Achieving the Quadruple Aim to deliver value-based allergy care in an ever-evolving health care system

Serologic measurements for peanut allergy: Predicting clinical severity is complex

Allergist-immunologists use serologic peanut allergy testing to maximize test sensitivity and specificity while minimizing cost and inconvenience. Recent advances toward this goal include a better understanding of specific IgE (sIgE) and component testing, epitope-sIgE assays, and basophil activation testing. Predicting reaction severity with serologic testing is challenged by a range of co-factors that influence reaction severity, such as the amount and form of any allergen consumed and comorbid disease. In 2020, the Allergy Immunology Joint Task Force on Practice Parameters recommended Ara h 2-sIgE as the most cost-effective diagnostic test for peanut allergy because of its superior performance, when compared with skin prick testing and serum IgE. Basophil activation testing, a functional test of allergic response not evaluated in the Joint Task Force on Practice Parameters guideline, is a promising option for both allergy diagnosis and prognosis. Similarly, epitope-sIgE testing may improve prediction of reaction thresholds, but further validation is needed. Despite advances in food allergy testing, many of these tools remain limited by cost, accessibility, and feasibility. In addition, there is a need for further research on how atopic dermatitis may be modifying serologic food allergy severity assessments. Given these limitations, allergy test selection requires a shared decision-making approach so that a patient's values and preferences regarding financial impact, inconvenience, and psychological effects are considered in the context of clinician expertise on the timing and use of optimized testing.

Pharmacoequity and Biologics in the Allergy Clinic: Providing the Right Care, at the Right Time, Every Time, to Everyone

Pharmacoequity refers to equity in access to pharmacotherapy for all patients and is an especially large barrier to biologic agents in patients with allergic diseases. Value-based care models can prompt clinicians to address social determinants of health, promoting pharmacoequity. Pharmacoequity is influenced by numerous factors including socioeconomic status, which may be mediated through insurance status, educational attainment, and access to specialist care. In addition to lower socioeconomic status, race and ethnicity, age, locations isolated from care systems, and off-label indications for biologic agents all constitute barriers to pharmacoequity. Whereas pharmaco-inequity is more apparent for expensive biologics, it also affects many other allergy treatments including epinephrine autoinjectors and SMART for asthma. Current programs aimed at alleviating cost barriers are imperfect. Patient assistance programs, manufacturer-sponsored free drug programs, and rebates often increase the complexity of care, with resultant inequity, particularly for patients with lower health literacy. Ultimately, single silver-bullet solutions are elusive. Long-term improvement instead requires a combination of research, advocacy, and creative problem-solving to design more intelligent and efficient systems that provide timely access to necessary care for every patient, every time.

Patient-Centered Practice Guidelines: GRADEing Evidence to Incorporate Certainty, Balance Between Benefits and Harms, Equity, Feasibility, and Cost-Effectiveness

The practice of medicine in recent years has emphasized the use of evidence-based clinical guidelines to help inform treatment decisions. Since its development in 2004, the GRADE (Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation) approach has offered a systematic process for reviewing and summarizing the certainty of evidence found in the medical literature regarding various treatment options. To develop truly patient-centered care guidelines, this appraisal of the certainty of evidence must be combined with an understanding of the balance between benefits and harms, patient preferences, equity, feasibility, cost-effectiveness, and policy implications. This review examines each of these domains in detail, exploring the process and benefits of developing relevant, patient-focused guidelines directly applicable to the practice of modern medicine.

Facilitating and Inhibiting Factors in the Design, Implementation, and Applicability of Value-Based Payment Models: A Systematic Literature Review

Evidence on the potential for value-based payment models to improve quality of care and ensure more efficient outcomes is limited and mixed. We aim to identify the factors that enhance or inhibit the design, implementation, and application of these models through a systematic literature review. We used the PRISMA guidelines. The facilitating and inhibiting factors were divided into subcategories according to a theoretical framework. We included 143 publications, each reporting multiple factors. Facilitators on objectives and strategies, such as realistic/achievable targets, are reported in 56 studies. Barriers regarding dedicated time and resources (e.g., an excessive amount of time for improvements to manifest) are reported in 25 studies. Consensus within the network regarding objectives and strategies, trust, and good coordination is essential. Health care staff needs to be kept motivated, well-informed, and actively involved. In addition, stakeholders should manage expectations regarding when results are expected to be achieved.

Provision of Food Allergy Care in the United Kingdom and United States: Current Issues and Future Directions

Food allergy (FA) is a growing issue worldwide. The United Kingdom and United States are high-income, industrialized countries with reported increases in FA prevalence over the past few decades. This review compares delivery of FA care in the United Kingdom and United States and each country's response to the heightened demand and disparities for FA services. In the United Kingdom, allergy specialists are scarce and general practitioners (GPs) provide most allergy care. Whereas the United States has more allergists per capita than the United Kingdom, there is still a shortage of allergy services owing to the greater reliance on specialist care for FA in America and wide geographic variation in access to allergist services. Currently, generalists in these countries lack the specialty training and equipment to diagnose and manage FA optimally. Moving forward, the United Kingdom aims to enhance training for GPs so they may provide better quality frontline allergy care. In addition, the United Kingdom is implementing a new tier of semi-specialized GPs and increasing cross-center collaboration through clinical networks. The United Kingdom and United States aim to increase the number of FA specialists, which is critical at a time of rapidly expanding management options for allergic and immunologic diseases requiring clinical expertise and shared decision-making to select appropriate therapies. While these countries aim to grow their supply of quality FA services actively, further efforts to build clinical networks and perhaps recruit international medical graduates and expand telehealth services are necessary to reduce disparities in access to care. For the United Kingdom in particular, increasing quality services will require additional support from the leadership of the centralized National Health Service, which remains challenging.

Shared decision-making, communicating risk, and food allergy in 2023

Background

Across the practice of allergy and clinical immunology, disruptive innovations have accelerated the adoption of shared decision-making (SDM) to improve the health of patients and populations, particularly with regard to food allergy prevention and management of food allergy and anaphylaxis.

Methods

A narrative review was performed to describe recent innovations in shared decision-making, risk communication, and food allergy.

Results

Several challenges, primarily related to the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic and misinformation campaigns, have catalyzed adaptations to evolve clinical care. Recent pressures have facilitated the rapid adoption of telemedicine. In 2023, many allergist/immunologists routinely incorporate both in-person and virtual visits to contextually deliver value-based care to each patient. SDM may occur in a hybrid model that incorporates both in-person and virtual encounters, with many patients experiencing benefit from a combination approach. This may be facilitated by leveraging previsit web-based SDM tools. Whether in person or by telemedicine, effective risk communication to avoid cognitive overload while appreciating population variation in numeracy is key to competent implementation of SDM. Misinformation continues to disproportionately harm patients who belong to groups that encourage denial of evidence-based medical recommendations and COVID-19 vaccination intent correlating with sociopolitical factors. Still, strategies to address misinformation that leverage empathy, respect, and expertise can help to mitigate these effects. Physician wellness is a key component to realization of the Quadruple Aim of health care, and the use of positive framing and appreciative inquiry can help to optimize outcomes and improve value in health care.

Conclusion

SDM is an important component to consider when incorporating recent innovations in allergy and clinical immunology care, particularly in the setting of contextual and conditional medical recommendations. Effective risk communication is critical to SDM that is truly reflective of patient goals and preferences, and can be facilitated through in-person encounters, telemedicine, and hybrid models. It is important to foster physician wellness as a component of the Quadruple Aim, particularly in the recent pandemic climate of misinformation and denial of evidence-based medicine within large groups of society.

The Impact of Value-Based Payment Models for Networks of Care and Transmural Care: A Systematic Literature Review

INTRODUCTION

Value-based healthcare has potential for cost control and quality improvement. To assess this, we review the evidence on the impact of value-based payment (VBP) models in the context of networks of care (NOC) and transmural care.

METHODS

We used the PRISMA guidelines for this systematic literature review. We searched eight databases in July 2021. Subsequently, we conducted title and abstract and full-text screenings, and extracted information in an extraction matrix. Based on this, we assessed the evidence on the effects of VBP models on clinical outcomes, patient-reported outcomes/experiences, organization-related outcomes/experiences, and costs. Additionally, we reviewed the facilitating and inhibiting factors per VBP model.

FINDINGS

Among articles studying shared savings and pay-for-performance models, most outline positive effects on both clinical and cost outcomes, such as preventable hospitalizations and total expenditures, respectively. Most studies show no change in patient satisfaction and access to care when adopting VBP models. Providers' opinions towards the models are frequently negative. Transparency and communication among involved stakeholders are found to be key facilitating factors, transversal to all models. Additionally, a lack of trust is an inhibitor found in all VBP models, together with inadequate targets and insufficient incentives. In bundled payment and pay-for-performance models, complexity in the structure of the program and lack of experience in implementing required mechanisms are key inhibitors.

CONCLUSIONS

The overall positive effect on clinical and cost outcomes validates the success of VBP models. The mostly negative effects on organization-reported outcomes/experiences are corroborated by findings regarding providers' lack of awareness, trust, and engagement with the model. This may be justified by their exclusion from the design of the models, decreasing their sense of ownership and, therefore, motivation. Incentives, targets, benchmarks, and quality measures, if adequately designed, seem to be important facilitators, and if lacking or inadequate, they are key inhibitors. These are prominent facilitators and inhibitors for P4P and shared savings models but not as prominent for bundled payments. The complexity of the scheme and lack of experience are prominent inhibitors in all VBP models, since all require changes in several areas, such as behavioral, process, and infrastructure.

Cost assessment of allergy procedures to improve high-value care implementation

Background: Oral challenges and desensitizations are regularly performed by allergy/immunology physicians. However, there is limited research that has evaluated their cost-effectiveness and overall health-care-related value. Objective: The objective was to analyze the costs of oral challenges and desensitizations by clinician type (including allergy/immunology physicians, other physicians, and certified registered nurse practitioners [CRNP] and physician assistants [PA]), and by geographic distribution in the United States. Methods: By using a de-identified commercial database of medical encounters, we identified all claims for outpatient oral challenges and desensitizations in 2017 and grouped them separately by clinician type and by U.S. Census region. We used analysis of variance to test for cost differences between these two groupings. Results: Allergy/immunology physicians performed the majority of oral challenges (74.36%) with a mean cost of $161, significantly less than that of other physicians ($280). Allergy/immunology physicians also performed the majority of desensitizations (84.48%) with a mean cost of $335, significantly higher than that of CRNPs/PAs ($280); other physicians were reimbursed significantly more than both groups ($410). By geographic region, the mean costs of oral challenges in the Northeast ($212) and the West ($210) were significantly higher than those of other regions, whereas the mean cost of desensitizations was significantly highest in the West ($381). Conclusion: Allergy/immunology physicians and CRNPs/PAs cost the least with respect to oral challenges, whereas CRNPs/PAs cost the least with respect to desensitizations. The Northeast and the West regions provided the highest cost for oral challenges, whereas the West was most expensive in terms of desensitizations. Further knowledge and examination of these reimbursement patterns are crucial in understanding their relative value and the impact on delivery of high-value care.

The Revenge of Unintended Consequences of Anaphylaxis-Risk Overdiagnosis: How Far We Have Come and How Far We Have to Go

Overdiagnosis of anaphylaxis risk is an underappreciated aspect of anaphylaxis prevention. Whereas the benefits of anaphylaxis-risk prevention are well known, potential harms resulting from preemptive approaches to mitigate anaphylaxis-risk are not insignificant. Still, great progress has been made in recent years to avoid the unintended consequences of anaphylaxis-risk overdiagnosis. Reflection on recent advances in the use of diagnostic testing, as well as the application of diagnostic labels, provides an important perspective to understand how far the specialty of allergy and immunology has come in improving the lives of patients and families. Examples of recent paradigm shifts in anaphylaxis-risk management include approaches to peanut allergy prevention without screening, deferral of corticosteroids to prevent biphasic anaphylaxis reactions, reevaluation of reflex use of emergency medical services for resolved community anaphylaxis, and an approach to penicillin allergy delabeling with direct oral challenge. Routine medical practices to decrease anaphylaxis risk can have lifelong impacts for patients-beyond just preventing anaphylaxis. As our understanding of these trade-offs evolves, it becomes necessary to weigh both the benefits and the harms of past management approaches. Because medicine remains a science of uncertainty and an art of probability, a critical approach to risk mitigation remains necessary to find the often-elusive balance in anaphylaxis prevention.

An update on international practice variation in peanut introduction: conundrums, controversies, and a new direction

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Introduction of peanut during the first year of life is associated with an 81% relative risk reduction of developing peanut allergy in infants with severe eczema, egg allergy, or both. However, significant international variation exists in risk stratification prior to peanut introduction.

RECENT FINDINGS

A policy-level screening approach, such as the one in the United States, is not practical and is associated with higher costs and more cases of peanut allergy over time, in contrast to international models that recommend universal early introduction without prescreening. In Australia, population-level efforts to introduce peanut early without screening have demonstrated high rates of peanut introduction before 12 months of age and low rates of severe allergic reactions. In contrast, screening prior to peanut introduction in the United States is associated with 'screening creep' - the tendency of clinicians to test populations where screening is not recommended.

SUMMARY

Early peanut introduction can reduce the risk of developing food allergy and is more effective without a risk-based screening approach. In some circumstances, shared clinical decision-making can facilitate food allergy prevention in a manner consistent with family values and preferences.

The role of the allergist/immunologist in the COVID-19 pandemic: A Janus-faced presentation

Background: Following its initial description in December 2019 in Wuhan, China, coronavirus-2 (COVID-19) has rapidly progressed into a worldwide pandemic, affecting millions of lives. Although every specialty of medicine has been affected, the field of allergy/immunology holds a special place in the battle against this modern-day plague. Because of the specialized training in allergy and clinical immunology, and the familiarity with comorbid contributing conditions, the allergist/immunologist is uniquely poised to play a major role both in the delivery of specialized therapeutic procedures and practices that can improve the health of patients with COVID-19 as well as in the use of forthcoming vaccines for the prevention of its spread. Objective: The purpose of this report is to examine the current body of evidence supporting the two phases of infection and inflammation that influence the pathogenesis of COVID-19 and to provide a classification of COVID-19 disease presentations and potential therapeutic targets with which the allergist/immunologist has particular expertise. Methods: This article was based on a literature review of articles published in PubMed related to COVID-19 and the immune response, and the author's own research and clinical experiences in the field of immunology. Results: Currently, the management of COVID-19 disease is being directed by a preventive strategy based on social distancing, quarantine, and facemasks to reduce the spread of the virus. Numerous clinical trials are being initiated to identify effective treatments for COVID-19 and are directed toward treatment of the two phases of infection and inflammation that influence the pathogenesis of COVID-19. An important resource for the allergist/immunologist is the COVID-19 Treatment Guidelines Panel (COVID-19 TGP), a National Institutes of Health sponsored panel of U.S. physicians, statisticians, and other experts, which has developed a set of continuously updated treatment guidelines intended for clinicians caring for patients during the rapidly evolving COVID-19 pandemic. Conclusion: COVID-19 is unique among other infectious diseases because, in many cases, the host immune inflammatory response can cause greater harm to the individual who is infected than the pathogen itself. In this report, the pathogenesis of COVID-19 and the influence it has on COVID-19 presentations is reviewed, together with recommended potential therapeutic targets and treatment recommendations.

Cost-Effectiveness of Biologics for Allergic Diseases

The introduction of specific humanized monoclonal antibodies over the past 20 years has dramatically changed the treatment of allergic diseases. At present, 5 mAbs are licensed for treating moderate to severe allergic and eosinophilic asthma, atopic dermatitis, chronic spontaneous urticaria, chronic sinusitis with nasal polyps, and eosinophilic granulomatosis with polyangiitis. Given the high costs of biologics, understanding their cost-effectiveness is critical. As new biologics are developed and new indications are approved for existing biologics, the use of biologics for allergic diseases will increase. Conducting cost-effectiveness evaluations in parallel to efficacy and effectiveness trials will help patients, providers, payers, and policymakers in decision making.