Improving epinephrine autoinjector usability and carriage frequency among patients at risk of anaphylaxis: a quality improvement initiative

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.

Glucagon prescribing and prevention of hospitalization for hypoglycemia in a large health system

AIMS

To examine glucagon prescribing trends among patients at high risk of severe hypoglycemia and assess if a glucagon prescription is associated with lower rates of severe hypoglycemia requiring hospital care.

METHODS

Retrospective analysis of electronic health records from a large integrated healthcare system between May 2019 and August 2021. We included adults (≥18 years) with type 1 diabetes or with type 2 diabetes treated with short-acting insulin and/or recent history of hypoglycemia-related emergency department visit or hospitalization. We calculated rates of glucagon prescribing overall and by patient characteristics. We then matched 1:1 those who were and were not prescribed glucagon and assessed subsequent hypoglycemia-related hospitalization.

RESULTS

Of 9,200 high risk adults, 2063 (22.4%) were prescribed glucagon. Among patients more likely to be prescribed glucagon were those younger, female, White, living in urban areas, with prior severe hypoglycemia, and with a recent endocrinology specialist visit. In the matched cohort (N = 1707 per arm), 62 prescribed glucagon and 33 not prescribed glucagon were hospitalized for hypoglycemia (adjusted incidence rate ratio 1.71, 95% CI 1.10-2.66; P = 0.018).

CONCLUSION

Glucagon prescribing was infrequent with significant racial and rural disparities. Patients with glucagon prescriptions did not have lower rates of hospitalization for hypoglycemia.

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.