Global assessment of the knowledge and confidence in managing allergic disorders among primary care pediatricians across Europe: An EAACI task force report.

BACKGROUND: Pediatricians are often the first point of contact for children in Primary Care (PC), but still perceive gaps in their allergy knowledge. We investigated self-perceived knowledge gaps and educational needs in pediatricians across healthcare systems in Europe so that future educational initiatives may better support the delivery of allergy services in PC. METHOD: A multinational survey was circulated to pediatricians who care for children and adolescents with allergy problems in PC by the EAACI Allergy Educational Needs in Primary Care Pediatricians Task Force from February to March 2023. A 5-point Likert scale was used to assess the level of agreement with questionnaire statements. Thirty surveys per country were the cut-off for inclusion and statistical analysis. RESULTS: In this study, 1991 respondents were obtained from 56 countries across Europe and 210 responses were from countries with a cut-off below 30 participants per country. Primary care pediatricians (PCPs) comprised 74.4% of the respondents. The majority (65.3%) were contracted to state or district health services. 61.7% had awareness of guidelines for onward allergy referral in their countries but only 22.3% were aware of the EAACI competencies document for allied health professionals for allergy. Total sample respondents versus PCPs showed 52% and 47% of them have access to allergy investigations in their PC facility (mainly specific IgE and skin prick tests); 67.6% and 58.9% have access to immunotherapy, respectively. The main barrier to referral to a specialist was a consideration that the patient's condition could be diagnosed and treated in this PC facility, (57.8% and 63.6% respectively). The main reasons for referral were the need for hospital assessment, and partial response to first-line treatment (55.4% and 59.2%, 47% and 50.7%, respectively). Learning and assessment methods preference was fairly equally divided between Traditional methods (45.7% and 50.1% respectively) and e-learning 45.5% and 44.9%, respectively. Generalist physicians (GPs) have the poorest access to allergy investigations (32.7%, p = .000). The majority of the total sample (91.9%) assess patients with allergic pathology. 868 (43.6%) and 1117 (46.1%), received allergy training as undergraduates and postgraduates respectively [these proportions in PCPs were higher (45% and 59%), respectively]. PCPs with a special interest in allergology experienced greater exposure to allergy teaching as postgraduates. GPs received the largest amount of allergy teaching as undergraduates. Identifying allergic disease based on clinical presentation, respondents felt most confident in the management of eczema/atopic dermatitis (87.4%) and rhinitis/asthma (86.2%), and least confident in allergen immunotherapy (36.9%) and latex allergy (30.8%). CONCLUSION: This study exploring the confidence of PCPs to diagnose, manage, and refer patients with allergies, demonstrated knowledge gaps and educational needs for allergy clinical practice. It detects areas in need of urgent improvement especially in latex and allergen immunotherapy. It is important to ensure the dissemination of allergy guidelines and supporting EAACI documents since the majority of PCPs lack awareness of them. This survey has enabled us to identify what the educational priorities of PCPs are and how they would like to have them met.

The urgent need for a harmonized severity scoring system for acute allergic reactions.

The accurate assessment and communication of the severity of acute allergic reactions are important to patients, clinicians, researchers, the food industry, and public health and regulatory authorities. Severity has different meanings to different stakeholders with patients and clinicians rating the significance of particular symptoms very differently. Many severity scoring systems have been generated, most focusing on the severity of reactions following exposure to a limited group of allergens. They are heterogeneous in format, none has used an accepted developmental approach, and none has been validated. Their wide range of outcome formats has led to difficulties with interpretation and application. Therefore, there is a persisting need for an appropriately developed and validated severity scoring system for allergic reactions that work across the range of allergenic triggers and address the needs of different stakeholder groups. We propose a novel approach to develop and then validate a harmonized scoring system for acute allergic reactions, based on a data-driven method that is informed by clinical and patient experience and other stakeholders' perspectives. We envisage two formats: (i) a numerical score giving a continuum from mild to severe reactions that are clinically meaningful and are useful for allergy healthcare professionals and researchers, and (ii) a three-grade-based ordinal format that is simple enough to be used and understood by other professionals and patients. Testing of reliability and validity of the new approach in a range of settings and populations will allow eventual implementation of a standardized scoring system in clinical studies and routine practice.

Challenges in the implementation of EAACI guidelines on allergen immunotherapy: A global perspective on the regulation of allergen products.

Regulatory approaches for allergen immunotherapy (AIT) products and the availability of high-quality AIT products are inherently linked to each other. While allergen products are available in many countries across the globe, their regulation is very heterogeneous. First, we describe the regulatory systems applicable for AIT products in the European Union (EU) and in the United States (US). For Europe, a depiction of the different types of relevant procedures, as well as the committees involved, is provided and the fundamental role of national agencies of the EU member states in this complex and unique network is highlighted. Furthermore, the regulatory agencies from Australia, Canada, Japan, Russia, and Switzerland provided information on the system implemented in their countries for the regulation of allergen products. While AIT products are commonly classified as biological medicinal products, they are made available by varying types of procedures, most commonly either by obtaining a marketing authorization or by being distributed as named patient products. Exemptions from marketing authorizations in exceptional cases, as well as import of allergen products from other countries, are additional tools applied by countries to ensure availability of needed AIT products. Several challenges for AIT products are apparent from this analysis and will require further consideration.

Allergy management in primary care across European countries -- actual status.

The standard of care for allergies within a primary care (PC) setting has a strong influence on disease prevention and control, quality of life, and patient satisfaction. The level of knowledge of allergic diseases and the accessibility to regular follow-up are essential. EAACI and IPCRG conducted a survey to evaluate the actual status of care for allergic diseases in PC. Access to allergy and asthma specialist treatment was identified as the greatest 'unmet need'. The average waiting time between a referral and being seen in a public health service is usually >6 weeks. Referring the patients to an 'organ' specialist is much easier compared with referral to an allergist. Most PCPs have access to blood tests for total and specific IgE. Skin prick testing is available in only half of the cases, while provocation tests, allergen quantification in homes, and a dietician service are even less available. 20.6% of practices do not have access to allergy tests at all. Other issues raised were low political or general public awareness, lack of understanding by the patients of their allergic disease, the need to invest in PC, and to achieve sufficient competence at the appropriate level of care.