Addressing Inpatient Beta-Lactam Allergies: A Multihospital Implementation

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.

A novel 2-step process for the management of inpatient beta-lactam allergy labels

BACKGROUND

Inpatient beta-lactam allergy labels may increase the unnecessary use of aztreonam and non-beta-lactam antibiotics, which can then lead to more adverse events and increased health care costs, OBJECTIVE: To assess the impact of a novel 2-step process (medication history review followed by risk stratification) on rates of beta-lactam delabeling, aztreonam use, and desensitizations on pediatric, adult, and obstetrics inpatients at a tertiary academic center.

METHODS

We prospectively collected data on 700 patients who received inpatient consultation from the Beta-Lactam Allergy Evaluation Service between August 2021 and July 2022. Patients were delabeled either by medication review alone, drug challenge alone if with a low-risk history, or penicillin skin test followed by drug challenge if with a high-risk history. Generalized linear regression modeling was used to compare aztreonam days of therapy in the intervention year with the 2 prior years. Drug desensitizations were assessed by electronic chart review.

RESULTS

Most of the patients (n = 656 of 700, 94%) had more than or equal to 1 beta-lactam allergy label removed, clarified, or both; 77.9% of these patients (n = 511 of 656) had 587 beta-lactam allergy labels removed. Nearly one-third (n = 149, 27.6%) had 162 allergy labels removed solely by medication history review. All 114 penicillin skin tests performed had negative results, and 98% (8 of 381) of the patients who underwent any drug challenge passed. Only 5.7% of the delabeled patients were relabeled. There was a 27% reduction in aztreonam use (P = .007). Beta-lactam desensitizations were reduced by 80%.

CONCLUSION

A full-time inpatient beta-lactam allergy service using medication history review and risk stratification can safely and effectively remove inpatient beta-lactam allergy labels, reduce aztreonam use, and decrease beta-lactam desensitizations.

A multicentre observational study to investigate feasibility of a direct oral penicillin challenge in de-labelling 'low risk' patients with penicillin allergy by non-allergy healthcare professionals (SPACE study): Implications for healthcare systems

OBJECTIVE

The huge burden of inaccurate penicillin allergy labels (PALs) is an important driver of antimicrobial resistance. This is magnified by insufficient allergy specialists and lack of 'point-of-care' tests. We investigated the feasibility of non-allergy healthcare professionals (HCPs) delivering direct oral penicillin challenges (DPCs) for penicillin allergy de-labelling.

METHODS

This prospective observational study was conducted in three hospitals in England across three settings (acute medical, pre-surgical and haematology-oncology). Patients with a PAL were screened and stratified as low risk/high risk. Low risk patients (non-immune mediated symptoms, benign rash, tolerated amoxicillin since and family history) underwent a DPC.

RESULTS

N = 2257 PALs were screened, 1054 were eligible; 643 were approached, 373 declined, 270 consented and 259 risk stratified (low risk = 155; high risk = 104). One hundred and twenty-six low risk patients underwent DPC, 122 (96.8%) were de-labelled with no serious allergic reactions. Conversion rate from screening-to-consent was 12% [3.3% and 17.9% in acute and elective settings respectively; odds ratios for consent were 3.42 (p < 0.001) and 5.53 (p < 0.001) in haematology-oncology and pre-surgical setting respectively. Common reasons for failure to progress in the study included difficulty in reaching patients, clinical instability/medical reasons, lacking capacity to consent and psychological factors.

INTERPRETATION

DPCs can be delivered by non-allergy HCPs. A high proportion of patients with PALs did not progress in the study pathway. Strategies to deliver DPC at optimal points of the care pathway are needed to enhance uptake. Elective settings offer greater opportunities than acute settings for DPC. The safety and simplicity of DPCs lends itself to adoption by healthcare systems beyond the UK, including in resource-limited settings.

Inpatient allergy delabeling of pediatric patients with low-risk penicillin allergy status through direct oral amoxicillin challenge

Background: Less than 5% of children who report penicillin allergy have clinically pertinent type 1 immunoglobulin E mediated hypersensitivity reaction by using direct oral amoxicillin challenge. Several pathways have been developed to delabel penicillin allergy by using direct oral amoxicillin challenge, mostly in the outpatient settings, but there is relative scarcity on published outcomes of these pathways, especially in the inpatient pediatric settings. Objective: This study aimed to evaluate the performance of an institutionally derived inpatient penicillin allergy screening tool. Methods: Patients were stratified into three penicillin allergy risk categories by using an institutional screening questionnaire. Patients with a no-risk status were delabeled without challenge testing. Patients with low-risk status underwent direct graded oral amoxicillin challenge and delabeled based on their response. Patients with high-risk status were referred to allergy service. Results: Ninety-two patients were identified with penicillin allergy. Forty of the 92 patients (43%) were screened. Of the 40 patients screened, 6 (15%) were identified as no risk, 28 (70%) were identified as low risk, and 6 (15%) were identified as high risk. Twenty-four of the 28 patients at low risk (86%) were eligible for direct amoxicillin oral challenge. Seventeen of the 24 (71%) consented to oral challenge but only 12 (71%) underwent direct amoxicillin oral challenge. Eleven of the 12 who underwent oral challenge (92%) were successfully delabeled. Five of the six patients at no risk (83%) were successfully delabeled. Three of the six patients at high risk (50%) were referred for further allergy evaluation. Overall, 16 of the 40 patients screened (40%) were successfully delabeled. Conclusion: In this small pediatric inpatient study, our institutional risk stratification screening tool identified patients at low risk for penicillin allergy and direct graded oral amoxicillin challenge was safely administered to delabel penicillin allergy in these patients.Clinical trial NCT05020327, www.clinicaltrials.gov.

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.

Qualitative analysis of healthcare provider perspectives to evaluating beta-lactam allergies

BACKGROUND

There is a lack of understanding of the barriers reported by healthcare providers when evaluating beta-lactam allergies, but knowledge of these barriers is required for practical and effective implementation interventions.

METHODS

Twenty-five healthcare providers, consisting of physicians, nurses and pharmacists practicing in the areas of intensive care, emergency medicine, infectious disease and general hospital practice, were interviewed between September 2021 and July 2023. Twenty-three of these providers were practising in the USA. A semi-structured interview guide grounded in the Theoretical Domain Framework was used for the interviews. Deductive and inductive analysis was performed on the interview transcripts, and translated into intervention recommendations using the Behaviour Change Wheel.

RESULTS

Widely held beliefs included a lack of clear policy for the evaluation of allergies, confusing or missing documentation of allergy information, confidence in their own and their colleagues' ability to evaluate allergies when information is available, and pharmacists as the provider most equipped to evaluate beta-lactam allergies.

CONCLUSIONS

Health systems should adopt and disseminate policies for the evaluation of beta-lactam allergies, and promote the use of pharmacists in the evaluation of drug allergies when possible. Allergy sections of electronic health records should be reworked to encourage unambiguous documentation of allergy reactions and support using previously tolerated beta-lactam antibiotics.

[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.

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.

Use of a beta-lactam graded challenge process for inpatients with self-reported penicillin allergies at an academic medical center

Background

The Antimicrobial Stewardship Program (ASP) at Nebraska Medicine collaborated with a board-certified allergist to develop a penicillin allergy guidance document for treating inpatients with self-reported allergy. This guidance contains an algorithm for evaluating and safely challenging penicillin-allergic patients with beta-lactams without inpatient allergy consults being available.

Methods

Following multi-disciplinary review, an order set for beta-lactam graded challenges (GC) was implemented in 2018. This contains recommended monitoring and detailed medication orders to challenge patients with various beta-lactam agents. Inpatient orders for GC from 3/2018-6/2022 were retrospectively reviewed to evaluate ordering characteristics, outcomes of the challenge, and whether documentation of the allergy history was updated. All beta-lactam challenges administered to inpatients were included, and descriptive statistics were performed.

Results

Overall, 157 GC were administered; 13 with oral amoxicillin and 144 with intravenous (IV) beta-lactams. Ceftriaxone accounted for the most challenges (43%). All oral challenges were recommended by an Infectious Diseases consult service, as were a majority of IV challenges (60%). Less than one in five were administered in an ICU (19%). Almost all (n = 150, 96%) were tolerated without any adverse event. There was one reaction (1%) of hives and six (4%) involving a rash, none of which had persistent effects. Allergy information was updated in the electronic health record after 92% of the challenges.

Conclusion

Both intravenous and oral beta-lactam graded challenges were implemented successfully in a hospital without a regular inpatient allergy consult service. They were well-tolerated, administered primarily in non-ICU settings, and were often ordered by non-specialist services. In patients with a self-reported penicillin allergy, these results demonstrate the utility and safety of a broadly adopted beta-lactam GC process.

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.

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.

Addressing the Challenges of Penicillin Allergy Delabeling With Electronic Health Records and Mobile Applications

Allergy labels are common, often incorrect, and potentially harmful. There are many opportunities for clinical decision support (CDS) tools integrated in the electronic health record (EHR) and mobile apps to address the challenges with drug allergy management, including penicillin allergy delabeling (PADL). Effective delabeling solutions must consider multidisciplinary clinical workflow and multistep processes, including documentation, assessment, plan (eg, allergy testing and referral), record update, drug allergy alert management, and allergy reconciliation over time. Developing a systematic infrastructure to manage allergies across the EHR is critical to improve the accuracy and completeness of a patient's allergy and avoid inadvertently relabeling. Improving the appropriateness and relevancy of drug allergy alerts is important to reduce alert fatigue. Using alerts to guide clinicians on appropriate antibiotic use may reduce unnecessary β-lactam avoidance. To date, EHR CDS tools have facilitated non-allergists to provide PADL at the point of care. A mobile app was shown to support PADL and provide specialist support and education. Future research is needed to standardize, integrate, and evaluate innovative CDS tools in the EHR to demonstrate patient safety and clinical utility and facilitate wider adoption.

Penicillin Allergy and Perioperative Anaphylaxis

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.

Reconciling Allergy Information in the Electronic Health Record After a Drug Challenge Using Natural Language Processing

Background

Drug challenge tests serve to evaluate whether a patient is allergic to a medication. However, the allergy list in the electronic health record (EHR) is not consistently updated to reflect the results of the challenge, affecting clinicians' prescription decisions and contributing to inaccurate allergy labels, inappropriate drug-allergy alerts, and potentially ineffective, more toxic, and/or costly care. In this study, we used natural language processing (NLP) to automatically detect discrepancies between the EHR allergy list and drug challenge test results and to inform the clinical recommendations provided in a real-time allergy reconciliation module.

Methods

This study included patients who received drug challenge tests at the Mass General Brigham (MGB) Healthcare System between June 9, 2015 and January 5, 2022. At MGB, drug challenge tests are performed in allergy/immunology encounters with routine clinical documentation in notes and flowsheets. We developed a rule-based NLP tool to analyze and interpret the challenge test results. We compared these results against EHR allergy lists to detect potential discrepancies in allergy documentation and form a recommendation for reconciliation if a discrepancy was identified. To evaluate the capability of our tool in identifying discrepancies, we calculated the percentage of challenge test results that were not updated and the precision of the NLP algorithm for 200 randomly sampled encounters.

Results

Among 200 samples from 5,312 drug challenge tests, 59% challenged penicillin reactivity and 99% were negative. 42.0%, 61.5%, and 76.0% of the results were confirmed by flowsheets, NLP, or both, respectively. The precision of the NLP algorithm was 96.1%. Seven percent of patient allergy lists were not updated based on drug challenge test results. Flowsheets alone were used to identify 2.0% of these discrepancies, and NLP alone detected 5.0% of these discrepancies. Because challenge test results can be recorded in both flowsheets and clinical notes, the combined use of NLP and flowsheets can reliably detect 5.5% of discrepancies.

Conclusion

This NLP-based tool may be able to advance global delabeling efforts and the effectiveness of drug allergy assessments. In the real-time EHR environment, it can be used to examine patient allergy lists and identify drug allergy label discrepancies, mitigating patient risks.

Factors Associated With Penicillin Allergy Labels in Electronic Health Records of Children in 2 Large US Pediatric Primary Care Networks

Importance

Penicillin allergy labels influence clinical decision-making, yet most children who are labeled do not have type 1 hypersensitivity allergic reactions and instead have a history of predictable adverse reactions or unspecified illness symptoms while receiving penicillin for viral infections. Studies describing penicillin allergy labeling in the pediatric outpatient setting are lacking.

Objective

To describe the epidemiology and factors associated with penicillin allergy labels across 2 large US pediatric primary care networks.

Design, Setting, and Participants

This retrospective, longitudinal birth cohort study was conducted in 90 primary care pediatric practices serving a diverse population of children across Houston, Texas, Austin, Texas, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, and parts of New Jersey. Participants were children born between January 2010 and June 2020 who had a health care visit in the first 14 days of life and at least 2 additional visits in the first year of life at one of 90 primary care pediatric practices. Censoring criteria were additionally applied to exclude data from children no longer seeking health care in the 90 clinics over time. Statistical analysis was performed from February to May 2021.

Exposures

Basic patient demographics, health care utilization, penicillin exposure, and primary clinic location.

Main Outcomes and Measures

Addition of penicillin allergy label in the electronic medical record.

Results

Among 334 465 children in the birth cohort, 164 173 (49.1%) were female; 72 831 (21.8%) were Hispanic, 59 598 (17.8%) were non-Hispanic Black, and 148 534 (44.4%) were non-Hispanic White; the median (IQR) age at censoring was 3.8 (1.7-6.6) years; 18 015 (5.4%) were labeled as penicillin allergic, but the prevalence of penicillin allergy labeling ranged from 0.9% to 10.2% across practices. Children were labeled at a median (IQR) age of 1.3 (0.9-2.3) years. Non-Hispanic White children were more likely to be labeled compared with non-Hispanic Black children after controlling for potential confounders (adjusted odds ratio, 1.7 [95% CI, 1.6-1.8]). There were 6797 allergic children (37.7%) labeled after receiving 1 penicillin prescription and 1423 (7.9%) labeled after receiving 0 penicillin prescriptions.

Conclusions and Relevance

In this cohort study of more than 330 000 children, penicillin allergy labeling was common and varied widely across practices. Children were labeled early in life, and almost half were labeled after receiving 1 or 0 penicillin prescriptions. These findings raise questions regarding the validity of penicillin allergy labels. Future work exploring the fidelity of and outcomes associated with penicillin allergy-labeling in children is warranted.

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.

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.

Development and Validation of a Mobile Clinical Decision Support Tool for the Diagnosis of Drug Allergy in Adults: The Drug Allergy App

BACKGROUND

Penicillin allergy overdiagnosis has been associated with inappropriate antibiotic prescribing, increased antimicrobial resistance, worse clinical outcomes, and increased health care costs.

OBJECTIVE

To develop and validate a questionnaire-based algorithm built in a mobile application to support clinicians in collecting accurate history of previous reactions and diagnosing drug allergy appropriately.

METHODS

A survey was completed by 164 medical and nonmedical prescribers to understand barriers to best practice. Based on the survey recommendations, we created a 10-item questionnaire-based algorithm to allow classification of drug allergy history in line with the National Institute for Health and Care Excellence guidelines on drug allergy. The algorithm was incorporated into a mobile application and retrospectively validated using anonymized clinical databases at regional immunology and dermatology centers in Manchester, United Kingdom.

RESULTS

A total of 55.2% of prescribers (95% confidence interval, 47% to 63.4%) thought it impossible to draw a firm conclusion based on history alone and 59.4% (95% CI, 51.4% to 67.5%) believed that regardless of the details of the penicillin allergy history, they would avoid all β-lactams. A drug allergy mobile application was developed and retrospectively validated, which revealed a low risk for misclassification of outcomes compared with reference standard drug allergy investigations in the allergy and dermatology clinics.

CONCLUSIONS

Perceived lack of time and preparedness to collect an accurate drug allergy history appear to be important barriers to appropriate antimicrobial prescribing. The Drug Allergy App may represent a useful clinical decision support tool to diagnose drug allergy correctly and support appropriate antibiotic prescribing.

Role of clinical history in beta-lactam hypersensitivity

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Understand how the clinical history has been used to risk stratify patients reporting a beta-lactam allergy, both in clinical care pathways and predictive models.

RECENT FINDINGS

Drug allergy clinical care pathways have emerged as a safe and effective method of stratifying patients with a reported beta-lactam allergy into risk categories, with 'low-risk' patients able to proceed straight to direct challenges or test doses. These methods have streamlined antibiotic stewardship policies and penicillin allergy de-labeling. However, how to define 'low-risk' has been subject to much debate. New research has developed predictive models that utilize the clinical history to assess a patient's true risk of beta-lactam allergy.

SUMMARY

The clinical history has long been an essential part of drug allergy evaluation and has proven invaluable within the past decade in the development of drug allergy clinical pathways. Evidence-based predictive models that use the clinical history to assess a patient's true risk of beta-lactam allergy offer tremendous promise, but differ in crucial areas such as the populations they study, the predictor variables they use, and the ultimate accuracy they attain. These models highlight key aspects of the drug allergy history and pave the way for future large-scale research.

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.

Preoperative β-lactam antibiotic prophylaxis is superior to bacteriostatic alternatives in immediate expander-based breast reconstruction

BACKGROUND

Staged implant-based breast reconstruction is the most common reconstructive modality following mastectomy. Postoperative implant infections can have a significant impact on adjuvant oncologic care and reconstructive outcome. Here, we investigate the impact of β-lactam antibiotics (i.e., bactericidal) compared to alternative antibiotic agents on postoperative outcomes for implant-based breast reconstruction.

METHODS

A retrospective analysis of patients who underwent immediate sub-pectoral tissue expander placement with an inferior acellular dermal matrix (ADM) sling at a single institution between May 2008 and July 2018 was performed. Patient demographics, comorbidities, and complication rates were retrieved. The impact of antibiotic regimen on postoperative outcomes, including infection rate and reconstructive failure, was investigated.

RESULTS

A total of 320 patients with a mean age and BMI of 48.2 years and 25.0 kg/m² , respectively, who underwent 542 immediate breast reconstructions were included in the study. The use of a β-lactam antibiotic was protective against postoperative infection (odds ratio [OR] = 0.467, p = .046), infection requiring operative management (OR = 0.313, p = .022), and reconstructive failure (OR = 0.365, p = .028). Extended, that is, post-discharge, prophylaxis was not associated with any clinical benefit.

CONCLUSION

The use of β-lactam antibiotics for pre-/peri-operative prophylaxis is superior to alternative antibiotics with a bacteriostatic mechanism of action regarding rates of postoperative infection and reconstructive failure following immediate tissue expander-based breast reconstruction. Extended, that is, post-discharge, prophylaxis does not appear to be indicated, regardless of the antibiotic chosen.

A comprehensive assessment of carbapenem use across 90 Veterans Health Administration hospitals with defined stewardship strategies for carbapenems

OBJECTIVES

Carbapenems are an important target for antimicrobial stewardship (AS) efforts. In this study, we sought to compare different hospital-based strategies for improving carbapenem use.

METHODS

We analysed a cohort of all patients hospitalized at Veterans Health Administration (VHA) acute care hospitals during 2016 and a mandatory survey that characterized each hospital's carbapenem-specific AS strategy into one of three types: no strategy (NS), prospective audit and feedback (PAF) or restrictive policies (RP). Carbapenem use was compared using risk-adjusted generalized estimating equations that accounted for clustering within hospitals. Two infectious disease (ID) physicians independently performed manual chart reviews in 425 randomly selected cases. Auditors assessed carbapenem appropriateness with an assessment score on Day 4 of therapy.

RESULTS

There were 429 062 admissions in 90 sites (24 NS, 8 PAF, 58 RP). Carbapenem use was lower at PAF than NS sites [rate ratio (RR) 0.6 (95% CI 0.4-0.9); P = 0.01] but similar between RP and NS sites. Carbapenem prescribing was considered appropriate/acceptable in 215 (50.6%) of the reviewed cases. Assessment scores were lower (i.e. better) at RP than NS sites (mean 2.3 versus 2.7; P < 0.01) but did not differ significantly between NS and PAF sites. ID consultations were more common at PAF/RP than NS sites (51% versus 29%; P < 0.01). ID consultations were associated with lower (i.e. better) assessment scores (mean 2.3 versus 2.6; P < 0.01).

CONCLUSIONS

In this VHA cohort, PAF strategies were associated with lower carbapenem use and ID consultation and RP strategies were associated with more appropriate carbapenem prescribing. AS and ID consultations may work complementarily and hospitals could leverage both to optimize carbapenem use.

Algorithm to guide re-exposure to penicillin in allergic pregnant women with syphilis: Efficacy and safety

Background

Gestational syphilis is underdiagnosed and undertreated, leading to stillbirth, prematurity, low birthweight, neonatal death, and congenital syphilis. Most patients who label as allergic to penicillin are misdiagnosed.

Objective

To assess the efficacy and safety of an algorithm to guide re-exposure to penicillin in pregnant women with syphilis and reporting allergy to the antibiotic.

Methods

We performed a prospective study assessing pregnant women with syphilis and labeled as allergic to penicillin. Based on clinical history, patients were divided in two groups: high-risk and low-risk to penicillin allergy. Low-risk patients with negative skin testing and negative serum specific IgE to penicillin underwent drug provocation test. The remaining patients underwent desensitization.

Results

Ninety-one patients were enrolled. Allergy to penicillin was confirmed in 7.69% of pregnant women with syphilis and clinical history of allergy to penicillin; in all cases the diagnosis was made through intradermal testing, which predicted 100% of the breakthrough reactions observed during rapid drug desensitization (p < 0.001). Risk stratification based on the initial clinical reaction and skin testing to guide penicillin re-introduction through drug challenge or desensitization was safe (97.8%) and effective (97.8%).

Conclusion

We developed and showed the efficacy and safety of an algorithm to guide re-exposure to penicillin in pregnant women with syphilis and labeled as allergic to this drug. Intradermal test is an excellent biomarker in the diagnosis of immediate hypersensitivity reaction to penicillin and to predict breakthrough reaction during rapid drug desensitization. Further studies may confirm the greater safety of the intravenous protocol compared to the oral protocol.

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.

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

BACKGROUND

Penicillin allergy is reported in up to 10% of the general population; however, >90% of patients reporting an allergy are tolerant. Patients labeled as penicillin allergic have longer hospital stays, increased exposure to suboptimal antibiotics, and an increased risk of methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus and Clostridioides difficile. The primary aim with our quality improvement initiative was to increase penicillin allergy delabeling to at least 10% among all hospitalized pediatric patients reporting a penicillin allergy with efforts directed toward patients determined to be low risk for true allergic reaction.

METHODS

Our quality improvement project included several interventions: the development of a multidisciplinary clinical care pathway to identify eligible patients, workflow optimization to support delabeling, an educational intervention, and participation in our institution's quality improvement incentive program. Our interventions were targeted to facilitate appropriate delabeling by the primary hospital medicine team. Statistical process control charts were used to assess the impact of this intervention pre- and postpathway implementation.

RESULTS

After implementation of the clinical pathway, the percentage of patients admitted to hospital medicine delabeled of their penicillin allergy by discharge increased to 11.7%. More than one-half of those delabeled (51.2%) received a penicillin-based antimicrobial at time of discharge. There have been no adverse events or allergic reactions requiring emergency medication administration since pathway implementation.

CONCLUSIONS

Our quality improvement initiative successfully increased the rate of penicillin allergy delabeling among low-risk hospitalized pediatric patients, allowing for increased use of optimal antibiotics.

Unconfirmed penicillin allergy labels in the paediatric outpatient setting: A call for research and quality improvement initiatives

Over the last 10 years, the electronic medical record has redefined medical documentation, and physicians rely on accurate records to make clinical decisions. Penicillin allergy labels (PALs) are important pieces of the medical history that guide physicians in selecting specific antibiotic classes for the treatment of infectious diseases. However, most children labelled as penicillin-allergic do not have an IgE-mediated (immediate) allergic reaction to penicillin or its derivatives. In the absence of confirmatory penicillin allergy testing or additional history, these children receive alternative, often broad-spectrum and second-line, antibiotics. Addressing unconfirmed PALs requires an understanding of how and why labels get added to the electronic medical record. This viewpoint highlights the knowledge gaps in paediatric outpatient penicillin allergy labelling and proposes an acronym ('LABEL') that primary care providers and antimicrobial stewards can utilise when designing initiatives to address unconfirmed PALs in the community.

Penicillin Allergy Evaluation Access: A National Survey

In a study of 121 hospitals from 38 US states, 44% had access to an allergist for inpatient consultations and 39% had access to inpatient penicillin skin testing, indicating that the majority of US hospitals lack sufficient resources to address inpatient penicillin allergies.

Implementation of EMR-based standardized antibiotic desensitization protocols and its impact on providers

Background: As desensitization protocols become more readily available and published, more institutions are implementing them and searching for ways to streamline the process. There have been no published studies to date on the effect that electronic medical record systems (EMR) have on the safety and efficiency of β-lactam antibiotic desensitization. Objective: The purpose of this study was to evaluate the changes in workflow, efficiency, and medical errors after implementation of β-lactam antibiotic desensitization. Methods: A collaborative effort between the Allergy/Immunology Division and the Pharmacy Department led to the creation and implementation of antibiotic desensitization order sets. Pre- and postimplementation of β-lactam antibiotic surveys were sent to pharmacists and allergy/immunology fellows and attendings at a single-center tertiary care center. Results: There were only 26 valid respondents (12.3%) to both the pre- and postimplementation surveys. The percentage of respondents who thought that the time needed to prepare desensitization materials was < 4 hours increased from 23% to 77% (p < 0.001). The percentage of respondents who thought that the time needed to input electronic desensitization orders was < 1 hour increased from 19% to 54% (p = 0.002). The percentage of respondents who identified zero errors increased from 42% to 92% (p = 0.001). The perception of the overall desensitization process efficiency significantly increased (p < 0.001). Conclusion: Creation of standardized electronic β-lactam antibiotic desensitization order sets significantly decreased the time taken to order and prepare materials and increased overall efficiency.

Prevalence of Antibiotic Allergy Labels in a Tertiary Referral Center in Belgium

BACKGROUND

Antibiotic (AB) allergies are among the most frequently occurring adverse drug reactions. In US literature, AB allergy labels (AAL) are reported in 10% to 15% of patients' charts; however, large-scale European analyses are scarce.

OBJECTIVES

To retrospectively assess the prevalence of AAL in a tertiary referral hospital in Belgium between 2010 and 2018.

METHODS

Patients who consulted and/or were hospitalized during the study period, who had been labeled with an AB allergy, were selected for further analysis.

RESULTS

Of 1,009,598 unique patients (outpatients, n = 736,469; inpatients, n = 273,129), 28,147 patients (3%) were registered with 1 or more AAL, being 1% of outpatients (n = 9562) and 7% of inpatients (n = 18,585). Women were more likely to carry an AAL (68%) compared with men (32%, P < .001). In patients with an AAL, 9% had multiple labels and 5% had labels for multiple AB classes. Most frequently, beta-lactams were involved (84% of AAL), followed by quinolones (7%) and sulfonamides and macrolides (both 3%). Moreover, 88% of the reactions were self-reported, mostly being an unspecified rash (53%), whereas only 3% were considered confirmed AAL.

CONCLUSION

With an overall prevalence of 3%, the burden of AAL is less in our Western European center compared with US reports. However, this prevalence most likely still represents an overestimation of genuine AB allergic patients because most labels lack confirmation and/or specifications. Our work indicates that knowledge of the local epidemiology of AAL is necessary to estimate the impact of better allergy labeling and delabeling strategies.

The role of a clinical pharmacist in spurious Penicillin allergy: a narrative review

Background A label of penicillin allergy is held by 6-10% of the general population and 15-20% of inpatients. > 90% of these labels are found to be spurious after formal allergy assessment. Carrying an unnecessary label of penicillin allergy is not benign. Such patients may receive second line, more expensive antibiotics, representing a significant impediment to antimicrobial stewardship. Aim of the review To (a) Explain the burden of spurious penicillin allergy, and evaluate the safety of direct oral penicillin challenge in 'low risk' patients (b) appraise the place for a clinical pharmacist-led penicillin allergy de-labelling programme. Method Narrative review. Search engines: PubMed, Google Scholar and Cochrane reviews. Search criteria: English language; search terms: penicillin allergy, antimicrobial stewardship, antimicrobial resistance, clostridium difficile, vancomycin resistant enterococci, risk stratification, clinical pharmacist and direct oral provocation test Results Penicillin allergy labels are associated with: longer hospital stay, higher readmission rates, enhanced risk of surgical site infections, risk of Clostridioides difficile infection and Methicillin resistant Staphylococcus aureus infection, a delay in the first dose of an antibiotic in sepsis and higher healthcare costs. A direct oral penicillin challenge in 'low risk' patients has proven to be safe. Discussion Recent studies including those led by a clinical pharmacist have demonstrated safety of a direct oral penicillin challenge in 'low risk' patients. This intervention needs validation within individual health services. Conclusion Direct oral penicillin challenge reduces the adverse impact of spurious penicillin allergy. A pharmacist-led penicillin allergy de-labelling program needs further validation in prospective multi-centre studies.

Skin testing and drug challenge in the evaluation of drug hypersensitivity reactions

Immediate hypersensitivity to drugs is characterized by symptoms such as hives, swelling, and wheezing. To prevent a negative impact on care, assessment by an allergist is important. Evaluation requires a clear clinical history, but it is often lacking or vague, which makes a diagnosis difficult. Allergists instead can use skin testing and drug challenge to evaluate drug hypersensitivity reactions, which help the patient and provider understand the causative drug(s) and, more importantly, enables the use of the exonerated drug(s). Although penicillin skin testing is standardized, well described, and widely used, skin testing for most other drugs requires the use of a nonirritating skin testing concentration that can have a low negative predictive value. Drug challenges are the criterion standard for confirming tolerance. The allergist must obtain an in-depth clinical history and then follow with skin testing and/or drug challenges when indicated to determine which drugs can be de-labelled and which should be avoided. In this review, we focused on the evaluation of drug hypersensitivity reactions to antibiotics, perioperative agents, biologics, and chemotherapeutics.

Penicillin Allergy Delabeling Can Decrease Antibiotic Resistance, Reduce Costs, and Optimize Patient Outcomes

Background

Antibiotics are one of the most frequently prescribed medications. Among all classes of antibiotics, penicillins are prescribed due to their clinical efficacy, cost-effectiveness, and general safety. Unfortunately, penicillins also are the most common drug allergy listed in patient medical records. Increasing evidence shows that > 90% of patients labeled with a penicillin allergy are not allergic to penicillins and associated β-lactams. The health care consequences of penicillin allergy in the setting of military medicine and readiness are important to consider.

Observations

In the US, 8 to 10% of the population and up to 15% of hospitalized patients have a documented penicillin allergy, limiting the use of these effective antibiotics. When treating a patient with a penicillin allergy, many clinicians avoid prescribing all β-lactam antibiotics and stay away from cephalosporins due to the concern for potential cross-reactivity. The cost of treating those with a documented penicillin allergy is greater than the cost for those who can receive penicillin, as treatment with broad-spectrum antibiotics often results in longer hospitalizations with increased rates of adverse effects (AEs). Despite preventive programs such as vaccinations, hygiene measures, and prophylactic antibiotics, military personnel are at increased risk for infections due to the military's mobile nature and crowded living situations.

Conclusions

Many patients report an allergy to penicillin, but only a small portion have a true immune-mediated allergy. Given the clinical, public health, and economic costs associated with a penicillin allergy label, evaluation and clearance of penicillin allergies improves clinical outcomes, decreases AEs from higher risk alternative broad-spectrum antibiotics, and prevents the spread of antibiotic resistance. In military personnel, penicillin delabeling improves readiness with optimal antibiotic options and avoidance of unnecessary risks, expediting return to full duty.

Community-acquired bacterial meningitis in adults: emergency department management protocol

Acute bacterial meningitis (ABM) is a rare but disabling infectious condition that requires a performant multidisciplinary management approach. Between 70 and 90 adult patients are diagnosed with community-acquired ABM in Belgium annually, and reported case fatality rates range from 17 to 40%. The currently available guidelines provide evidence-based guidance on how to manage this disease. However, these guidelines do not translate the evidence to the daily practice at the emergency department in a Belgian healthcare context. We created a taskforce in University Hospitals Leuven consisting of experts with complementary expertise in managing this disease: neurology, neurosurgery, intensive care medicine, microbiology and infectious diseases. The taskforce agreed upon a flowchart containing seven management steps encompassing all relevant phases in emergency ABM management. In addition to the focus on timely and adequate initiation of antimicrobial treatment, the flowchart and protocol also provide guidance on practical hurdles such as how to assess the safety of performing a lumbar puncture and when to refer patients to the intensive care department. This protocol was implemented in University Hospitals Leuven and fosters inter-disciplinary coordination of ABM care.

[Prevention and control of antimicrobial stewardship: a review of evidenceGestión de las intervenciones en materia de prevención y control de la resistencia a los antimicrobianos en los hospitales: revisión de la evidencia]

Objective

To identify effective interventions to manage antimicrobial resistance in hospital settings and potential barriers to their implementation.

Method

A synthesis of evidence for health policy was performed using SUPPORT tools. Literature searches were performed in November and December 2018 in 14 databases. A face-to-face deliberative dialogue workshop to identify implementation barriers was performed with 23 participants (manager, researchers, and health care professionals) and 14 listeners divided into three groups. Researchers with experience in deliberative dialogue acted as facilitators.

Results

Twenty-seven systematic reviews focusing on antimicrobial stewardship using combined or individual strategies were identified. The interventions included education, electronic systems, use of biomarkers, and several strategies of antimicrobial management. The main barriers to the implementation of interventions, identified in the literature and deliberative dialogue workshop, were poor infrastructure and insufficient human resources, patient complaints regarding the treatment received, cultural differences within the multidisciplinary team, work overload, and lack of financing/planning.

Conclusion

Most of the strategies identified were effective for antimicrobial stewardship in hospital settings. The reliability of results may be strengthened with the performance of additional research of higher methodological quality.

Suspected penicillin allergy: risk assessment using an algorithm as an antibiotic stewardship project

Background

Beta-lactam antibiotics (BLA) are the treatment of choice for a large number of bacterial infections. Putative BLA allergies are often reported by patients, but rarely confirmed. Many patients do not receive BLA due to suspected allergy. There is no systematic approach to risk stratification in the case of a history of suspected BLA allergy.

Methods

Using the available stratification programs and taking current guidelines into account, an algorithm for risk stratification, including recommendations on the use of antibiotics in cases of compellingly indicated BLA despite suspected BLA allergy, was formulated by the authors for their maximum care university hospital.

Results

The hospital is in great need of recommendations on how to deal with BLA allergies. Patient-reported information in the history forms the basis for classifying the reactions into four risk categories: (1) BLA allergy excluded, (2) benign delayed reaction, (3) immediate reaction, and (4) severe cutaneous and extracutaneous drug reaction. Recommendations strictly depend on this classification and range from use of full-dose BLA or use of BLA under certain conditions (e.g., two-stage dose escalation, non-cross-reactive BLA only) to prohibiting all BLA and the use of alternative non-BLA. In case of suspected immediate or delayed allergic reactions, there is an additional recommendation regarding subsequent allergy testing during a symptom-free interval.

Conclusion

Triage of patients with suspected BLA is urgently required. While allergy testing, including provocation testing, represents the most reliable solution, this is not feasible in all patients due to the high prevalence of BLA allergies. The risk stratification algorithm developed for the authors’ hospital represents a tool suitable to making a contribution to rational antibiotic therapy.