Penicillin Allergy Delabeling Program: an exploratory economic evaluation in the Australian context

Penicillin or cephalosporin antibiotic allergy label: Influence on length of stay and hospital readmission

Background

A penicillin or cephalosporin antibiotic (PCA) allergy label (PCAAL) has negative implications for both the patient and health care alike.

Objective

A retrospective study was undertaken to evaluate the influence of a PCAAL on length of stay (LOS) and hospital readmissions.

Methods

Over 4 weeks, inpatients with a PCAAL who were referred to the allergy service or opportunistically reviewed were grouped in the categories delabeled (group 1a) or advice not followed (ie, label carriage) (group 1b). Comparator groups without a PCAAL were identified, those either on a PCA (the PCA group [group 2]) or on a non-PCA (the non-PCA group [group 3]).

Results

The study population comprised 77 patients as follows: group 1a (n = 19), group 1b (n = 6), group 2 (n = 36), and group 3 (n = 16). Those in group 1a were significantly older (median age 78 years) than those in group 1b (median age 53 years [P = .013]) or group 3 (median age 59 years [P = .013]).There was a trend toward lower LOS in group 1a (10 days) than in group 1b (11.5 days [P = not significant]). Group 2 had a significantly lower LOS (6 days) than either both group 1a (10 days [P = .043]) or group 3 (15 days [P = .002]). Group 3 had the highest rate of patients readmitted within 30 days (n = 5 [71.4%]).

Conclusion

A PCAAL carries influence on both LOS and readmissions, thus identifying the prompt need for allergy review to provide specific recommendations: delabeling and transition to an appropriate antibiotic. The significantly older group of those with a PCAAL who received a PCA after delabeling (ie, a 20-year age difference) may also be a signal that more elderly and comorbid patients benefit from this intervention the most.

Antimicrobial use and appropriateness in neutropenic fever: a study of the Hospital National Antimicrobial Prescribing Survey data

BACKGROUND

Neutropenic fever (NF) is a common complication in patients receiving chemotherapy. Judicious antimicrobial use is paramount to minimize morbidity and mortality and to avoid antimicrobial-related harms.

OBJECTIVES

To use an Australian national dataset of antimicrobial prescriptions for the treatment of NF to describe antimicrobial use, prescription guideline compliance and appropriateness; and to compare these findings across different healthcare settings and patient demographics. We also aimed to identify trends and practice changes over time.

METHODS

Data were extracted from the Hospital National Antimicrobial Prescribing Survey (Hospital NAPS) database from August 2013 to May 2022. Antimicrobial prescriptions with a NF indication were analysed for antimicrobial use, guideline compliance and appropriateness according to the Hospital NAPS methodology. Demographic factors, hospital classifications and disease characteristics were compared.

RESULTS

A total of 2887 (n = 2441 adults, n = 441 paediatric) NF prescriptions from 254 health facilities were included. Piperacillin-tazobactam was the most prescribed antimicrobial. Overall, 87.4% of prescriptions were appropriate. Piperacillin-tazobactam and cefepime had the highest appropriateness though incorrect piperacillin-tazobactam dosing was observed. Lower appropriateness was identified for meropenem, vancomycin, and gentamicin prescribing particularly in the private hospital and paediatric cohorts. The most common reasons for inappropriate prescribing were spectrum too broad, incorrect dosing or frequency, and incorrect duration.

CONCLUSIONS

This study provides insights into antimicrobial prescribing practices for NF in Australia. We have identified three key areas for improvement: piperacillin-tazobactam dosing, paediatric NF prescribing and private hospital NF prescribing. Findings from this study will inform the updated Australian and New Zealand consensus guidelines for the management of neutropenic fever in patients with cancer.

Penicillin Allergy Impact and Management

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

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

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

Delabelling multiple antibiotic allergy: Practical issues

With the growing incidence of multi-drug resistant organisms, delabelling incorrect antibiotic allergies has become an integral part of antimicrobial stewardship worldwide. For example, around 90% of penicillin allergy labels are found to be inaccurate following a full allergy work-up, which deprive patients the use of effective first-line penicillin antibiotics and increase the risk of antimicrobial resistance with the use of other extended spectrum non-penicillin antimicrobials. Significant numbers of adult and paediatric patients over time are labelled with multiple penicillin and non-penicillin antibiotic allergies often during inappropriate antimicrobial use, resulting in a label of “multiple antibiotic allergy”. In contrast to delabelling penicillin allergy where oral direct provocation tests can be used for low-risk, mild reactions, and sensitivity/specificity/positive and negative predictive values of skin tests have been demonstrated, diagnostic tests for multiple antibiotic allergy often require the use of a combination of in-vivo and in-vitro tests across different antimicrobial classes for evaluation. Shared decision making with patients and informed consent are also needed when prioritising which drugs to delabel first, balancing the risks, benefits of testing vs. interim use of alternative antibiotics. Similar to delabelling penicillin allergy, the cost-effectiveness of delabelling multiple drug allergies is unknown.

Differences in beta-lactam and penicillin allergy: Beyond the West and focusing on Asia-Pacific

Beta-lactam (BL) antibiotic "allergy" labels are common, but often overdiagnosed. Although much research has been focused on the BL allergy and the delabelling process in the West, studies from other parts of the world remain sparse. This review outlines the contrasting global epidemiology, shifting clinical practices and disparities of BL allergy in the Asia-Pacific region compared with the West. Innovative strategies to overcome barriers in BL allergy workup are discussed and potential directions for future research and service development are also proposed.

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

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