1
|
Hare WM, Belete M, Brayne AB, Daykin H, Everson M, Ratcliffe A, Samuel K, Sorrell L, Rockett M. Patient-reported outcomes, postoperative pain and pain relief after day case surgery (POPPY): methodology for a prospective, multicentre observational study. Anaesthesia 2024. [PMID: 39468775 DOI: 10.1111/anae.16460] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Accepted: 09/23/2024] [Indexed: 10/30/2024]
Abstract
BACKGROUND In the UK, approximately 70% of surgical procedures are undertaken as day-cases. Little information exists about recovery from day-case surgery, yet international data highlights patients are at risk of developing significant longer-term health problems including chronic post-surgical pain and persistent postoperative opioid use. The Patient-reported Outcomes, Postoperative Pain and pain relief after daY case surgery (POPPY) study was a national prospective multicentre observational study, measuring short- and longer-term patient-reported outcomes, postoperative pain and pain relief after day-case surgery. METHODS This was a collaborative project led by resident anaesthetists under the Research and Audit Federation of Trainees umbrella. Adult day-case surgical patients were recruited on the day of surgery. Baseline data including patient characteristics; procedure details; pre-operative analgesic use; pre-existing pain; and quality of life scores were recorded. Patients were followed up through automated short message service messages. Short-term (postoperative days 1, 3 and 7) outcomes included: quality of recovery; pain severity; impact of pain on function; and analgesic use. Longer-term outcomes (postoperative day 97) included: quality of life; analgesic use; incidence of chronic post-surgical pain; and incidence persistent postoperative opioid use. Additional outcomes were completed by those patients with chronic post-surgical pain and persistent postoperative opioid use, with 30 patients recruited to a qualitative semi-structured interview study exploring postoperative expectations, recovery, postoperative pain and opioid use. RESULTS An embedded pilot study at four sites recruited 129 patients. Responses to the automated short message service were gained from 129 patients (100%) at day 1; 116 (89.9%) at day 3; 108 (83.7%) at day 7; and 77 (59.7%) at day 97 postoperatively. The pilot enabled refinement of the methods and processes before the national roll out. CONCLUSION This paper outlines the methods for the POPPY study, the largest UK multicentre prospective observational study considering short- and longer-term outcomes following day-case surgery.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- William M Hare
- South West Anaesthesia Research Matrix, UK
- Royal Devon University Healthcare NHS Foundation Trust, Exeter, UK
| | - Martha Belete
- Torbay and South Devon NHS Foundation Trust, Torbay, UK
- Research and Audit Federation of Trainees, UK
| | - Adam B Brayne
- South West Anaesthesia Research Matrix, UK
- University Hospitals Plymouth NHS Trust, Plymouth, UK
| | - Harriet Daykin
- South West Anaesthesia Research Matrix, UK
- Royal Devon University Healthcare NHS Foundation Trust, Exeter, UK
| | - Matthew Everson
- South West Anaesthesia Research Matrix, UK
- Royal Devon University Healthcare NHS Foundation Trust, Exeter, UK
| | - Anna Ratcliffe
- South West Anaesthesia Research Matrix, UK
- University Hospitals Plymouth NHS Trust, Plymouth, UK
| | | | - Lexy Sorrell
- Faculty of Health, University of Plymouth, Plymouth, UK
| | - Mark Rockett
- University Hospitals Plymouth NHS Trust, Plymouth, UK
- Faculty of Health, University of Plymouth, Plymouth, UK
| |
Collapse
|
2
|
Sexton ME, Kuruvilla ME. Management of Penicillin Allergy in the Perioperative Setting. Antibiotics (Basel) 2024; 13:157. [PMID: 38391543 PMCID: PMC10886174 DOI: 10.3390/antibiotics13020157] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 12/15/2023] [Revised: 01/22/2024] [Accepted: 01/23/2024] [Indexed: 02/24/2024] Open
Abstract
The selection of perioperative antibiotic prophylaxis is challenging in patients with a history of penicillin allergy; as such, we present a literature review exploring current best practices and the associated supporting evidence, as well as areas for future research. Guidelines recommend the use of alternative agents in patients with an IgE-mediated hypersensitivity reaction, but those alternative agents are associated with worse outcomes, including an increased risk of surgical site infection, and higher cost. More recent data suggest that the risk of cross-reactivity between penicillins and cephalosporins, particularly cefazolin, is extremely low, and that cefazolin can be used safely in most penicillin-allergic patients. Studies have therefore explored how best to implement first-line cefazolin use in patients with a penicillin allergy label. A variety of interventions, including preoperative allergy de-labeling with incorporation of penicillin skin testing, use of patient risk-stratification questionnaires, and utilization of clinician algorithms to guide antibiotic selection intraoperatively, have all been shown to significantly increase cefazolin utilization without a corresponding increase in adverse events. Further studies are needed to clarify the most effective interventions and implementation strategies, as well as to evaluate whether patients with severe delayed hypersensitivity reactions to penicillin should continue to be excluded from receipt of other beta-lactams.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Mary Elizabeth Sexton
- Division of Infectious Diseases, Emory University School of Medicine, Atlanta, GA 30322, USA
| | - Merin Elizabeth Kuruvilla
- Department of Internal Medicine, Emory University School of Medicine, Atlanta, GA 30322, USA
- Novartis Pharmaceuticals, East Hanover, NJ 07936, USA
| |
Collapse
|
3
|
Makris M, Papapostolou N, Pasali M, Aggelidis X, Chliva C, Katoulis AC. Patient Adherence to Written Instructions following Complete Allergological Evaluation for Suspected Beta-Lactam Allergy: A Tertiary Hospital Study in Greece. J Pers Med 2023; 13:1719. [PMID: 38138946 PMCID: PMC10745116 DOI: 10.3390/jpm13121719] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 10/13/2023] [Revised: 12/05/2023] [Accepted: 12/15/2023] [Indexed: 12/24/2023] Open
Abstract
BACKGROUND Beta-lactam (BL) antibiotics are among the most prescribed groups of drugs worldwide and have been implicated in a variety of allergic reactions. There is a paucity of literature regarding patient adherence to prescribed instructions following comprehensive allergy assessments. OBJECTIVE The objective was to follow up the clinical course of BL allergy in patients who underwent thorough allergological investigation for suspected BL allergy at a tertiary hospital and ascertain patients' compliance with the provided written instructions. MATERIALS An observational study in patients referred for suspected BL allergy who underwent a comprehensive allergy workup (in vivo ± in vitro tests, DPT in culprit and/or alternative BL) and who subsequently received written instructions was conducted. Data on the nature of the reported drug hypersensitivity reaction, the culprit BL drug, the allergological workup, and the detailed instructions provided in a written drug allergy report were collected retrospectively. Patients' compliance with the instructions was recorded by a telephone survey using a pre-defined questionnaire. RESULTS Among the 212 patients meeting the inclusion criteria, 87 patients (72.4% women; mean age 50.1 years; age range 6-84 years) responded to the telephone survey and were included in this study. Surprisingly, 45 out of 87 (51.7%) patients did not adhere to the written instructions. The primary factor contributing to non-compliance was the fear of re-occurrence of a drug-induced allergic reaction (personal and/or triggered by their treating physician reluctance), accounting for 77.7% of cases. The analysis demonstrated that the initial reaction's severity and type, as well as the outcomes of skin testing, did not correlate with compliance to instructions (p > 0.05). Surprisingly enough, a drug provocation test (DPT), irrespectively of the result, emerged as a negative predictor for adherence, with only 40.6% of DPT patients complying compared to 77.8% of those who did not undergo DPT (p = 0.005; odds ratio = 0.195; 95% confidence interval: 0.058-0.655). Variables such as performing DPT with alternative or incriminated drugs or the result of the DPT (positive-negative) were not associated with patient compliance. Conversely, the type of instructions provided exhibited a noteworthy correlation with compliance. Patients who were explicitly instructed to entirely avoid all BL antibiotics demonstrated markedly higher adherence rates (83.3%) compared to those who were advised to have a partial or complete release of BLs (31.8% and 58.1%, respectively; p < 0.05). Notably, among compliant patients who received either the original culprit drug or the alternative (32 out of 87, 36.7%), no allergic reactions were reported. In contrast, among the 12 patients with written avoidance of all BLs, subsequent BL intake led to immediate reactions (Grade I and IV) in 2 patients (16.6%). CONCLUSIONS A notable disparity in patient adherence to written instructions prohibiting or releasing beta-lactams was demonstrated. Less than half of the patients ultimately complied with the provided instructions, underscoring the need for tailored patients' education and strategies to improve adherence in the management of suspected BL allergy.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Michael Makris
- Allergy Unit “D. Kalogeromitros”, 2nd Department of Dermatology and Venereology, Medical School, University General Hospital “Attikon”, National and Kapodistrian University of Athens, 12462 Athens, Greece (X.A.)
- 2nd Department of Dermatology and Venereology, Medical School, University General Hospital “Attikon”, National and Kapodistrian University of Athens, 12462 Athens, Greece;
| | - Niki Papapostolou
- Allergy Unit “D. Kalogeromitros”, 2nd Department of Dermatology and Venereology, Medical School, University General Hospital “Attikon”, National and Kapodistrian University of Athens, 12462 Athens, Greece (X.A.)
- 2nd Department of Dermatology and Venereology, Medical School, University General Hospital “Attikon”, National and Kapodistrian University of Athens, 12462 Athens, Greece;
| | - Maria Pasali
- Allergy Unit “D. Kalogeromitros”, 2nd Department of Dermatology and Venereology, Medical School, University General Hospital “Attikon”, National and Kapodistrian University of Athens, 12462 Athens, Greece (X.A.)
| | - Xenofon Aggelidis
- Allergy Unit “D. Kalogeromitros”, 2nd Department of Dermatology and Venereology, Medical School, University General Hospital “Attikon”, National and Kapodistrian University of Athens, 12462 Athens, Greece (X.A.)
- 2nd Department of Dermatology and Venereology, Medical School, University General Hospital “Attikon”, National and Kapodistrian University of Athens, 12462 Athens, Greece;
| | - Caterina Chliva
- Allergy Unit “D. Kalogeromitros”, 2nd Department of Dermatology and Venereology, Medical School, University General Hospital “Attikon”, National and Kapodistrian University of Athens, 12462 Athens, Greece (X.A.)
- 2nd Department of Dermatology and Venereology, Medical School, University General Hospital “Attikon”, National and Kapodistrian University of Athens, 12462 Athens, Greece;
| | - Alexander C. Katoulis
- 2nd Department of Dermatology and Venereology, Medical School, University General Hospital “Attikon”, National and Kapodistrian University of Athens, 12462 Athens, Greece;
| |
Collapse
|
4
|
Stundner O, Adams MCB, Fronczek J, Kaura V, Li L, Allen ML, Vail EA. Academic anaesthesiology: a global perspective on training, support, and future development of early career researchers. Br J Anaesth 2023; 131:871-881. [PMID: 37684165 PMCID: PMC10636519 DOI: 10.1016/j.bja.2023.07.030] [Citation(s) in RCA: 4] [Impact Index Per Article: 4.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 05/13/2023] [Revised: 07/26/2023] [Accepted: 07/27/2023] [Indexed: 09/10/2023] Open
Abstract
As anaesthesiologists face increasing clinical demands and a limited and competitive funding environment for academic work, the sustainability of academic anaesthesiologists has never been more tenuous. Yet, the speciality needs academic anaesthesiologists in many roles, extending beyond routine clinical duties. Anaesthesiologist educators, researchers, and administrators are required not only to train future generations but also to lead innovation and expansion of anaesthesiology and related specialities, all to improve patient care. This group of early career researchers with geographically distinct training and practice backgrounds aim to highlight the diversity in clinical and academic training and career development pathways for anaesthesiologists globally. Although multiple routes to success exist, one common thread is the need for consistent support of strong mentors and sponsors. Moreover, to address inequitable opportunities, we emphasise the need for diversity and inclusivity through global collaboration and exchange that aims to improve access to research training and participation. We are optimistic that by focusing on these fundamental principles, we can help build a more resilient and sustainable future for academic anaesthesiologists around the world.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Ottokar Stundner
- Department of Anesthesiology and Intensive Care, Innsbruck Medical University, Innsbruck, Austria.
| | - Meredith C B Adams
- Departments of Anesthesiology, Biomedical Informatics, Pharmacology & Physiology, and Public Health Sciences, Wake Forest School of Medicine, Winston-Salem, NC, USA
| | - Jakub Fronczek
- Centre for Intensive Care and Perioperative Medicine, Jagiellonian University Medical College, Kraków, Poland
| | - Vikas Kaura
- Leeds Institute of Medical Research at St James's, Faculty of Medicine and Health, University of Leeds, Leeds, UK
| | - Li Li
- Department of Anesthesiology & Pain Medicine, University of Washington, Seattle Children's Hospital, Seattle, WA, USA
| | - Megan L Allen
- Department of Anaesthesia and Pain Management, The Royal Melbourne Hospital and Department of Critical Care, The University of Melbourne, Melbourne, Australia
| | - Emily A Vail
- Department of Anesthesiology & Critical Care, Perelman School of Medicine, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA, USA
| |
Collapse
|
5
|
Wade S, Marshall E. A pharmacist-led penicillin allergy de-labelling project within a preoperative assessment clinic: the low-hanging fruit is within reach. J Hosp Infect 2023; 139:1-5. [PMID: 37343770 DOI: 10.1016/j.jhin.2023.06.012] [Citation(s) in RCA: 1] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 06/08/2022] [Revised: 05/24/2023] [Accepted: 06/05/2023] [Indexed: 06/23/2023]
Abstract
BACKGROUND Having a false penicillin-allergy label is linked to longer hospital stays and to an increased risk of Clostridioides difficile and meticillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus infection. AIM To assess a penicillin-allergy de-labelling tool designed for use by the non-allergist. METHODS Patients attending the surgical preoperative assessment clinic (POAC) at a large UK teaching hospital, who reported a penicillin allergy, were directly de-labelled by nursing or pharmacy staff, where appropriate. A penicillin-allergy de-labelling tool designed for use by the non-allergist was adapted and applied; nursing staff were provided with supporting information and education to enable removal of spurious labels. Antimicrobial pharmacists (AMPs) provided follow-up, cross-checked prophylactic antibiotics administered, interrogated clinical notes, and telephoned patients following their surgery, for details of any adverse reactions suffered. FINDINGS A total of 163 patients reporting a penicillin allergy were identified for intervention. Twenty-nine (17.8%) patients reported a penicillin-allergy history appropriate for direct de-labelling, of whom eight (27.6%) declined to consent. The remaining 21 patients (12.8%) were directly de-labelled, with 12 (7.4%) patients consenting during their POAC appointment; the remaining nine (5.5%) patients were consented and de-labelled after their surgery by an AMP. CONCLUSION The POAC was identified as an appropriate location and time-point in the patient pathway to enable the direct removal of spurious penicillin-allergy labels prior to surgery. Results suggest that this could be undertaken by nursing staff, although support from AMPs enabled a greater number of patients to be de-labelled.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- S Wade
- University Hospitals Bristol & Weston NHS Foundation Trust, Marlborough Street, Bristol, UK.
| | - E Marshall
- University Hospitals Bristol & Weston NHS Foundation Trust, Marlborough Street, Bristol, UK
| |
Collapse
|
6
|
McCullagh IJ, Salas B, Teodorczuk A, Callaghan M. Modifiable risk factors for post-operative delirium in older adults undergoing major non-cardiac elective surgery: a multi-centre, trainee delivered observational cohort feasibility study and trainee survey. BMC Geriatr 2023; 23:436. [PMID: 37454100 PMCID: PMC10349417 DOI: 10.1186/s12877-023-04122-7] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 12/09/2022] [Accepted: 06/20/2023] [Indexed: 07/18/2023] Open
Abstract
BACKGROUND Post-operative delirium (POD) is an acute brain failure which may occur following major surgery, with serious implications for participants and caregivers. Evidence regarding optimal anaesthetic management for older participants at higher risk of POD is conflicting. We conducted a feasibility study of our protocol in 5 centres to guide sample size estimation and inform future recruitment strategies for a larger cohort study. METHODS Participants aged over 65 and scheduled for major surgery were recruited. They were assessed pre-operatively for delirium, cognitive impairment, depression, comorbidity, activity levels and alcohol use. Details of management during surgery, all medications and complications were recorded by a trainee-led research team. Participants were assessed for delirium in the immediate recovery period and then on post-operative days 1-4 using the 4 question attention test (4AT) with complications assessed at day 4 using the post-operative morbidity survey (POMS). Primary outcomes were the incident rates of POD. Secondary outcomes were number of eligible patients, recruitment rates and retention rates throughout the study, time required for data collection, preoperative risk factors assessment and daily postoperative delirium assessments. Also to assess the added value of employing the regional trainee research network (INCARNNET) to deliver the study. Specifically, what proportion of patient consent, data collection and post-operative testing is performed by anaesthesia trainees from this group, especially the success of weekend delirium assessment by trainees? A survey was completed at the end of the study by the trainees involved regarding their involvement in the study. RESULTS Ninety-five participants were recruited, of whom 93 completed the study. Overall, POD occurred in 9 patients. Of these, three were detected in recovery and six on post-op days 1-4. Median length of stay was 6 days. Recruitment rates were high in all but one site. 59 (62%) participants were consented by trainees and 189 (63%) of post op delirium assessments were performed by trainees. A total of six patients declined the study (in a follow up survey of trainees). Pre-existing cognitive impairment, depression and problem drinking were detected in 4(4.3%), 3(3.2%) and 5(5.37%) participants, respectively. Co-morbidity was common with 55(59%) in class three or four of the geriatric index of morbidity. Overall, from a total of 641 data points, levels of missing data were as follows, site A = 9.3%, B = 13.5%, C = 15.4%, D = 10.9%, E = 11.1% (data could not be completed retrospectively). CONCLUSIONS A multi-centre observational cohort study of delirium carried out by UK trainee anaesthetists is feasible. Patients are content to undergo day of surgery consent and multiple short questionnaires pre-operatively. Proposed data, especially pharmacological, should be carefully considered for their relevance to modifiable mechanisms that can lead to POD. Future research to enable prognostic modelling of POD should involve large scale cohort studies of enriched populations to capture a higher POD incidence. POD remains a common complication in older persons undergoing major surgery in the UK and studies of interventions are urgently needed. TRIAL REGISTRATION All methods were carried out in accordance with relevant guidelines and regulations. The study was retrospectively registered with ISRCTN94663125 on 07/02/2018.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Iain J McCullagh
- Newcastle Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust, Newcastle upon Tyne, UK.
- Newcastle University, Newcastle upon Tyne, UK.
| | - Barbara Salas
- Newcastle Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust, Newcastle upon Tyne, UK
| | - Andrew Teodorczuk
- Faculty of Medicine, University of Queensland, Brisbane, Australia
- Metro North Mental Health, The Prince Charles Hospital, Brisbane, QLD, Australia
- School of Medicine and Dentistry, University of Queensland, Brisbane, Australia
| | - Mark Callaghan
- Newcastle Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust, Newcastle upon Tyne, UK
| |
Collapse
|
7
|
Savic L. Response to Bennett et al. Clin Exp Allergy 2023; 53:376-377. [PMID: 36562260 DOI: 10.1111/cea.14270] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 12/09/2022] [Accepted: 12/10/2022] [Indexed: 12/24/2022]
Affiliation(s)
- Louise Savic
- Department of Anaesthesia, Leeds Teaching Hospitals NHS Trust, Leeds, UK
| |
Collapse
|
8
|
Savic L, Ardern-Jones M, Avery A, Cook T, Denman S, Farooque S, Garcez T, Gold R, Jay N, Krishna MT, Leech S, McKibben S, Nasser S, Premchand N, Sandoe J, Sneddon J, Warner A. BSACI guideline for the set-up of penicillin allergy de-labelling services by non-allergists working in a hospital setting. Clin Exp Allergy 2022; 52:1135-1141. [PMID: 36128691 DOI: 10.1111/cea.14217] [Citation(s) in RCA: 25] [Impact Index Per Article: 12.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 05/04/2022] [Revised: 06/13/2022] [Accepted: 06/30/2022] [Indexed: 01/26/2023]
Abstract
The Standards of Care Committee of the British Society for Allergy and Clinical Immunology (BSACI) and a committee of experts and key stakeholders have developed this guideline for the evaluation and testing of patients with an unsubstantiated label of penicillin allergy. The guideline is intended for UK clinicians who are not trained in allergy or immunology, but who wish to develop a penicillin allergy de-labelling service for their patients. It is intended to supplement the BSACI 2015 guideline "Management of allergy to penicillin and other beta-lactams" and therefore does not detail the epidemiology or aetiology of penicillin allergy, as this is covered extensively in the 2015 guideline (1). The guideline is intended for use only in patients with a label of penicillin allergy and does not apply to other beta-lactam allergies. The recommendations include a checklist to identify patients at low risk of allergy and a framework for the conduct of drug provocation testing by non-allergists. There are separate sections for adults and paediatrics within the guideline, in recognition of the common differences in reported allergy history and likelihood of true allergy.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Louise Savic
- Department of Anaesthesia, Leeds Teaching Hospitals NHS Trust, Leeds, UK
| | - Michael Ardern-Jones
- Faculty of Medicine, University of Southampton, Southamptom, UK.,Department of Dermatology, University Hospitals Southampton NHS Foundation Trust, Southamptom, UK
| | - Anthony Avery
- Centre for Academic Primary Care, School of Medicine, University of Nottingham, Nottingham, UK
| | - Tim Cook
- Department of Anaesthesia and Intensive Care, Royal United Hospitals Bath NHS Foundation Trust, Bath, UK
| | - Sarah Denman
- Medicines Management and Pharmacy Services, Leeds Teaching Hospitals NHS Trust, Leeds, UK
| | - Sophie Farooque
- Department of Allergy, Imperial College Healthcare NHS Trust, London, UK
| | - Tomaz Garcez
- Dept of Immunology, Manchester University NHS Foundation Trust, Manchester, UK
| | | | - Nicola Jay
- Department of Paediatric Allergy, Sheffield Childrens NHS Foundation Trust, Sheffield, UK
| | - Mamidipudi Thirumala Krishna
- Department of Allergy and Immunology, University Hospitals Birmingham NHS Foundation Trust, Birmingham, UK.,Institute of Immunology and Immunotherapy, University of Birmingham, Birmingham, UK
| | - Sue Leech
- Department of Paedaitric Allergy, Kings College Hospital NHS Foundation Trust, London, UK
| | - Shauna McKibben
- Department of Asthma and Allergy, Imperial College Healthcare NHS Trust, London, UK
| | - Shuaib Nasser
- Department of Allergy, Cambridge University Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust, Cambridge, UK
| | - Nikhil Premchand
- Department of Clinical Infection, Northumbria Healthcare NHS Foundation Trust, Newcastle, UK
| | - Jonathan Sandoe
- Leeds Institute of Medical Research, University of Leeds, Leeds, UK.,Department of Microbiology, Leeds Teaching Hospitals NHS Trust, Leeds, UK
| | - Jacqueline Sneddon
- British Society for Antimicrobial Chemotherapy, Birmingham, UK.,Health Improvement Scotland, Glasgow, UK
| | | |
Collapse
|
9
|
Wang XM, Kennard L, Rutkowski K, Bruco MEF, Mirakian R, Wagner A. Amoxicillin hypersensitivity: patient outcomes in a seven-year retrospective study. Ann Allergy Asthma Immunol 2022; 129:507-514.e2. [PMID: 35788420 DOI: 10.1016/j.anai.2022.06.021] [Citation(s) in RCA: 1] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 12/29/2021] [Revised: 06/18/2022] [Accepted: 06/22/2022] [Indexed: 10/17/2022]
Abstract
BACKGROUND The beta-lactam antibiotic amoxicillin and the beta-lactamase inhibitor clavulanic acid in combination with amoxicillin are known to both cause immediate and non-immediate type hypersensitivity. OBJECTIVE To characterize a large cohort of patients with a history of amoxicillin or amoxicillin-clavulanic acid hypersensitivity. METHODS Retrospective analysis of demographics, presentation, investigation, and management of 331 patients presenting to one allergy center with a history of hypersensitivity to amoxicillin or amoxicillin-clavulanic acid. RESULTS Hypersensitivity was confirmed in 37/221 (17%) patients who took amoxicillin and 47/110 (43%) patients who took amoxicillin-clavulanic acid as the index drug. In immediate hypersensitivity, skin testing confirmed the diagnosis in 66/139 (47%) patients. Penicillin cross-reactivity was observed in 16/36 (44%). 13/16 (81%) cross-reactive patients reacted to amoxicillin-clavulanic acid as the index drug. All skin test negative patients (73/139) underwent drug provocation. The negative predictive value of skin tests was 89%. In non-immediate hypersensitivity, delayed intradermal tests confirmed diagnosis in 12/170 (7%). 8/12 (67%) skin test positive patients presented with DRESS. All skin test negative patients (158/170) underwent drug provocation. The negative predictive value of skin tests was 95%. Penicillin cross-reactivity was observed in 3/12 (25%). Ten patients were diagnosed with hypersensitivity to clavulanic acid. CONCLUSION The negative predictive value of skin tests in both immediate and non-immediate hypersensitivity reactions is excellent and excludes severe allergy. Non-immediate hypersensitivity is rare. Confirmed hypersensitivity is more likely if amoxicillin-clavulanic acid is the index drug. Cross-reactivity was more common in patients presenting with immediate hypersensitivity, most commonly involving benzylpenicillin. A minority of patients were allergic to clavulanic acid.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Xingyue Maria Wang
- Oxford University Hospitals, Oxford University Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust, Oxford, United Kingdom.
| | - Lucinda Kennard
- Department of Adult Allergy, Guy's and St Thomas' NHS Foundation Trust, London, United Kingdom
| | - Krzysztof Rutkowski
- Department of Adult Allergy, Guy's and St Thomas' NHS Foundation Trust, London, United Kingdom
| | | | - Rita Mirakian
- Department of Allergy, Cambridge University Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust, Cambridge, United Kingdom
| | - Annette Wagner
- Department of Adult Allergy, Guy's and St Thomas' NHS Foundation Trust, London, United Kingdom
| |
Collapse
|
10
|
Ramsey A. Penicillin Allergy and Perioperative Anaphylaxis. FRONTIERS IN ALLERGY 2022; 3:903161. [PMID: 35769557 PMCID: PMC9234876 DOI: 10.3389/falgy.2022.903161] [Citation(s) in RCA: 3] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 03/24/2022] [Accepted: 05/10/2022] [Indexed: 01/17/2023] Open
Abstract
Penicillin allergy is the most commonly reported drug allergy, while perioperative anaphylaxis is overall rare. This review covers the epidemiology of both penicillin allergy and perioperative anaphylaxis both separately and taken together. Considerations regarding anaphylaxis to penicillin during pregnancy are also discussed, since penicillin is the drug of choice for Group B Streptococcus prophylaxis. The minimal cross reactivity between penicillins and cephalosporins is addressed, since the vast majority of patients with a penicillin allergy label can receive perioperative cephalosporins. The management of the patient who has experienced perioperative anaphylaxis, including the importance of allergy referral is covered. Approaches to pre-operative penicillin allergy evaluations and opportunities for education are highlighted.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Allison Ramsey
- Rochester Regional Health, Rochester, NY, United States
- Clinical Assistant Professor of Medicine, University of Rochester School of Medicine and Dentistry, Rochester, NY, United States
- *Correspondence: Allison Ramsey
| |
Collapse
|
11
|
Dias P, Patel A, Rook W, Edwards MR, Pearse RM, Abbott TEF. Contemporary use of antimicrobial prophylaxis for surgical patients: An observational cohort study. Eur J Anaesthesiol 2022; 39:533-539. [PMID: 34738963 DOI: 10.1097/eja.0000000000001619] [Citation(s) in RCA: 2] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/26/2022]
Abstract
BACKGROUND Antimicrobial prophylaxis is commonly used to prevent surgical site infection (SSI), despite concerns of overuse leading to antimicrobial resistance. However, it is unclear how often antimicrobials are used and whether guidelines are followed. OBJECTIVES To describe contemporary clinical practice for antimicrobial prophylaxis including guideline compliance, the rate of postoperative infection and associated side effects. DESIGN A prospective, multicentre, observational cohort study. SETTING Twelve United Kingdom National Health Service hospitals. PARTICIPANTS One thousand one hundred and sixteen patients, aged at least 18 years undergoing specific colo-rectal, obstetric, gynaecological, urological or orthopaedic surgical procedures. EXPOSURE Compliance with guidelines for antimicrobial prophylaxis. OUTCOMES The primary outcome was SSI within 30 days after surgery. Secondary outcomes were number of doses of antimicrobials for prophylaxis and to treat infection, incidence of antimicrobial-related side effects and mortality within 30 days after surgery. Data are presented as number with percentage (%) or median with interquartile range [IQR].Results of logistic regression analyses are presented as odds ratio/rate ratio (OR/RR) with 95% confidence intervals (95% CIs). RESULTS 1102 out of 1106 (99.6%) patients received antimicrobial prophylaxis, which was compliant with local guidelines in 929 out of 1102 (84.3%) cases. 2169 out of 51 28 (42.3%) doses of antimicrobials were administered as prophylaxis (median 1 [1 to 2] dose) and 2959 out of 5128 (57.7%) were administered to treat an infection (median 21 [11 to 28] doses). 56 patients (5.2%) developed SSI. Antimicrobial prophylaxis administered according to local guidelines was not associated with a lower incidence of SSI compared with administration outside guidelines [OR 0.90 (0.35 to 2.29); P = 0.823]. 23 out of 1072 (2.2%) patients experienced a side effect of antimicrobial therapy. 7 out of 1082 (0.6%) patients died. The median hospital stay was 3 [1 to 5] days. CONCLUSION Antimicrobial prophylaxis was administered for almost all the surgical procedures under investigation. However, this was not always compliant with guidelines. Further research is required to determine whether the amount of prophylactic antimicrobials could be safely and effectively reduced without increasing the incidence of SSI.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Priyanthi Dias
- From the William Harvey Research Institute, Queen Mary University of London, London (PD, AP, RMP, TEFA), University Hospitals Birmingham NHS Foundation Trust, Birmingham (WR), and Department of Anaesthesia, University Hospital Southampton NHS Foundation Trust, Southampton, UK, Acute, Critical & Perioperative Care Research Group, NIHR Biomedical Research Centre, University Hospital Southampton NHS Foundation Trust and University of Southampton, Southampton, UK (MRE)
| | | | | | | | | | | |
Collapse
|
12
|
Anstey KM, Tsao L, Otani IM. Drug Allergy Delabeling Programs: Recent Strategies and Targeted Populations. Clin Rev Allergy Immunol 2022; 62:484-504. [PMID: 35031956 DOI: 10.1007/s12016-021-08913-x] [Citation(s) in RCA: 2] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Accepted: 11/17/2021] [Indexed: 12/12/2022]
Abstract
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.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Karen M Anstey
- Division of Pulmonary, Allergy and Critical Care Medicine, Department of Medicine, School of Medicine, Oregon Health & Science University, 3181 S.W. Sam Jackson Park Road, Mail Code UHN67, Portland, OR, 97239, USA.
| | - Lulu Tsao
- Division of Pulmonary, Critical Care, Allergy, and Sleep Medicine, Department of Medicine, School of Medicine, University of California, San Francisco, CA, USA
| | - Iris M Otani
- Division of Pulmonary, Critical Care, Allergy, and Sleep Medicine, Department of Medicine, School of Medicine, University of California, San Francisco, CA, USA
| |
Collapse
|
13
|
Abstract
PURPOSE OF REVIEW Drug allergy management has previously not been emphasized in the elderly. However, the geriatric population poses several unique characteristics, challenges for drug allergy testing and considerations in the management. Especially in the era of COVID-19, the elderly population is a vulnerable cohort and reviewing the management during this unprecedented time is both timely and relevant. RECENT FINDINGS In recent years, larger scale studies focusing on the epidemiology and prevalence trends of drug allergies among older adults has been summarized in this review. Emphasis on anaphylaxis in the older adults has been studied. SUMMARY There are many implications of these findings. Epidemiological studies are useful in realizing the burden and spectrum of drug allergies on our healthcare system. It has allowed us to identify certain barriers in drug allergy management and develop ways to overcome these challenges through. Lastly, we have proposed an approach to drug allergy management based on previous studies as well as from our perspective and local experience.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Jane C Y Wong
- Division of Rheumatology & Clinical Immunology, Department of Medicine, Queen Mary Hospital, Pok Fu Lam, Hong Kong
| | | |
Collapse
|
14
|
Abstract
Perioperative anaphylaxis (PA) is a rare but life-threatening condition that poses diagnostic and management challenges in the operating room. The incidence of severe perioperative reactions is estimated to be approximately 1:7000-10,000. Management involves both immediate stabilization of the patient and identifying the culprit agent. Identification is essential to prevent recurrence of the event in subsequent surgeries and to avoid unnecessary labeling of drug allergy. Identifying all possible exposures including medications, disinfectants, latex, and dyes and choosing the appropriate tests are essential for proper evaluation. To identify the culprit, primary testing modalities include tryptase at the time of the reaction with subsequent levels and skin testing with nonirritating concentrations to the medications and substances utilized during the procedure and those potentially used as alternates. This strategy provides guidance for future surgeries and procedures. Close collaboration between the allergy, anesthesiology, and surgery teams is essential for appropriate management of these patients at the time of the reaction, during the post event evaluation and in preparation for subsequent surgeries.
Collapse
|
15
|
DALES, Drug Allergy Labels in Elective Surgical patients: a prospective multicentre cross-sectional study of incidence, risks, and attitudes in penicillin de-labelling strategies. Br J Anaesth 2021; 127:897-904. [PMID: 34243942 DOI: 10.1016/j.bja.2021.05.026] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 03/22/2021] [Revised: 05/23/2021] [Accepted: 05/30/2021] [Indexed: 11/23/2022] Open
Abstract
BACKGROUND We sought to define the prevalence and nature of patient-reported drug allergies, determine their impact on prescribing, and explore drug allergy knowledge and attitudes amongst anaesthetists. METHODS We performed a prospective cross-sectional study in 213 UK hospitals in 2018. Elective surgical patients were interviewed, with a detailed allergy history taken in those self-reporting drug allergy. Anaesthetists completed a questionnaire concerning perioperative drug allergy. RESULTS Of 21 219 patients included, 6214 (29.3 %) (95% confidence interval [CI]: 28.7-29.9) reported drug allergy. Antibiotics, NSAIDs, and opioids were the most frequently implicated agents. Of a total of 8755 reactions, 2462 (28.1%) (95% CI: 29.2-31.1) were categorised as high risk for representing genuine allergy after risk stratification. A history suggestive of chronic spontaneous urticaria significantly increased the risk of reporting drug allergy (odds ratio 2.68; 95% CI: 2.4-3; P<0.01). Of 4756 anaesthetists completing the questionnaire, 1473 (31%) (95% CI: 29.7-32.3) routinely discuss perioperative allergy risk with patients. Prescribing habits in the presence of drug allergy labels differ depending on the implicated agent. Most anaesthetists (4678/4697; 99.6%) (95% CI: 99.4-99.8) prescribe opioids when reactions are consistent with side-effects, although 2269/4697 (48%) (95% CI: 46.9-49.7) would avoid the specific opioid reported. CONCLUSIONS Almost 30% of UK elective surgical patients report a history of drug allergies, but the majority of reported reactions are likely to be non-allergic reactions. Allergy labels can impact on perioperative prescribing through avoidance of important drugs and use of less effective alternatives. We highlight important knowledge gaps about drug allergy amongst anaesthetists, and the need for improved education around allergy.
Collapse
|
16
|
Sneddon J, Cooper L, Ritchie N, Steele C, Spears M, McEwen J, Dempsey Z, Sutherland R, Khatamzas E, Seaton RA. An algorithm for safe de-labelling of antibiotic allergy in adult hospital in-patients. Clin Exp Allergy 2021; 51:1229-1232. [PMID: 33811406 DOI: 10.1111/cea.13878] [Citation(s) in RCA: 10] [Impact Index Per Article: 3.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 02/02/2021] [Revised: 03/16/2021] [Accepted: 03/18/2021] [Indexed: 01/21/2023]
Affiliation(s)
| | - Lesley Cooper
- Scottish Antimicrobial Prescribing Group, Glasgow, UK
| | - Neil Ritchie
- Queen Elizabeth University Hospital, Glasgow, UK
| | | | | | - Jo McEwen
- Ninewells Hospital and Medical School, Dundee, UK
| | | | | | - Elham Khatamzas
- Edinburgh Royal Infirmary, Edinburgh, UK.,Department of Medicine III, Ludwig-Maximilians University, Munich, Germany
| | - R Andrew Seaton
- Scottish Antimicrobial Prescribing Group, Glasgow, UK.,Queen Elizabeth University Hospital, Glasgow, UK
| |
Collapse
|