Community Use of Epinephrine for the Treatment of Anaphylaxis: A Review and Meta-Analysis

Milk-induced anaphylaxis among children presenting to Canadian emergency departments

BACKGROUND

Cow's milk is one of the most common and burdensome allergens in pediatrics, and it can induce severe anaphylactic reactions in children. However, data on cow's milk-induced anaphylaxis are sparse.

OBJECTIVE

To describe the epidemiology of pediatric cow's milk-induced anaphylaxis and to determine risk factors for repeat emergency department (ED) epinephrine administration.

METHODS

Between April 2011 and May 2023, data were collected on children with anaphylaxis presenting to 10 Canadian EDs. A standardized form documenting symptoms, triggers, treatment, and outcome was used. Multivariate logistic regression was used.

RESULTS

Of 3118 anaphylactic reactions, 319 milk-induced anaphylaxis cases were identified (10%). In the prehospital setting, 54% of patients with milk-induced anaphylaxis received intramuscular epinephrine. In those with milk-induced anaphylaxis, receiving epinephrine before presenting to the ED was associated with a reduced risk of requiring 2 or more epinephrine doses in the ED (adjusted odds ratio, 0.95 [95% CI, 0.90-0.99]). Children younger than 5 years of age were more likely to experience a mild reaction compared with that in older children, who experienced a moderate reaction more often (P < .0001). Compared with other forms of food-induced anaphylaxis, children presenting with milk-induced anaphylaxis were younger; a greater proportion experienced wheezing and vomiting, and less experienced angioedema.

CONCLUSION

Prehospital epinephrine in pediatric milk-induced anaphylaxis is underused; however, it may decrease risk of requiring 2 ED epinephrine doses. Milk-induced anaphylaxis in children younger than 5 years of age may be less severe than in older children. Wheezing and vomiting are more prevalent in milk-induced anaphylaxis compared with that of other foods.

Disease burden and unmet need for acute allergic reactions - A patient perspective

Background

Acute allergic reactions (AARs) occur shortly after exposure to an allergen, and the severity is on a continuum. Systemic corticosteroids (CS) are mainstay treatment of moderate to severe AARs, whereas those at risk of the most severe AARs (ie, anaphylaxis) are also recommended prescription of epinephrine autoinjectors. There is limited research on the impact of AARs not fulfilling the criteria for anaphylaxis. We have characterized a sample with a history of moderate to severe AARs and evaluated their self-reported disease burden (ie, daily life impact, anxiety, and treatment impediments).

Methods

Survey study of adults with experience of AARs treated with CS. Participants recruited from a web-based panel and using social media were asked to complete a questionnaire related to their allergy and experience of AARs. The results were summarized for the whole sample and across subgroups with and without prescription of epinephrine.

Results

The final study sample included 387 participants (80% women, mean age 41), of which 129 (33%) had at some point been prescribed epinephrine. The most common symptoms were respiratory (80%) and skin (78%) manifestations, and the mean (standard deviation, SD) self-rated severity score (scale from 0 [very mild] to 10 [very severe]) of the most recent AAR was 6.1 (2.0). More than 80% had experience of AARs interrupting daily activities and 50% of AARs that had limited work/studies or participation in leisure activities. Most of the respondents reported some degree of anxiety related to AARs and 43% had feared for their lives. Moreover, difficulties swallowing allergy medicine at an AAR was experienced by 26% and not having the medicine available when needed by 66%. Participants with prescription of epinephrine experienced more severe AARs than those without such prescription (mean [SD] severity 6.8 [2.1] vs 5.8 [1.8], p < 0.0001); however, also those without epinephrine prescription reported considerable anxiety and impact on daily life and to a similar degree as those with prescription.

Conclusions

In this sample, subjects with experience of AARs treated with CS showed a considerable disease burden with anxiety and interruption on daily life, as well as problems related to access to, and swallowing of, medication. Although respondents with epinephrine prescription had more severe disease, a high disease burden was also evident among those without epinephrine. The study increases the knowledge of people with moderate to severe AARs, a patient population that has previously been underrepresented in the research literature.

Anaphylaxis: A 2023 practice parameter update

This practice parameter update focuses on 7 areas in which there are new evidence and new recommendations. Diagnostic criteria for anaphylaxis have been revised, and patterns of anaphylaxis are defined. Measurement of serum tryptase is important for diagnosis of anaphylaxis and to identify underlying mast cell disorders. In infants and toddlers, age-specific symptoms may differ from older children and adults, patient age is not correlated with reaction severity, and anaphylaxis is unlikely to be the initial reaction to an allergen on first exposure. Different community settings for anaphylaxis require specific measures for prevention and treatment of anaphylaxis. Optimal prescribing and use of epinephrine autoinjector devices require specific counseling and training of patients and caregivers, including when and how to administer the epinephrine autoinjector and whether and when to call 911. If epinephrine is used promptly, immediate activation of emergency medical services may not be required if the patient experiences a prompt, complete, and durable response. For most medical indications, the risk of stopping or changing beta-blocker or angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitor medication may exceed the risk of more severe anaphylaxis if the medication is continued, especially in patients with insect sting anaphylaxis. Evaluation for mastocytosis, including a bone marrow biopsy, should be considered for adult patients with severe insect sting anaphylaxis or recurrent idiopathic anaphylaxis. After perioperative anaphylaxis, repeat anesthesia may proceed in the context of shared decision-making and based on the history and results of diagnostic evaluation with skin tests or in vitro tests when available, and supervised challenge when necessary.

2023 International Consensus on Cardiopulmonary Resuscitation and Emergency Cardiovascular Care Science With Treatment Recommendations: Summary From the Basic Life Support; Advanced Life Support; Pediatric Life Support; Neonatal Life Support; Education, Implementation, and Teams; and First Aid Task Forces

The International Liaison Committee on Resuscitation engages in a continuous review of new, peer-reviewed, published cardiopulmonary resuscitation and first aid science. Draft Consensus on Science With Treatment Recommendations are posted online throughout the year, and this annual summary provides more concise versions of the final Consensus on Science With Treatment Recommendations from all task forces for the year. Topics addressed by systematic reviews this year include resuscitation of cardiac arrest from drowning, extracorporeal cardiopulmonary resuscitation for adults and children, calcium during cardiac arrest, double sequential defibrillation, neuroprognostication after cardiac arrest for adults and children, maintaining normal temperature after preterm birth, heart rate monitoring methods for diagnostics in neonates, detection of exhaled carbon dioxide in neonates, family presence during resuscitation of adults, and a stepwise approach to resuscitation skills training. Members from 6 International Liaison Committee on Resuscitation task forces have assessed, discussed, and debated the quality of the evidence, using Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation criteria, and their statements include consensus treatment recommendations. Insights into the deliberations of the task forces are provided in the Justification and Evidence-to-Decision Framework Highlights sections. In addition, the task forces list priority knowledge gaps for further research. Additional topics are addressed with scoping reviews and evidence updates.

User-Centered Design and Evaluation of Clinical Decision Support to Improve Early Peanut Introduction: Formative Study

BACKGROUND

Peanut allergy has recently become more prevalent. Peanut introduction recommendations have evolved from suggesting peanut avoidance until the age of 3 years to more recent guidelines encouraging early peanut introduction after the Learning Early about Peanut Allergy (LEAP) study in 2015. Guideline adherence is poor, leading to missed care opportunities.

OBJECTIVE

In this study, we aimed to develop a user-centered clinical decision support (CDS) tool to improve implementation of the most recent early peanut introduction guidelines in the primary care clinic setting.

METHODS

We edited the note template of the well-child check (WCC) visits at ages 4 and 6 months with CDS prompts and point-of-care education. Formative and summative usability testing were completed with pediatric residents in a simulated electronic health record (EHR). We estimated task completion rates and perceived usefulness of the CDS in summative testing, comparing a test EHR with and without the CDS.

RESULTS

Formative usability testing with the residents provided qualitative data that led to improvements in the build for both the 4-month and 6-month WCC note templates. During summative usability testing, the CDS tool significantly improved discussion of early peanut introduction at the 4-month WCC visit compared to scenarios without the CDS tool (9/15, 60% with CDS and 0/15, 0% without CDS). All providers except one at the 4-month WCC scenario gave at least an adequate score for the ease of use of the CDS tool for the history of present illness and assessment and plan sections. During the summative usability testing with the 6-month WCC new build note template, providers more commonly provided comprehensive care once obtaining a patient history concerning for an immunoglobulin E-mediated peanut reaction by placing a referral to allergy/immunology (P=.48), prescribing an epinephrine auto-injector (P=.07), instructing on how to avoid peanut products (P<.001), and providing an emergency treatment plan (P=.003) with CDS guidance. All providers gave at least an adequate score for ease of use of the CDS tool in the after-visit summary.

CONCLUSIONS

User-centered CDS improved application of early peanut introduction recommendations and comprehensive care for patients who have symptoms concerning for peanut allergy in a simulation.

Severe Anaphylactic Reactions to Home Doses of Oral Immunotherapy for Food Allergy

BACKGROUND

Severe anaphylactic reactions to home doses may occur during food allergy oral immunotherapy (OIT).

OBJECTIVE

To study the rate and risk factors for such reactions.

METHODS

We studied all patients aged greater than 3.5 years who completed OIT in a single center between April 2010 and January 2020. All home epinephrine-treated reactions (HETRs) were identified. High-grade HETRs (HG-HETRs) were defined as HETRs involving respiratory (SpO2 of 94% or less), cardiovascular (low blood pressure), or central nervous system impairment (loss of consciousness). We investigated the rate and risk factors for HG-HETRs.

RESULTS

A total of 1,637 OIT treatments were studied: milk (880), peanut (346), tree nuts (221), sesame (115), and egg (75). Of 390 identified HETRs, 30 HG-HETRs occurred during 27 treatments (1.65% of all treatments). Nearly all (26 of 30) were during milk OIT in patients with house dust mite (HDM) sensitization and asthma (26 of 30 each). Of the 30 patients with HG-HETRs, 21 recovered with one or two epinephrine treatments, but nine (0.55% of all treatments) did not respond to a second dose of epinephrine and were deemed to have refractory anaphylaxis. Three patients required intensive care unit admission and three received epinephrine drip, but none required ventilatory support. Risk factors for HG-HETRs included milk OIT (P = .031), asthma (P = .02) and HDM sensitization (P = .02). No specific triggers for HG-HETR were identified. Of patients with HG-HETRs, 25.9% were fully desensitized, including the four non-milk treated patients; 22.2% were partially desensitized; and 51.9% failed.

CONCLUSIONS

High-grade HETRs are uncommon, particularly refractory anaphylactic reactions to home OIT doses. Although milk OIT, asthma, and HDM sensitization are the main risk factors for such reactions, identification of patients who are at risk is challenging.

Contextual community epinephrine prescribing: Is more always better?

OBJECTIVE

Prompt administration of epinephrine is first-line management of anaphylaxis. Although severe anaphylaxis may require more than 1 epinephrine dose, multiple epinephrine device packs may not be necessary for all patients at risk for allergic reactions.

DATA SOURCES

A narrative review was used to describe key considerations to contextualize community epinephrine prescribing.

RESULTS

Anaphylaxis has a lifetime prevalence of 1.6% to 5.1%. Meeting diagnostic criteria for anaphylaxis is not required for epinephrine treatment of a severe allergic reaction. A "1-2-3" approach to anaphylaxis treatment is important to clearly relay central management steps: promptly administer a first dose of intramuscular epinephrine with proper positioning, and activate emergency medical services if immediate symptom resolution does not occur; consider a second dose of intramuscular epinephrine with consideration of oxygen administration and intravenous fluid if initial epinephrine response is not adequate; and consider a third intramuscular epinephrine dose together with consideration of intravenous fluid support and oxygen for continued lack of appropriate response. Although multiple epinephrine doses may be required to treat severe anaphylaxis, 90% of anaphylaxis cases do not require more than 1 epinephrine dose. A universal requirement for multiple epinephrine devices in patients without a history of anaphylaxis is not cost-effective. Patients without a history of anaphylaxis may be managed without multiple device prescriptions within a patient-preference sensitive paradigm of care.

CONCLUSION

Anaphylaxis prevention involves appropriate education to avoid allergen triggers, recognize symptoms of an allergic reaction, rapidly access and administer intramuscular epinephrine, and appropriately activate emergency medical services when needed. For patients with previous anaphylaxis, particularly those who have required more than 1 dose of epinephrine to treat an allergic reaction, possessing multiple epinephrine devices is an important part of managing community anaphylaxis risk.

Winnipeg-based elementary school teachers' perspectives on food allergy management: a qualitative analysis

BACKGROUND

Food allergy affects 7-8% of children worldwide. Teachers supervise children in school, where most children spend their day. Yet, teachers have variable food allergy-related knowledge.

OBJECTIVE

We aimed to identify how Winnipeg-based elementary school teachers manage food allergy and prevent food-triggered allergic reactions in their classrooms and schools.

METHODS

Kindergarten-Grade 6 public and private school teachers, from Winnipeg, Canada, were interviewed virtually upon providing written informed consent. Interviews were recorded and transcribed verbatim. The study followed a pragmatic framework. Data were analysed via thematic analysis by multiple researchers.

RESULTS

We interviewed 16 teachers, who primarily identified as female (87.5%). Most teachers worked in public schools (87.5%) and, on average, had 5.8 years of teaching experience. We identified four themes within the data. Most teachers (68.9%) had direct or indirect experience with food allergy. Theme 1 described the minimal standardization and inconsistent enforcement of food allergy policies between and within schools. Teachers also had varied food allergy knowledge. Theme 2 reflected teachers' variable confidence/perceived knowledge towards food allergy management, including feeling of stress and anxiety. Theme 3 captured the lack of standardized food allergy education for teachers, and concerns about the adequacy of the current provincial program. Theme 4 described how teachers spoke of relying on other school staff, families and students to have effective communication.

CONCLUSION

Teachers' food allergy management was informed by their knowledge and lived experience, guided by their school policies and individualized students' needs. Teachers identified gaps in knowledge and communication, and desired more training and resources.

Food Allergy Education and Management in Early Learning and Childcare Centres: A Scoping Review on Current Practices and Gaps

Anaphylaxis has occurred in preschools/schools yet there are no consistent food allergy (FA) management practices in early learning and childcare centres (ELCC) across jurisdictions. Presently, there are no reviews that have synthesized FA-related knowledge and management practices within ELCC. We aimed to perform a scoping review of FA management in ELCC, and report on perceived gaps or barriers. A PRISMA-ScR-guided search was conducted for North American, European and Australian articles in English/French in the OVID-MedLine, Scopus, and PsycInfo databases. Two independent reviewers screened the titles/abstracts of 2010 articles and full-text screened 77 articles; 15 of which were specifically related to ELCC. If the two reviewers could not agree to the relevance of a given study, a third reviewer provided guidance. This third reviewer also screened French articles. Thematic and descriptive reports of the studies were presented. We reported solely on pre-Coronavirus Disease pandemic ELCC studies. We included ten articles in this review, which provide evidence that ELCC staff have variable baseline knowledge, comprehension, experience, and practices in place to manage FA. ELCC staff also have limited FA-related training and experience regarding administration of epinephrine auto-injectors (EAI). Emergency Anaphylaxis Plans (EAP) were described in four studies. One study reported the parental influence on the site's food purchasing and FA management. Three studies provided educational interventions, which demonstrated increased and sustained FA-related knowledge and confidence post-intervention. Participants deemed the training beneficial and desired annual training and more FA resources to be available. Across jurisdictions, ELCC staff have provided care and administered EAI in emergencies, but training remained variable. Communication and care planning amongst ELCC staff, and parents, is crucial. Annual education, available EAI and EAPs are tools necessary for effectively managing emergencies.

The Ability of First Aid Providers to Recognize Anaphylaxis: A Scoping Review

Early recognition of anaphylaxis is critical to early treatment and often occurs in the first aid setting. However, the ability of first aid providers to recognize anaphylaxis is unknown. We sought to examine the evidence regarding first aid providers' ability to recognize anaphylaxis. Our scoping review was performed as part of the International Liaison Committee on Resuscitation (ILCOR) continuous evidence evaluation processes to update the 2020 ILCOR Consensus on Science with Treatment Recommendations. We searched Medline, Embase, Cochrane, and the gray literature from 2010 to September 2022. The population included adults and children experiencing anaphylaxis with a description of any specific symptom to a first aid provider. Recognition of anaphylaxis was the primary outcome. Two investigators (DM and PC) reviewed abstracts and extracted and assessed the data. Discrepancies between the reviewers were resolved by discussion and consensus with the ILCOR First Aid Task Force. Out of 957 hits, 17 studies met inclusion criteria: one review and meta-analysis, two experimental studies, and 14 observational studies. We did not identify any studies that directly addressed our PICOST (Population, Intervention, Control, Outcomes, Study Design, and Timeframe) as none were performed in the first aid setting. Articles included individuals who may be first aid providers as patients and parents (n=5), teachers, students or school staff (n=8), caregivers and patients (n= 2) or nannies (n=1). All included studies were conducted in high-income countries. Our scoping review found that signs and symptoms of anaphylaxis were not specific and did not allow for easy identification by the first aid provider. Studies focused on education (n=10) and protocols (n=2) and found that both could have a positive impact on anaphylaxis recognition and management. While we did not identify any clinical studies that directly addressed the ability of first aid providers to identify anaphylaxis, future studies examining education methods and action plans may help improve the identification of anaphylaxis by first aid providers.

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

Background

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

Methods

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

Results

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

Conclusion

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

Comparing the risk of anaphylaxis requiring epinephrine in oral immunotherapy and subcutaneous immunotherapy: A review of recent Canadian real-world literature

Background

The safety of pediatric food oral immunotherapy (Ped-OIT) has been depicted by some as less favorable than subcutaneous immunotherapy (SCIT) owing to the increased number of serious adverse events requiring epinephrine. A review of real-world data comparing Ped-OIT and SCIT safety is necessary to guide shared decision making.

Objectives

Our aim was to compare the safety and adverse event profiles of peanut Ped-OIT and SCIT using Canadian real-word literature.

Methods

We performed a retrospective review of recent Canadian real-world literature on peanut Ped-OIT and SCIT safety and adverse events.

Results

The incidences of systemic reactions requiring epinephrine were 11 in 270 patients (4.07%) and 12 in 41,020 doses (0.029%) in a multicenter study in British Columbia, Alberta, Manitoba, and Nova Scotia studying 270 preschool-age children treated with peanut OIT. Similarly, a multicenter study in South-Western Ontario examining 160 patients between the ages of 1 and 17 years who were treated with peanut OIT showed that the incidences of systemic reactions requiring epinephrine were 5 in 160 patients (3.1%) and 8 in 52,751 doses (0.015%). A single-center retrospective review of 380 patients receiving aeroallergen SCIT showed that the incidences of systemic reactions requiring epinephrine were 28 in 380 patients (7.4%) and 1 in 1047 injection visits (0.095%). These findings are comparable to those of a review of 860 patients in Ontario who received either aeroallergen or venom SCIT, in which the incidence of systemic reaction requiring epinephrine was 10 in 4242 injections (0.24%).

Conclusion

Despite differences in the OIT protocols used and age groups studied, recent real-world data suggest that the safety of preschool peanut OIT or peanut OIT using a slower buildup schedule is comparable to that of SCIT.

Temporal trends in anaphylaxis ED visits over the last decade and the effect of COVID-19 pandemic on these trends

BACKGROUND

Anaphylaxis is an acute systemic and potentially fatal allergic reaction. We evaluated trends in yearly rates of anaphylaxis in a pediatric Emergency Department (ED) in Montreal, Canada.

METHODS

A prospective and retrospective recruitment process was used to find families of children who had presented with anaphylaxis at the Montreal Children's Hospital between April 2011 and April 2021. Using a uniform recruitment form, data were collected. Anaphylaxis patterns were compared to clinical triggers using descriptive analysis.

RESULTS

Among 830,382 ED visits during the study period, 2726 (26% recruited prospectively) presented with anaphylaxis. The median age was 6 years (IQR: 0.2, 12.00), and 58.7% were males. The relative frequency of anaphylaxis cases doubled between 2011-2015, from 0.22% (95% CI, 0.19, 0.26) to 0.42 March 2020, the total absolute number of anaphylaxis cases and relative frequency declined by 24 cases per month (p < 0.05) and by 0.5% of ED visits (p < 0.05).

CONCLUSIONS

The rate of anaphylaxis has changed over the years, representing modifications in food introduction strategies or lifestyle changes. The decrease in the frequency of anaphylaxis presenting to the ED during the COVID pandemic may reflect decreased accidental exposures with reduced social gatherings, closed school, and reluctance to present to ED.

Varying Approaches to Management of IgE-Mediated Food Allergy in Children Around the World

Food allergy is a chronic disease that affects individuals of all ages and is a significant public health problem globally. This narrative overview examines clinical management strategies for IgE-mediated food allergy in children around the world to understand variations in practice. Information was drawn from clinical practice guidelines, recent research, the websites of professional and governmental bodies with expertise in food allergy, and clinical experts from a broad cross-section of geographical regions. The structure and delivery of clinical services, allergen avoidance and food labeling, and resources to support the management of allergic reactions in the community are discussed in detail. The adoption of emerging food immunotherapies is also explored. Wide variations in clinical management of food allergy were apparent across the different countries. Common themes were continuing issues with access to specialist care and recognition of the need to balance risk reduction with dietary and social restrictions to avoid unnecessary detrimental impacts on the quality of life of food allergy sufferers. Findings highlight the need for standardized presentation of practice and priorities, and may assist clinicians and researchers when engaging with government and funding agencies to address gaps.

Who Needs Epinephrine? Anaphylaxis, Autoinjectors, and Parachutes

International guidelines stipulate that intramuscular (IM) epinephrine (adrenaline) is the first-line treatment for anaphylaxis, with an established good safety profile. The availability of epinephrine autoinjectors (EAI) has greatly facilitated the lay administration of IM epinephrine in community settings. However, key areas of uncertainty remain around epinephrine usage. These include variations in prescribing EAI, what symptoms should prompt epinephrine administration, whether emergency medical services (EMS) need to be contacted after administration, and whether epinephrine administered via EAI reduces mortality from anaphylaxis or improves quality of life measures. We provide a balanced commentary on these issues. There is increasing recognition that a poor response to epinephrine, particularly after 2 doses, is a useful marker of severity and the need for urgent escalation. It is likely that patients who respond to a single epinephrine dose do not require EMS activation or emergency department transfer, but data are needed to demonstrate the safety of this approach. Lastly, patients at risk of anaphylaxis must be counseled against over-reliance on EAI alone.

Endpoints and Outcomes After Immunotherapy for Food Allergy: What Is Meaningful for Patients?

Multiple novel interventions for food allergy are currently at various stages of development with the goal of reducing or eliminating allergic reactions. However, the relative success of these therapeutics in achieving meaningful, long-term improvements to patients' lives is difficult to determine as there is currently very limited understanding of the degree of alignment between clinical trial efficacy endpoints and patient-centered outcomes. Furthermore, outcome measures used in clinical trials of food allergy immunotherapies vary widely, are often misinterpreted, and not necessarily consistent with what patients expect to achieve through treatment. This review aims to assist clinicians in critically interpreting outcomes reported in clinical trials and accurately communicating risks and outcomes to patients when practicing shared decision-making.

Impact of Reaction Setting on the Management, Severity, and Outcome of Pediatric Food-Induced Anaphylaxis: A Cross-Sectional Study

BACKGROUND

Prompt epinephrine autoinjector (EAI) use is the primary treatment for anaphylaxis. However, limited Canadian data exist on the impact of reaction location on EAI use for food-induced anaphylaxis (FIA).

OBJECTIVE

We sought to investigate the setting, management, and severity of pediatric FIA.

METHODS

We recruited children presenting with FIA from 11 Canadian emergency departments. Patient demographics and the setting, management, and symptoms of FIA were collected by standardized questionnaire. Factors associated with prehospital EAI use and reaction severity were determined by logistic regression.

RESULTS

We recruited 3,604 children; 60.2% were male and the median age was 5.0 years (interquartile range 1.8-11.0). Among cases with a known location of FIA (85.0%), home was the most common setting (68.1%), followed by school/daycare (12.8%), other locations (11.4%; eg, park, car), and restaurants (7.4%). In the prehospital setting, EAI was administered in 36.7% of reactions at home, 66.7% in school/daycare, 40.2% in other locations, and 44.5% in restaurants. Relative to reactions occurring at school/daycare, prehospital EAI use was less likely at home (adjusted odds ratio [aOR] 0.80; 95% CI 0.76-0.84), in restaurants (aOR 0.81; 95% CI 0.75-0.87), and in other settings (aOR 0.77; 95% CI 0.73-0.83), when data were adjusted for reaction severity, sex, age, comorbidities, and province. The FIA setting was not associated with reaction severity or hospitalization.

CONCLUSIONS

Prehospital EAI use was higher at school/daycare than in other settings, potentially owing to the presence of policies and training on FIA. Setting-specific interventions including educational programs and policies/laws mandating training and stocking an EAI may improve anaphylaxis recognition and treatment.

Bridging Knowledge Gaps in Anaphylaxis Management Through a Video-Based Educational Tool

Introduction: We aimed to develop and test the effectiveness of an education tool to help pediatric patients and their families better understand anaphylaxis and its management, and to improve current knowledge and treatment guidelines adherence. Methods: From June 2019 to May 2022, 128 pediatric patients with history of food-triggered anaphylaxis who presented to the allergy outpatient clinics at the study institution were recruited. Consenting families were asked to complete 6 questions related to the triggers, recognition, and management of anaphylaxis at the time of presentation to the clinic. Participants were shown a 5-min animated video on the causes, presentation, and management of anaphylaxis. At the end of the video, the participants were redirected to the same 6 questions to respond again. The scores were recorded in proportion of correct answers (minimum 0.0; maximum 1.0). Results: The mean age of the patients was 5.8 ± 4.5 years (range: 0.5-18.8 years). The majority were males (70 patients; 54.7%). The mean baseline prevideo education questionnaire score was 0.76 ± 0.2 (range: 0.3-1.0), whereas the mean follow-up score was 0.82 ± 0.2 (range: 0.3-1.0). This score difference of 0.06 was statistically significant (P < 0.001). There were no significant associations between change in scores and age or gender of the participants. Conclusion: Our video teaching method was successful in educating patients and their families to better understand anaphylaxis and its management at the moment of the clinical encounter. Retention of knowledge at long-term follow-up should be assessed.

Trends and determinants of epinephrine prescriptions: a proxy of anaphylaxis epidemiology?

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Epinephrine autoinjectors (EAIs) are recommended to all patients previously experiencing anaphylaxis reaction in order to prevent further reactions and fatalities. Under that perspective, EAI prescription could be considered as a proxy of anaphylaxis epidemiology. Nevertheless EAI prescription rates are still unacceptably low.

RECENT FINDINGS

The review focuses on potential determinants, in addition to clinical indications, which might impact EAI prescription rates by exploring the scientific literature published within the past 18 months, wherever available. Although some controversial results, age, sex, ethnicity, geographical setting and socioeconomic conditions might influence both physician prescription behaviour and EAIs' accessibility from the patient's side, which hampers the accuracy of EAI prescription as a proxy of anaphylaxis. Low EAI prescription and refill rates have been recorded even in the absence of significant socioeconomic barriers, suggesting that economical limitations only partially account for the issue, and cultural restrictions have also to be considered and addressed.

SUMMARY

In addition to providing the same opportunities in terms of EAI availability in all countries worldwide, implementing the resources for anaphylaxis management in terms of practical knowledge, education, and allergy specialist networks is an urgent need, even in the absence of socioeconomic barriers.

Acute At-Home Management of Anaphylaxis: 911: What Is the Emergency?

The appropriate at-home management of anaphylaxis begins with patient education on recognition and treatment, especially when and how to use epinephrine. Delayed administration of epinephrine as well as having severe symptoms and needing multiple doses of epinephrine to treat symptoms are risk factors for biphasic anaphylaxis. The successful implementation of at-home management of anaphylaxis requires appropriate patient selection and an algorithmic approach that recommends activation of emergency medical services (EMS) when the patient does not adequately respond to at-home administration of epinephrine or there are extenuating patient-related circumstances. Fortunately, approximately 98% of anaphylactic episodes respond to 2 or fewer doses of epinephrine, the standard prescription used for epinephrine autoinjectors; fatal anaphylaxis is very rare, as low as 0.002 deaths/million person-years; and biphasic reactions are uncommon (∼5%), and only extremely rarely lethal. Thus, most common concerns leading to recommended EMS activation and emergency department visits after epinephrine administration are generally unsubstantiated. Furthermore, emergency department visits do not always lead to better treatment and drive health care costs higher. Open communications with patients and families regarding risks and benefits of at-home management and observation versus EMS activation and emergency department evaluation after epinephrine administration for anaphylaxis are essential. However, we believe the data indicate that it is time to reconsider the often used and taught approach that recommends EMS activation whenever epinephrine is used.

Tree Nut-Induced Anaphylaxis in Canadian Emergency Departments: Rate, Clinical Characteristics and Management

BACKGROUND

Data are sparce regarding tree nut-induced anaphylaxis (TNA).

OBJECTIVE

We aimed to characterize rate, clinical characteristics, and management of TNA in children (0-17 years old) across Canada, and assess factors associated with severe reactions and epinephrine use.

METHODS

Between April 2011 and May 2020, data were collected on children presenting to five emergency departments (EDs) in Canada. Multivariate logistic analysis was used to evaluate factors associated with severe reactions (stridor, cyanosis, circulatory collapse, or hypoxia) and epinephrine use.

RESULTS

Among 3096 cases of anaphylaxis, 540 (17%) were induced by tree nut. The median age was 5.2 years [Interquartile range (IQR): 2.5-9.5] and 65.4% were males. Among all reactions, 7.0% were severe. The major tree nuts accounting for anaphylaxis were cashew (32.8%), hazelnut (20.0%) and walnut (11.5%). Cashew-induced anaphylaxis was more common in British Columbia [14.0% difference (95% CI, 1.6%-27.6%)] versus Ontario and Quebec, whereas pistachio-induced anaphylaxis was more common in Ontario and Quebec [6.3% difference (95% CI, 0.5%-12.2%)]. Pre-hospital and ED intramuscular (IM) epinephrine administration was documented in only 35.2% and 52.4% of cases, respectively. Severe reactions were more likely among males [adjusted Odds Ratio (aOR) 1.05 (95% CI, 1.01-1.10)] older children [aOR 1.00 (95% CI, 1.00-1.01)], and in reactions triggered by macadamia [aOR 1.27 (95% CI, 1.03-1.57)].

CONCLUSION

Different TNA patterns in Canada may be due to differences in lifestyle (higher prevalence of Asian ethnicity in British Columbia versus Arabic ethnicity in Ontario and Quebec). IM epinephrine underutilization urges for EAI stocking in schools and restaurants, patient education, and consistent policies across Canada.

Seafood-induced anaphylaxis in children presenting to Canadian emergency departments: Rates, clinical presentation, and management

BACKGROUND

There is a lack of data on seafood-induced anaphylaxis in children in Canada.

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the rate, clinical features, and management of seafood-induced anaphylaxis in children presenting to emergency departments across Canada.

METHODS

Children with anaphylaxis were recruited at 6 emergency departments between 2011 and 2020 as part of the Cross-Canada Anaphylaxis REgistry. A standardized form documenting symptoms, triggers, comorbidities, and management was used to collect data.

RESULTS

There were 75 fish-induced and 71 shellfish-induced cases of suspected anaphylaxis, most of which were caused by salmon and shrimp, respectively. Mucocutaneous symptoms were most common, whereas respiratory symptoms were associated with patients with fish-induced reactions who have comorbid asthma (adjusted odds ratio [aOR], 1.18; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.02-1.36). Prehospital epinephrine was underused (<35%), whereas in-hospital epinephrine was given to less than 60% of the patients. Among those with a known fish or shellfish allergy, prehospital epinephrine use was associated with known asthma (aOR 1.39 [95% CI, 1.05-1.84] and aOR 1.25 [95% CI, 1.02-1.54], respectively). Among children who were assessed by either skin test or specific immunoglobulin E, 36 patients (76.6%) with suspected fish-induced anaphylaxis and 19 patients (51.4%) with suspected shellfish-induced anaphylaxis tested positive.

CONCLUSION

Prehospital epinephrine is underused in the management of seafood-induced anaphylaxis. Among children with known seafood allergy, prehospital epinephrine use is more likely if there is a known asthma comorbidity.

Food Allergy Education and Management in Schools: A Scoping Review on Current Practices and Gaps

Currently, no synthesis of in-school policies, practices and teachers and school staff’s food allergy-related knowledge exists. We aimed to conduct a scoping review on in-school food allergy management, and perceived gaps or barriers in these systems. We conducted a PRISMA-ScR-guided search for eligible English or French language articles from North America, Europe, or Australia published in OVID-MedLine, Scopus, and PsycINFO databases. Two reviewers screened 2010 articles’ titles/abstracts, with 77 full-text screened. Reviewers differed by language. Results were reported descriptively and thematically. We included 12 studies. Among teachers and school staff, food allergy experiences, training, and knowledge varied widely. Food allergy experience was reported in 10/12 studies (83.4%); 20.0–88.0% had received previous training (4/10 studies; 40.0%) and 43.0–72.2% never had training (2/10 studies; 20.0%). In-school policies including epinephrine auto-injector (EAI) and emergency anaphylaxis plans (EAP) were described in 5/12 studies (41.7%). Educational interventions (8/12 studies; 66.7%) increased participants’ knowledge, attitudes, beliefs, and confidence to manage food allergy and anaphylaxis vs. baseline. Teachers and school staff have more food allergy-related experiences than training and knowledge to manage emergencies. Mandatory, standardized training including EAI use and evaluation, and the provision of available EAI and EAPs may increase school staff emergency preparedness.