphilis testing among pregnant women; 7) one-time testing for hepatitis C infection; 8) evaluation of men who have sex with men after sexual assault; and 9) two-step testing for serologic diagnosis of genital herpes simplex virus. Physicians and other health care providers can use these guidelines to assist in prevention and treatment of STIs.

β-lactam exposure outcome among patients with a documented allergy to penicillins post-implementation of a new electronic medical record system and alerting rules

BACKGROUND

Recent studies suggest that type I hypersensitivity cross-reactivity between β-lactam antibiotics is due to side chain similarity and not the common β-lactam ring. As a result, the prescriber-alerting rules of an electronic medical record (EMR) system were adjusted to only flag prescribers when prescribing penicillins or β-lactams with similar side chains (viz, cephalexin, cefadroxil, and cefoxitin) to patients with a documented allergy to penicillins. This study was conducted to assess and confirm the safety of the adjusted alerting rules; the primary outcome was the prevalence of anaphylaxis on β-lactam re-exposure.

METHODS

Retrospective chart review was conducted for patients who, under the reformed alerting rules, received a β-lactam antibiotic post-documentation of an allergy to penicillins in their EMR from April 2018 to July 2019 at a 268-bed community hospital. Given the volume of eligible patients, a 25% sample was randomly selected for review from initiation of the β-lactam antibiotic up to 30 days post-exposure to determine the prevalence of anaphylaxis.

RESULTS

Of the 325 charts reviewed, 300 patients (92.3%) received a β-lactam antibiotic with a different side chain than penicillins (not alerted on prescribing). Chart review of these 300 patients confirmed no reports of anaphylaxis secondary to β-lactam exposure (0%), and two patients developed non-anaphylactic delayed reactions (rash).

CONCLUSIONS

There were no reports of immediate life-threatening anaphylaxis under the reformed alerting rules, despite 25 patients (7.7%) receiving an alerted drug, such as piperacillin-tazobactam. The reformed alerting rules better reflect current literature and reduce the risk of prescriber-alerting fatigue without compromising patient safety. The occurrence of delayed reactions reinforced the need to monitor for these reactions on β-lactam antibiotic prescribing.

Impact of an Antibiotic Side-Chain-Based Cross-reactivity Chart Combined With Enhanced Allergy Assessment Processes for Surgical Prophylaxis Antimicrobials in Patients With β-Lactam Allergies

BACKGROUND

β-Lactam antibiotics are first-line therapy for perioperative prophylaxis; however, patient-reported allergies often lead to increased prescribing of alternative antibiotics that may increase the incidence of surgical site infections. The R-group side chain of the β-lactam ring is responsible for allergic cross-reactivity and experts recommend the use of β-lactams that are structurally dissimilar.

METHODS

An internally developed, antibiotic side-chain-based cross-reactivity chart was developed and implemented alongside enhanced allergy assessment processes. This single-center, quasi-experimental study analyzed antibiotic prescribing in all adult patients with a documented β-lactam allergy undergoing an inpatient surgical procedure between quartile (Q) 1 (2012)-Q3 (2014) (historical group) and Q3 (2016)-Q3 (2018) (intervention group). Propensity-weighted scoring analyses compared categorical and continuous outcomes. Interrupted time-series analysis further analyzed key outcomes.

RESULTS

A total of 1119 and 1089 patients were included in the historical and intervention cohorts, respectively. There was a significant difference in patients receiving a β-lactam alternative antibiotic between cohorts (84.9% vs 15.1%; P < .001). There was a decrease in 30-day readmissions in the intervention cohort (7.9% vs 6.3%; P = .035); however, there was no difference in the incidence of SSIs in patients readmitted (14.8% vs 13%; P = .765). No significant differences were observed in allergic reactions (0.5% vs 0.3%; P = .323), surgical site infections, in-hospital and 30-day mortality, healthcare facility-onset Clostridiodes difficile infection, acute kidney injury, or hospital costs.

CONCLUSIONS

Implementation of an antibiotic cross-reactivity chart combined with enhanced allergy assessment processes significantly improved the prescribing of β-lactam antibiotics for surgical prophylaxis.

Penicillin Allergy Delabeling: A Multidisciplinary Opportunity

The penicillin allergy label has been consistently linked with deleterious effects that span the health care spectrum, including suboptimal clinical outcomes, the emergence of bacterial resistance, and increased health care expenditures. These risks have recently motivated professional organizations and public health institutes to advocate for the implementation of penicillin allergy delabeling initiatives; however, the burden of delabeling millions of patients is too expansive for any one discipline to bear alone. This review presents the unique perspectives and roles of various stakeholder groups involved in penicillin allergy diagnosis, assessment, and delabeling; we emphasize opportunities, barriers, and promising areas of innovation. We summarize penicillin allergy methods and tools that have proven successful in delabeling efforts. A multidisciplinary approach to delabeling patients with reported penicillin allergy, bolstered by evidence-based clinical practices, is recommended to reduce the risks that associate with the penicillin allergy label.

Assessment of the Frequency of Dual Allergy to Penicillins and Cefazolin: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis

Importance

Cefazolin is the preoperative antibiotic of choice because it is safer and more efficacious than second-line alternatives. Surgical patients labeled as having penicillin allergy are less likely to prophylactically receive cefazolin and more likely to receive clindamycin or vancomycin, which results in higher rates of surgical site infections.

Objective

To examine the incidence of dual allergy to cefazolin and natural penicillins.

Data Sources

MEDLINE/PubMed, Web of Science, and Embase were searched without language restrictions for relevant articles published from database inception until July 31, 2020.

Study Selection

In this systematic review and meta-analysis, a search of MEDLINE/PubMed, Web of Science, and Embase was performed for articles published from database inception to July 31, 2020, for studies that included patients who had index allergies to a natural penicillin and were tested for tolerability to cefazolin or that included patients who had index allergies to cefazolin and were tested for tolerability to a natural penicillin. A total of 3228 studies were identified and 2911 were screened for inclusion.

Data Extraction and Synthesis

Data were independently extracted by 2 authors. Bayesian meta-analysis was used to estimate the frequency of allergic reactions.

Main Outcomes and Measures

Dual allergy to cefazolin and a natural penicillin.

Results

Seventy-seven unique studies met the eligibility criteria, yielding 6147 patients. Cefazolin allergy was identified in 44 participants with a history of penicillin allergy, resulting in a dual allergy meta-analytical frequency of 0.7% (95% credible interval [CrI], 0.1%-1.7%; I2 = 74.9%). Such frequency was lower for participants with unconfirmed (0.6%; 95% CrI, 0.1%-1.3%; I2 = 54.3%) than for those with confirmed penicillin allergy (3.0%; 95% CrI, 0.01%-17.0%; I2 = 88.2%). Thirteen studies exclusively assessed surgical patients (n = 3884), among whom 0.7% (95% CrI, 0%-3.3%; I2 = 85.5%) had confirmed allergy to cefazolin. Low heterogeneity was observed for studies of patients with unconfirmed penicillin allergy who had been exposed to perioperative cefazolin (0.1%; 95% CrI, 0.1%-0.3%; I2 = 13.1%). Penicillin allergy was confirmed in 16 participants with a history of cefazolin allergy, resulting in a meta-analytical frequency of 3.7% (95% CrI, 0.03%-13.3%; I2 = 64.4%). The frequency of penicillin allergy was 4.4% (95% CrI, 0%-23.0%; I2 = 75%) for the 8 studies that exclusively assessed surgical patients allergic to cefazolin.

Conclusions and Relevance

These findings suggest that most patients with a penicillin allergy history may safely receive cefazolin. The exception is patients with confirmed penicillin allergy in whom additional care is warranted.

Assessing Use of a Standardized Allergy History Questionnaire for Patients with Reported Allergy to Penicillin

BACKGROUND

Inappropriate allergy labelling is associated with significant clinical and pharmacoeconomic implications. Detailed antimicrobial allergy assessments represent a key component of antimicrobial stewardship and aid in identifying true type I (immediate hypersensitivity) reactions. The allergy history form currently used at the University Hospital of Northern British Columbia (UHNBC), in Prince George, relies on the assessor's ability to ask appropriate prompting questions to obtain a thorough history, but it may not be sufficient to accurately identify true allergies.

OBJECTIVE

To compare a standardized allergy history questionnaire and the current allergy history form in terms of the quality and quantity of documentation gathered.

METHODS

This prospective observational study involved patients who were admitted to medical and surgical services at UHNBC from November 2018 to January 2019 with a penicillin-class allergy reported on their electronic medical record (EMR). A list of patients with EMR-reported allergies was generated by the hospital's health information software system, and these patients were interviewed using the standardized allergy history questionnaire.

RESULTS

A total of 48 patients were assessed during the study period. Nineteen (40%) of the patients had an inappropriate allergy label on their EMR. Only 36 (75%) had an allergic reaction described on their EMR. Furthermore, only 36 (75%) of the 48 patients had the same allergy recorded on the EMR and on the allergy history form contained in their paper chart, of whom 22 had a documented reaction. The mean time to complete the standardized allergy history questionnaire was 2 minutes.

CONCLUSIONS

At the study institution, documentation of allergy histories was often incomplete. Detailed allergy assessments are the first step in identifying true immunoglobulin E-mediated hypersensitivity reactions. Utilization of a standardized allergy history questionnaire is feasible and may serve to improve documentation and overall antimicrobial stewardship.

Reducing unnecessary antibiotic prescription through implementation of a clinical guideline on self-limiting respiratory tract infections

BACKGROUND

Clinical guidelines (CG) are used to reduce variability in practice when the scientific evidence is sparse or when multiple therapies are available. The development and implementation of evidence-based CG is intended to organize and provide the best available evidence to support clinical decision making in order to improve quality of care. Upper respiratory tract infections (URTI) are the leading cause of misuse of antibiotics and a CG may reduce the unnecessary antibiotic prescription.

METHODS

The aim of this quasi-experimental, before-after study was to analyze the short- and long-term effects of the implementation of a CG to decrease the rate of antibiotic prescription in URTI cases in the emergency department of a third level private hospital in Quito, Ecuador. The study included 444 patients with a main diagnosis of URTI. They were distributed in three groups: a baseline cohort 2011 (n = 114), a first post-implementation cohort 2011 (n = 114), and a later post-implementation cohort 2018 (n = 216). The implementation strategy consisted of five key steps: acceptance of the need for implementation of the CG, dissemination of the CG, an educational campaign, constant feedback, and sustainability of the strategy through continuous training.

RESULTS

The results of this study show a 42.90% of antibiotic prescription rate before the CG implementation. After the implementation of the CG, the prescription rate of antibiotics was significantly reduced by 24.5% (42.9% vs 18.4%, p<0.0001) and the appropriate antibiotic prescription rate was significantly increased by 44.2% (22.4% vs 66.6%, p<0.0001) in the first post-implementation cohort 2011. There was not a significant difference in antibiotic prescription rate and appropriate antibiotic prescription rate between two post-implementation cohorts: 18.4% vs 25.9% (p = 0.125) and 66.6% vs 50% (p = 0.191), respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

The implementation of CGs decreases the rate of antibiotic prescription in URTI cases. The results are remarkable after early implementation, but the effect persists over time. The emphasis must shift from guideline development to strategy implementation.

Safety and efficacy of de-labelling penicillin allergy in adults using direct oral challenge: a systematic review

Background

Approximately 10% of people have an unverified penicillin allergy, with multiple personal and public health consequences.

Objectives

To assess the efficacy and safety of direct oral challenge, without prior skin testing, in this population.

Methods

MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL, the Cochrane Library and Google Scholar were searched from inception to 28 June 2020 (updated November 2020) to find published and unpublished studies that reported direct oral challenge for the purpose of removal of penicillin allergy labels. Population weighted mean was used to calculate the proportion of patients who developed an immediate or delayed reaction to direct oral challenge across the studies.

Results

Thirteen studies were included in the review, with a sample size of 1202 (range 7–328). Studies included inpatient and outpatient cohorts assessed as low risk for true allergy. In pooled analysis of all 13 studies there were 41/1202 (3.41%) mild immediate or delayed reactions to direct oral challenge. The population-weighted mean incidence of immediate or delayed reaction to an oral challenge across studies was also 3.41% (95% CI: 2.38%–4.43%). There were no reports of serious adverse reactions, 96.5% of patients could be de-labelled and many were subsequently successfully treated with penicillin.

Conclusions

Direct oral challenge is safe and effective for de-labelling patients assessed as low risk for true allergy. Non-specialist clinicians competent in using an assessment algorithm can offer evaluation of penicillin allergy labels using direct oral challenge in appropriate patients. These measures will facilitate optimal infection treatment for patients, support antimicrobial stewardship, and minimize antimicrobial resistance.