Preparing Patients for Oral Immunotherapy (PPOINT): International Delphi consensus for procedural preparation and consent.

BACKGROUND: Despite the promise of oral immunotherapy (OIT) to treat food allergies, this procedure is associated with potential risk. There is no current agreement about what elements should be included in the preparatory or consent process. OBJECTIVE: We developed consensus recommendations about the OIT process considerations and patient-specific factors that should be addressed before initiating OIT and developed a consensus OIT consent process and information form. METHODS: We convened a 36-member Preparing Patients for Oral Immunotherapy (PPOINT) panel of allergy experts to develop a consensus OIT patient preparation, informed consent process, and framework form. Consensus for themes and statements was reached using Delphi methodology, and the consent information form was developed. RESULTS: The expert panel reached consensus for 4 themes and 103 statements specific to OIT preparatory procedures, of which 76 statements reached consensus for inclusion specific to the following themes: general considerations for counseling patients about OIT; patient- and family-specific factors that should be addressed before initiating OIT and during OIT; indications for initiating OIT; and potential contraindications and precautions for OIT. The panel reached consensus on 9 OIT consent form themes: benefits, risks, outcomes, alternatives, risk mitigation, difficulties/challenges, discontinuation, office policies, and long-term management. From these themes, 219 statements were proposed, of which 189 reached consensus, and 71 were included on the consent information form. CONCLUSION: We developed consensus recommendations to prepare and counsel patients for safe and effective OIT in clinical practice with evidence-based risk mitigation. Adoption of these recommendations may help standardize clinical care and improve patient outcomes and quality of life.

Development and acceptability of a decision-aid for food allergy Oral immunotherapy in children.

BACKGROUND: Limited decision-support tools are available to help shared decision-making (SDM) regarding food oral immunotherapy (OIT) initiation. No current tool covers all foods, forms, and pediatric ages for which OIT is offered. METHODS: In compliance with International Patient Decision Aid Standards criteria, this pediatric decision-aid comparing OIT versus avoidance was developed in three stages. Nested qualitative data assessing OIT decisional needs were supplemented with evidence-synthesis from the OIT literature to create the prototype decision-aid content. This underwent iterative development with food allergy experts and patient advocacy stakeholders until unanimous consensus was reached regarding content, bias, readability, and utility in making a choice. Lastly, the tool underwent validated assessment of decisional acceptability, decisional conflict, and decisional self-efficacy. RESULTS: The decision-aid underwent 5 iterations, resulting in a 4-page written aid (Flesch-Kincaid reading level 6.1) explaining therapy choices, risks and benefits, providing self-rating for attribute importance for the options and self-assessment regarding how adequate the information was in decision-making. A total of n = 135 caregivers of food-allergic children assessed the decision-aid, noting good acceptability, high decisional self-efficacy (mean score 85.9/100) and low decisional conflict (mean score 20.9/100). Information content was rated adequate and sufficient, the therapy choices wording balanced, and presented without bias for a "best choice." Lower decisional conflict was associated with caregiver-reported anaphylaxis. CONCLUSIONS: This first pediatric OIT decision-aid, agnostic to product, allergen, and age has good acceptability, limited bias, and is associated with low decisional conflict and high decisional self-efficacy. It supports SDM in navigating the decision to start OIT or continue allergen avoidance.

Telemedicine Lessons Learned During the COVID-19 Pandemic.

PURPOSE OF REVIEW: Prior to the SARS-CoV-2 novel coronavirus (COVID-19) pandemic, access and utilization of telemedicine in the USA was negligeable, with very little interest from both the public and healthcare sectors. Since that time, telemedicine technology and services have undergone explosive growth and investment and are poised to change the way healthcare is delivered now and in the future. But has telemedicine truly changed the way healthcare is delivered or is it merely a temporary fix for a temporary pandemic? RECENT FINDINGS: This global public health emergency has exposed vulnerabilities in our healthcare system and telemedicine has proven to be an effective tool to help increase access to care and improve affordability for patients across all racial, economic, geographic, and technological demographics. Looking back on the last 20 months or so since the pandemic started, this review attempts to summarize what has gone well and what has not in the telehealth space and concludes that while far from perfect, telemedicine is here to stay.

The impact of mental toughness and postural abnormalities on dysfunctional breathing in athletes.

Background: While asthma and exercise-induced bronchoconstriction (EIB) can explain some cases of exertional dyspnea, the differential diagnosis of dyspnea is extensive. Dysfunctional breathing (DB) is a condition that is often overlooked and underdiagnosed. Pharmacologic treatments are available and widely utilized by clinicians for exertional dyspnea, but a better understanding of the non-pharmacologic treatments as well as psychological factors that play a role in DB can provide professional, elite amateurs, and recreational athletes with more therapeutic options.Measurement tools for mental toughness: Given the psychological components involved with these conditions, a tool to measure domains of sports mental toughness in athletes could help medical providers create a more comprehensive athlete profile which can be used in conjunction with standard pharmacologic therapy to provide a more effective treatment plan.Diagnosing DB: While normal breathing mechanics help shape appropriate posture and spinal stabilization, DB has been shown to contribute to pain and motor control deficits resulting in dysfunctional movement patterns, which further contribute to DB. Most respiratory specialists are unaware of how to assess the role of faulty sports technique, especially running gait, in dysfunctional breathing patterns making it difficult to recommend appropriate treatment and offer referrals for relevant therapies.Assessing postural changes: Three key components of proper running gait are reviewed and described in detail including trunk counter-rotation, extension of atlanto-occipital joint in conjunction with a forward tilted trunk, and ankle and hip joint range of motion.Conclusions: When underlying gait abnormalities and mental skills are addressed properly, they can disrupt poor breathing mechanics, facilitating a transition away from DB and toward healthier breathing patterns.KEY POINTS In summary, the following points should be considered when evaluating athletes who are having difficulty breathing even when compliant with their medications or if there is not an indication of asthma or EIB:Assess dysfunctional breathing (DB) with Nijmegen questionnaire (NQ).If DB is present, measure mental skills using the Sisu Quiz to determine an athlete's mental skills profile.Evaluate postural changes that may impact an athlete's ability to breathe.Using the three tools of the NQ, Sisu Quiz, and Postural assessments creates an athlete profile that is clinically useful to improve breathing technique.DB is often mistaken for other conditions for which medications are prescribed. By identifying DB early and making appropriate changes may negate or reduce the need for pharmacotherapy.Improving DB will improve athletic performance.

Accelerated/rush allergen immunotherapy.

Accelerated allergy shot schedules for inhalant and venom allergens provide individuals with allergy symptom relief but in a shorter time frame than conventional therapy. Accelerated immunotherapy (IT) protocols allow patients to reach therapeutic doses in a shorter time frame while improving adherence and reducing direct costs (e.g., fewer office visits and medications) and indirect costs (e.g., less travel time, missed work or school). Rush IT and cluster IT are believed to work through mechanisms similar to conventional subcutaneous IT (SCIT). The risk for severe systemic reactions during accelerated IT is low when appropriately administered; however, life-threatening and fatal reactions do occur. To reduce the incidence of systemic allergic reactions during cluster and rush IT protocols, premedication is recommended. It is important to exclude individuals at high risk such as those with poorly controlled asthma or those who are on ß-blockers to mitigate the risk for developing systemic allergic reactions. However, accelerated SCIT regimens offer increased convenience, faster improvement in allergy symptoms, and the potential to reduce health-care costs while providing equivalent safety outcomes compared with conventional IT protocols.

Wearable Technology and How This Can Be Implemented into Clinical Practice.

PURPOSE OF REVIEW: Our day-to-day life is saturated with health data that was previously out of reach. Over the last decade, new devices and fitness technology companies are attempting to tap into this data, uncovering a treasure trove of useful information that, when applied correctly, has the potential to revolutionize the way we approach healthcare and chronic conditions like asthma, especially in the wake of the COVID-19 pandemic. RECENT FINDINGS: By harnessing exciting developments in personalization, digitization, wellness, and patient engagement, care providers can improve health outcomes for our patients in a way we have never been able to do in the past. While new technologies to capture individual health metrics are everywhere, how can we use this information to make a real difference in our patients' lives? Navigating the complicated landscape of personal wearable devices, asthma inhaler sensors, and exercise apps can be daunting to even the most tech savvy physician. This manuscript will give you the tools necessary to make lasting changes in your patients' lives by exposing them to a world of usable, affordable, and relatable health technology that resonates with their personal fitness and wellness goals. These tools will be even more important post-COVID-19, as the landscape of clinical outpatient care changes from mainly in-person visits to a greater reliance on telemedicine and remote monitoring.

Immunotherapy and new treatments.

PURPOSE OF REVIEW: This review comes at a time where new techniques in immunotherapy administration are being developed, new innovations are being incorporated to standard techniques, and new regulations are being adopted regarding the creation and storage of allergen extracts. Prior to the release of updated practice parameters regarding allergic rhinitis and immunotherapies, this review article provides a synopsis of current recommendations, a comparison of the practices in the United States and those of Europe, and an examination of experimental methods that are being studied. RECENT FINDINGS: This article seeks to review and discuss the various methods of administration, build up schedules, efficacy, effect on other atopic symptoms, and safety associated with allergen immunotherapy. SUMMARY: Innovations in standard techniques, such as new allergoids for SCIT, appear to be effective in improving symptoms and increasing IgG levels for grass allergens. Data for newer techniques is less clear. There appears to be increased treatment-related adverse events for ILIT, worse symptom scores compared with placebo for IDIT, and insufficient studies regarding the effectiveness of EPIT for aeroallergens. New regulations seek to standardize the documentation, storage, and creation of allergen extracts.

Quality of life and psychological issues associated with food allergy.

Food allergies (FA) pose risks beyond just the physical harm caused by anaphylaxis. The psychological consequences associated with an FA diagnosis can arguably be more detrimental for long-term health and quality of life than the consequences of an actual reaction. This can be seen in the hypervigilance of patients and caregivers surrounding mealtime, limited social interactions with peers, strained familial relationships, and increased reluctance to travel.1 More than 40% of children with FA have experienced at least one severe food-induced reaction. Given the need for daily nourishment, the potential for a very small amount leading to a life-threatening reaction is real, so it is not surprising that fear and anxiety can overwhelm patients with this condition.1 , 2 Allergists have a responsibility to recognize the difference between adaptive versus maladaptive anxiety. Whereas the demands of a busy office can often dissuade prolonged in-depth conversations about mental health, there are several validated tools that can be used to quickly and efficiently identify patients at risk. Allergists can play an important role in how an FA diagnosis is conceptualized and whether families leave the office with confidence or with excessive amounts of fear. Instilling a healthy respect for foods without crippling families with anxiety should be the goal of any clinic visit. To provide optimal support and treatment for patients with increased stress and anxiety, there needs to be a more substantial and easily accessible network of mental health professionals integrated within FA treatment centers so that patients and their families have the resources to address their mental health needs.

Extrapolating Evidence-Based Medicine of AIT Into Clinical Practice in the United States.

Allergy/immunology specialists in the United States prescribing allergy immunotherapy (AIT) have placed a heavy value on practical experience and anecdotal evidence rather than research-based evidence. With the extensive research on AIT conducted in the last few decades, the time has come to better implement evidence-based medicine (EBM) for AIT. The goal of this review was to critically assess EBM for debated concepts in US AIT practice for respiratory allergies in the context and quality of today's regulatory standards. Debated topics reviewed were the efficacy and safety of AIT in various subgroups (eg, polyallergic patients, older patients, patients with asthma, and pregnant women), diagnosis topics (eg, skin prick test vs allergen-specific serum IgE, factors affecting skin prick tests, use of nasal or conjunctival allergen challenges, and telemedicine for diagnosis), and dosing topics (eg, optimal dosing for subcutaneous immunotherapy and sublingual immunotherapy tablets, US liquid allergen extract history, duration of treatment, and biomarkers of efficacy). In addition, EBM for patient-centered AIT issues (eg, adherence, use of practice guidelines, and pharmacoeconomics) and the approach to implementation of AIT EBM in future clinical practice were addressed. The EBM for each concept was briefly summarized, and when possible, a practical, concise recommendation was given.

Optimal patient selection for oral immunotherapy.

Standard criteria for ideal patient selection with food oral immunotherapy (OIT) have yet to be determined. Although there are a handful of contraindications to consider before recommending OIT, most patients with confirmed immunoglobulin E-mediated food allergies are appropriate candidates. Success rates of OIT can vary widely and be influenced by several factors. Choosing the most appropriate candidate for an OIT program can mitigate risks and provide the best chance for patients to be successful.

Recommendations for Physical Activity in Asthma: A Work Group Report of the AAAAI Sports, Exercise, and Fitness Committee.

Regular physical activity not only improves general health but also can positively impact asthma outcomes, such as control and quality of life. Despite this, many asthma patients do not engage in regular physical activity because they mistakenly believe that they should restrict exercise participation. Health care providers have an opportunity to influence the physical activity levels of their patients during regular office visits. Nonetheless, health care providers often overlook physical activity counseling as an adjunct to pharmacological therapy in asthma patients, and in particular, overlook physical activity counseling. Some providers who acknowledge the benefits of physical activity report being unaware how to approach a conversation with patients about this topic. To address these issues, members of the Sports, Exercise, and Fitness Committee of the American Academy of Allergy, Asthma, and Immunology (AAAAI) performed a focused literature search to identify and evaluate the effects of physical activity in patients with asthma. The purpose of this report is to summarize the evidence for physical activity's impact on asthma patients' disease control, pulmonary function, and overall well-being. Several subpopulations of patients with asthma, including children, adolescents, and older adults, are considered individually. In addition, this report offers practical recommendations for clinicians, including how to identify and overcome barriers to counseling, and methods to incorporate physical activity counseling into asthma treatment practice.

Digital Inhalers and Remote Patient Monitoring for Asthma.

Digital inhaler systems, remote patient monitoring, and remote therapeutic monitoring offer great promise as diagnostic tools and therapeutic interventions to improve adherence and inhaler technique for patients with difficult-to-control asthma. In turn, improvements in adherence and inhaler technique may translate into decreasing the need for high side effect treatments such as oral corticosteroids and costly therapies including biologics. Although more clinical trials are needed, studies that use digital inhaler systems to collect objective real-time data on medication-taking behavior via electronic medication monitors and feed this data back to patients on their mobile asthma app, and to health care professionals on the clinician dashboard to counsel patients, show positive outcomes. This article addresses the use of these diagnostic and therapeutic tools in asthma care, how to choose a digital inhaler system, how to teach patients to use the system, strategies for the adoption of these technologies in large health care systems as well as smaller practices, coding and reimbursement, liability concerns, and research gaps.

Boxed Warnings and Off-Label Use of Allergy Medications: Risks, Benefits, and Shared Decision Making.

The Food and Drug Administration is tasked with evaluating the efficacy and safety of a drug. Despite having a regimented appraisal process in place, safety evidence can emerge during clinical trials as well as from observations and studies conducted after the drug has been on the market, which might require a boxed warning. The boxed warning is the most severe warning that the Food and Drug Administration can give to an approved drug. It is commonly referred to as a Black Box Warning because it is outlined in the package insert by a thick black box to garner the attention of prescribers and patients. There are currently more than 400 medications that have boxed warnings, and the information addressing major risks associated with a particular drug may, appropriately or inappropriately, influence patient and clinician decision making. Health care professionals must use the best evidence and clinical judgment in determining whether to prescribe medications with these warnings. Use of an approved drug at dosages or for indications other than what it was originally licensed for is referred to as "off-label" and is legal, commonplace, and may be evidence-based. All drugs may expose patients to possible harm, so prescribers have an obligation to discuss the best available evidence regarding benefits and harms so that patients can participate in shared decision making.

Using oral food challenges to provide clarity and confidence when diagnosing food allergies.

A verified food allergy can be an impactful life event that leads to increased anxiety and measurable effects on quality of life. Allergists play a key role in framing this discussion and can help alleviate underlying fears by promoting confidence and clarifying safety concerns. Correctly diagnosing a patient with an immunoglobulin E (IgE) mediated food allergy remains a nuanced process fraught with the potential for error and confusion. This is especially true in situations in which the clinical history is not classic, and allergists rely too heavily on food allergy testing to provide a confirmatory diagnosis. A comprehensive medical history is critical in the diagnosis of food allergy and should be used to determine subsequent testing and interpretation of the results. Oral food challenge (OFC) is a critical procedure to identify patients with an IgE-mediated food allergy when the history and testing are not specific enough to confirm the diagnosis and can be a powerful teaching tool regardless of outcome. Although the safety and feasibility of performing OFC in a busy allergy office have always been a concern, in the hands of an experienced and trained provider, OFC is a safe and reliable procedure for patients of any age. With food allergy rates increasing and analysis of recent data that suggests that allergists across the United States are not providing this resource consistently to their patients, more emphasis needs to be placed on food challenge education and hands-on experience. The demand for OFCs will only continue to increase, especially with the growing popularity of oral immunotherapy programs; therefore, it is essential that allergists become familiar with the merits and limitations of current testing modalities and open their doors to using OFCs in the office.

Approach to the Patient with Hives.

Urticaria is a common presenting problem to the primary care provider. Acute urticaria lasting less than 6 weeks may be associated with a drug or food allergens. Chronic urticaria lasting more than 6 weeks is often associated without a known underlying cause. Inducible stimuli causing hives should be excluded using specific provocation testing. Treatment follows a standardized algorithmic approach as outlined by the Joint Task Force Practice Parameter and/or International Urticaria guidelines. Patients not responsive to steps 1 or 2 should be referred to an urticaria specialist for further evaluation and treatment. The prognosis and outcome of urticaria is generally very favorable for most patients.

AAAAI Work Group Report: Trends in Oral Food Challenge Practices Among Allergists in the United States.

The oral food challenge (OFC) is the criterion standard for diagnosing food allergy, but prior studies indicate many allergists may not be using OFCs for various reasons. To better understand current OFC trends, practices, and barriers, the American Academy of Allergy Asthma and Immunology (AAAAI) Adverse Reactions to Foods Committee subcommittee updated a 19-item survey (previously administered in 2009) and sent it to AAAAI and American College of Allergy, Asthma, and Immunology (ACAAI) membership. There were a total of 546 respondents who represented approximately a 10% response rate. Among the 546 respondents, compared with 2009, significantly more providers offer OFCs (95% vs 84.5%), offer >10 OFCs per month (17% vs 5.6%), obtain informed consent (82.2% vs 53.6%), and performed OFCs in fellowship (71% vs 45%) (all P < .001). Fellowship OFC training was limited, with 56% performing <10 OFCs in fellowship and 29% performing none. Although 94% see patients <12 months of age, 35.5% do not offer OFCs for early peanut introduction. Although 79% dedicate a supervising medical provider (MD, NP, PA) and 86% have a written OFC protocol, only 60% had a standardized reaction treatment protocol and 56% prepared emergency medications before OFC. Compared with 2009, there was significant worsening of perceived barriers to performing OFCs, including time (65.6% vs 55%), space (55.3% vs 27.1%), staffing (59.6% vs 44.3%), experience (16.9% vs 11.5%), and hospital proximity (10.9% vs 7.9%), though reimbursement as a barrier improved (45.9% vs 53.7%) (all P < .01). Compared with 2009, although more providers offer OFCs, multiple perceived barriers to performing OFCs have worsened. Hesitancy to challenge infants and emergency preparedness issues are emerging potential concerns.

Work Group Report: Perspectives in Diagnosis and Management of Exercise-Induced Bronchoconstriction in Athletes.

Exercise-induced bronchoconstriction, otherwise known as exercise-induced bronchoconstriction with asthma or without asthma, is an acute airway narrowing that occurs as a result of exercise and can occur in patients with asthma. A panel of members from the American Academy of Allergy, Asthma & Immunology Sports, Exercise, & Fitness Committee reviewed the diagnosis and management of exercise-induced bronchoconstriction in athletes of all skill levels including recreational athletes, high school and college athletes, and professional athletes. A special emphasis was placed on the recommendations and regulations set forth by professional athletic organizations after a detailed review of their collective bargaining agreements, substance abuse policies, antidoping program manuals, and the World Anti-Doping Agency antidoping code. The recommendations in this review are based on currently available evidence in addition to providing guidance for athletes of all skill levels as well as their treating physicians to better understand which pharmaceutical and nonpharmaceutical management options are appropriate as well as which medications are permitted or prohibited, and the proper documentation required to remain compliant.

Using Telemedicine in a Private Allergy Practice.

As technology improves and telehealth companies continue to innovate, the ways in which physicians can provide care for their patients are constantly expanding. Providing quality health care is no longer constrained by local commutes and a brick-and-mortar footprint, but instead can be provided at a local, regional, and national level in ways that were not feasible in the past. The possibilities are endless as we enter a brave new world where medicine and technology meet. But what exactly is telemedicine and how can it be incorporated into a busy clinical allergy practice? What are the barriers to entry and how can telemedicine be used to enhance patient care by providing more options and driving revenue all at the same time? At its core, telemedicine is simply the remote treatment of patients using telecommunication tools such as telephones, smartphones, and computers. Of course, the implementation of this basic concept is much more nuanced and complex, with virtual visits acting as the sounding board for a host of additional synergistic health applications including wearable devices and mobile apps. This new model of health care delivery has the potential to uproot but at the same time enhance the conventional doctor-patient relationship, and if used correctly address many of the challenges that have historically plagued health care. Telemedicine and telehealth technologies can be used to strengthen medical services and overcome many of the barriers that have previously existed by providing safe, accessible, cost-effective, and convenient health care at the touch of a button.

Oral Food Challenges in Infants and Toddlers.

Oral food challenges (OFCs) are an indispensable tool for accurately diagnosing clinically relevant food allergy. Despite perceived concerns, data suggest OFCs, including infant OFCs, are both safe and practical in the clinical setting. The benefits of OFCs can be far reaching and impactful for the patient and parents, with improved quality of life, clarifying unnecessary dietary restrictions, increased social interactions, and reducing fear and anxiety. Demand for OFCs in infants and toddlers will continue to increase in the coming years and board-certified allergists will need to meet these demands by providing appropriate care in a safe and welcoming environment.

Allergic and Mixed Rhinitis: Diagnosis and Natural Evolution.

Chronic rhinitis (CR) is divided into two main categories: allergic rhinitis (AR) and nonallergic rhinitis (NAR). These conditions are more recognizable to an experienced clinician, as they can be more clearly demarcated diagnostically. However, an additional 30% to 50% of patients with CR might have an overlap of NAR and AR, referred to as mixed rhinitis (MR). Progress in elucidating the pathophysiologic mechanisms behind MR and NAR has been made in the past several years, and there are now several guidelines published to assist the clinician in accurately diagnosing AR, NAR, and MR. Clinical history and subjective symptoms can provide clues for differentiating AR from MR and NAR, but allergy testing is recommended to confirm these conditions. Progress in accurately diagnosing patients with CR will be made as studies incorporate subjective (i.e., validated questionnaires such as the irritant index questionnaire (IIQ), medication responsiveness, and quality-of-life tools) and objective (i.e., nasal cytologic testing, nasal provocation, and biomarkers) methods characterizing rhinitis subtypes.