ABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: There is a scarcity of prospective studies investigating the relative roles of skin prick and intradermal testing, serum-specific Immunoglobulin E, and extended oral challenges in diagnosing children with reported beta-lactam allergies. OBJECTIVE: To determine the sensitivity and specificity of skin testing and serum-specific Immunoglobulin E in children with beta-lactam allergies, with immediate and non-immediate historic reactions. METHODS: Four hundred children with parent-reported beta-lactam allergies were recruited into an open-label prospective study. Detailed allergy histories were collected. Those with medically observed and documented histories of anaphylaxis, requiring epinephrine, or SCARs were excluded. In total, 380 children underwent all testing modalities and a direct provocation test. Each child was followed up for a minimum of three years. RESULTS: True allergy in children was uncommon, 8·3% reacted to the direct provocation challenge or the 5-day extended oral provocation challenge. Children reporting cephalosporin allergy or a reaction within one year were more likely to react to direct provocation testing. The sensitivity, specificity, and positive predictive value of skin testing was 12·5%, 98·8% and 20·0% for direct challenge outcomes, 4·76%, 99·0% and 25·0% for extended challenge outcomes, and 6·9%, 99·0% and 40·0% for both challenges combined. Follow-up investigations revealed that 5·7% of children had a mild repeat reaction and 2·7% continued to avoid the culprit despite successful delabeling. The relabeling rate for children readmitted to hospital was 15% with the relabeing being unfounded. CONCLUSION: Genuine beta-lactam allergies were rare, with over 90% of children effectively delabeled. Skin and serum-specific Immunoglobulin E testing did not aid the diagnosis of beta-lactam antibiotic allergy in children, regardless of medical history. Extended oral challenges proved valuable in confirming allergies and boosted parental confidence.
ABSTRACT
Background: Beta-lactam antibiotics are first-line agents for most patients receiving antimicrobial prophylaxis in surgical procedures. Despite evidence showing low cross-reactivity between penicillins and cephalosporins, patients with beta-lactam allergies commonly receive vancomycin as an alternative to avoid allergic reaction. Methods: Adult patients receiving vancomycin for surgical prophylaxis with a reported beta-lactam allergy at our institution between August 2017 to July 2018 were retrospectively evaluated for potential eligibility for penicillin allergy testing and/or receipt of standard prophylaxis. Results: Among 830 patients who received vancomycin for surgical prophylaxis, 196 reported beta-lactam allergy and were included in the analysis. Approximately 40 % of surgeries were orthopedic. Of patients receiving vancomycin as first-line therapy, 189 (96.4 %) were potentially eligible for beta-lactam prophylaxis. Conclusions: Patients with beta-lactam allergies often qualify for receipt of a first-line antibiotic. An opportunity exists for improved allergy assessment as an antimicrobial stewardship intervention in surgical prophylaxis.
ABSTRACT
Across all settings, women self-report more drug allergies than do men. Although there is epidemiologic evidence of increased drug allergy labeling in postpubertal females, the evidence base for female sex as a risk factor for true immune-mediated drug hypersensitivity reactions (DHRs), particularly in fatal drug-induced anaphylaxis, is low. A focus on the known immunologic mechanisms described in immediate and delayed DHR, layered on known hormonal and genetic sex differences that drive other immune-mediated diseases, could be the key to understanding biological sex variations in DHR. Particular conditions that highlight the impact of drug allergy in women include (1) pregnancy, in which a drug allergy label is associated with increased maternal and fetal complications; (2) multiple drug intolerance syndrome, associated with anxiety and depression; and (3) female-predominant autoimmune medical conditions in the context of mislabeling of the drug allergy or increased underlying risk. In this review, we describe the importance of drug allergy in the female population, mainly focusing on the epidemiology and risk, the mechanisms, and the associated conditions and psychosocial factors. By performing a detailed analysis of the current literature, we provide focused conclusions and identify existing knowledge gaps that should be prioritized for future research.
Subject(s)
Anaphylaxis , Drug Hypersensitivity , Pregnancy , Female , Humans , Male , Drug Hypersensitivity/etiology , Anaphylaxis/drug therapy , Risk Factors , Self Report , Sex Characteristics , Anti-Bacterial Agents/therapeutic use , PenicillinsABSTRACT
Although antimicrobial stewardship programs have excelled over the past decade, uptake and application of these programs to special populations such as solid organ transplant recipients have lagged. Here, we review the value of antimicrobial stewardship for transplant centers and highlight data supporting interventions that are ripe for adoption. In addition, we review the design of antimicrobial stewardship initiatives, targets for both syndromic and system-based interventions.
Subject(s)
Antimicrobial Stewardship , Hematopoietic Stem Cell Transplantation , Organ Transplantation , Humans , Anti-Bacterial Agents/therapeutic use , Organ Transplantation/adverse effects , Transplant RecipientsABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: Antibiotics are the first-line treatment for bacterial infections; however, overuse and inappropriate prescribing have made antibiotics less effective with increased antimicrobial resistance. Unconfirmed reported antibiotic allergy labels create a significant barrier to optimal antimicrobial stewardship in health care, with clinical and economic implications. OBJECTIVE: A systematic review was conducted to summarize the impact of patient-reported antibiotic allergy on clinical outcomes and various strategies that have been employed to effectively assess and remove these allergy labels, improving patient care. METHODS: The review was undertaken using the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines. A critical appraisal was conducted on all studies and a narrative synthesis was performed to identify themes. RESULTS: Four themes emerged: the prevalence of antibiotic allergy, impact of antibiotic allergy on antimicrobial prescribing, impact of antibiotic allergy on clinical outcomes, and delabeling strategies to improve clinical outcomes. Of the 32 studies, including 1,089,675 participants, the prevalence of reported antibiotic allergy was between 5% and 35%. Patients with a reported antibiotic allergy had poorer concordance with prescribing guidelines in 30% to 60% of cases, with a higher use of alternatives such as quinolone, tetracycline, macrolide, lincosamide, and carbapenem and lower use of beta-lactam antibiotics. Antibiotic allergy delabeling was identified as an intervention and recommendation to advance the state of the science. CONCLUSIONS: There is substantial evidence within the literature that antibiotic allergy labels significantly impact patient clinical outcomes and a consensus that systematic assessment of reported antibiotic allergies, commonly referred to as delabeling, improves the clinical management of patients.
Subject(s)
Drug Hypersensitivity , Hypersensitivity , Humans , Self Report , Anti-Bacterial Agents/adverse effects , Drug Hypersensitivity/diagnosis , Drug Hypersensitivity/epidemiology , Drug Hypersensitivity/therapy , Delivery of Health Care , Hypersensitivity/drug therapy , PenicillinsABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: A guideline identifying when inpatients with penicillin or cephalosporin antibiotic allergy labels (PCAAL) can receive ß-lactam antibiotics increased ß-lactam receipt at a large northeastern US health care system. OBJECTIVE: To report outcomes of implementing a similar guideline and electronic order set (OS) at an independent academic health care system. METHODS: Penicillin/cephalosporin receipt (percentage of inpatients receiving full doses) and alternative antibiotic use (days of therapy per 1000 patient-days [DOT/1000PD]) were compared over 3 periods before (February 1, 2017, to January 31, 2018) and after guideline implementation (February 1, 2018, to January 31, 2019), and after OS implementation (February 1, 2019, to January 31, 2020) among inpatients with PCAAL admitted on medical services with access to guideline/OS and education (Medical-PCAAL, n = 8721), surgical services with access to guideline/OS without education (Surgical-PCAAL, n = 5069), and obstetrics/gynecology services without interventions (Ob/Gyn-PCAAL, n = 798) and inpatients without PCAAL admitted on the same services (Medical-No-PCAAL, n = 50,840; Surgical-No-PCAAL, n = 29,845; Ob/Gyn-No-PCAAL, n = 6109). χ2 tests were used to compare categorical variables, and analysis of variance was used to compare continuous and interrupted time series analyses (ITSA) to investigate the guideline/OS implementation effect on penicillin/cephalosporin receipt. RESULTS: In the Medical-PCAAL group, penicillin/cephalosporin receipt increased (58%-68%, P < .001), specifically for cefazolin (8%-11%, P = .02) and third- to fifth-generation cephalosporins (43%-48%, P = .04), and aztreonam use decreased (12 DOT/1000PD, P = .03). In the Medical-No-PCAAL group, penicillin/cephalosporin receipt increased (88%-90%, P = .004), specifically for penicillin (40%-44%, P < .001), without changes in aztreonam use. Significant changes were not observed in these outcomes on surgical or obstetrics/gynecology services. Per ITSA, guideline/OS implementation was associated with increased penicillin/cephalosporin receipt in the Medical-PCAAL group only. CONCLUSION: Guideline and OS implementation was associated with improved antibiotic stewardship on inpatient services that also received allergy education.
Subject(s)
Drug Hypersensitivity , Hypersensitivity , Humans , Anti-Bacterial Agents/adverse effects , beta-Lactams/adverse effects , Inpatients , Aztreonam , Penicillins/adverse effects , Cephalosporins/therapeutic use , Cephalosporins/adverse effects , Drug Hypersensitivity/drug therapy , Hypersensitivity/drug therapy , Retrospective StudiesABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: Nurses, the largest group among healthcare professionals, hold a pivotal position to positively influence antimicrobial management by virtue of being in constant touch with patients and their widespread engagement in multiple activities relating to antimicrobial use. However, the existing gap in nursing curriculum particularly in areas related to antimicrobial resistance and optimal use of these agents limits the clinical application of nurses' skills and pose barrier to their contribution towards achieving desirable outcomes in patient care. This training program was conducted to increase the nurses' awareness on antimicrobial resistance (AMR) and sensitize them on their role in optimal antimicrobial management and stewardship activities. METHODS: Training comprised of 4 modules focussing on topics like key concepts on antimicrobials, AMR, infection prevention and control, antibiotic allergy, optimal use of antibiotics and antimicrobial stewardship (AS). The participants' knowledge at baseline and 1 week after program were assessed. RESULTS AND CONCLUSIONS: 190 nurses participated in the program. Post program there was a consistent increase in the number of correct responses to all knowledge-based questions pertaining to 4 modules. A significant improvement in knowledge scores for all modules from baseline was also seen. The participants rated the overall quality of program as very good and agreed on its applicability in their practice. The training program was quite successful in educating nurses on critical issues related to AMR and AS. Nurses need to be constantly trained and sensitized for their potential contributions in the field of AMR and stewardship.
Subject(s)
Anti-Bacterial Agents , Nurses , Humans , Anti-Bacterial Agents/therapeutic use , Tertiary Care Centers , Drug Resistance, Bacterial , IndiaABSTRACT
OBJECTIVES: Prudent handling of reported antibiotic allergies is an important aspect of antibiotic stewardship. The Dutch Working Party on Antibiotic Policy (SWAB) constituted a multidisciplinary expert committee to provide evidence-based recommendations for bedside decision-making in antibiotic therapy in patients that report an antibiotic allergy. METHODS: The guideline committee generated 12 key questions, most of which were population, intervention, comparison, and outcome questions relevant to both children and adults with suspected antibiotic allergies. For each question, a systematic literature search was performed and reviewed for the best available evidence according to the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) system. The quality of evidence was graded from very low to high, and recommendations were formulated in structured discussions as strong or weak. RESULTS: Sixty recommendations were provided for suspected allergy to ß-lactam antibiotics (BLAs) and non-ß-lactam antibiotics. Owing to the absence of randomized controlled trials in this field, the underlying evidence was predominantly graded as low or very low. Available data support that a detailed allergy history should always be performed and critically appraised. When cross-allergy between BLA groups is not to be expected due to the absence of molecular similarity of the side chains, the patient can be safely exposed to the alternative BLA. An exception to this rule is severe delayed-type reactions in which re-exposure to a BLA should only be considered after consultation with a multidisciplinary team. CONCLUSIONS: Accumulated scientific data now support a more liberal approach that better balances the benefits of treatment with first choice and usually smaller spectrum antibiotics with appropriate avoidance of antibiotics in case of a truly high risk of a (severe) allergic reaction. In The Netherlands, a formal guideline was developed that provides recommendations for the approach toward suspected allergy to BLA and frequently used non-ß-lactam antibiotics, thereby strongly supporting antimicrobial stewardship.
Subject(s)
Antimicrobial Stewardship , Drug Hypersensitivity , Hypersensitivity , Adult , Child , Humans , Anti-Bacterial Agents/adverse effects , beta-Lactams/adverse effects , Drug Hypersensitivity/diagnosis , Hypersensitivity/drug therapyABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: Antibiotic allergy labels are important barriers to treatment and antimicrobial stewardship, but their prevalence in UK hospitals is poorly described. OBJECTIVE: To ascertain the prevalence and characteristics of antibiotic allergy labels in a large UK hospital setting and estimate the proportion of penicillin allergy labels for which point-of-care (POC) delabeling assessment would be appropriate. METHODS: Electronic health records data were analyzed from all patients treated at Cambridge University Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust in 2019. Validated POC delabeling risk stratification criteria were retrospectively applied to penicillin allergy labels. RESULTS: Recorded reactions to antibiotics were present in 11.8% of all patients (32,148 of 273,216), 16.3% of inpatients (13,874 of 85,230), and 9.7% of outpatients (18,274 of 187,986). Penicillins were the commonest reaction precipitant described (9.0% of patients; 24,646 of 273,216), followed by sulfonamides/trimethoprim (1.4%; 3869 of 273,216) and macrolides/lincosamides (1.3%; 3644 of 273,216). A total of 3.9% of inpatients had recorded reactions to >1 antibiotic class (3348 of 85,230). Cutaneous manifestations were the most commonly described reaction features (40.7% of labels; 15,821 of 38,902). Of 15,949 labels describing probable or possible penicillin "allergy" with sufficient detail to allow for the retrospective assessment of POC delabeling suitability, 1702 were deemed suitable for removal or downgrading of the label to "intolerance" without further investigation (10.7%), 11,887 were appropriate for POC assessment using an oral penicillin challenge (OPC) or OPC with prior bedside skin testing (74.5%), and 2360 were identified as unsuitable for any form of POC assessment (14.8%). CONCLUSIONS: Antibiotic allergy labels are highly prevalent in a UK hospital setting. A large proportion of penicillin allergy labels may be suitable for POC delabeling assessment.
Subject(s)
Antimicrobial Stewardship , Drug Hypersensitivity , Humans , Retrospective Studies , Drug Hypersensitivity/diagnosis , Drug Hypersensitivity/epidemiology , Anti-Bacterial Agents/adverse effects , Penicillins/adverse effects , Hospitals , United Kingdom/epidemiologyABSTRACT
Summary: Background. Drug hypersensitivity reactions are presumably immune-mediated reactions that cause reproducible signs and/or symptoms. Overdiagnosis of drug allergy, frequently self-reported, is common and carries significant limitations. We intended to analyze the frequency and impact of drug allergy in hospitalized patients. Methods. A retrospective study was conducted in an Internal Medicine ward at a tertiary hospital in Portugal. All patients with a drug allergy report admitted within a 3-year period were included. Data were collected from their electronic medical records. Results. We found that 15.4% of patients had a report of drug allergy, with antibiotics being the most common (56.4%), followed by non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (21.7%) and radiocontrast media (7.0%). The allergy report affected the clinical approach of 14.5% of patients by motivating the use of second-line agents, or the eviction of necessary procedures. The usage of alternative antibiotics entailed a cost increase of 2.4 times. There were 14.7% of patients to whom the suspected drug was administered: 87.0% tolerated and 13.0% developed a reaction. Only 1.9% were referred to our Allergy and Clinical Immunology department and proceeded in their allergy study. Conclusions. In this study, a considerable number of patients had a drug allergy label on their records. This label contributed to an increase in the cost of treatment, or the avoidance of necessary exams. However, disregarding an allergy record may lead to potentially life-threatening reactions that proper risk assessment could avoid. Further investigation should always be part of the follow-up routine of these patients, and better articulation between departments should be encouraged.
ABSTRACT
Suspected or confirmed antibiotic allergy is a frequently encountered clinical circumstance that influences antimicrobial prescribing and often leads to the avoidable use of less efficacious and/or more toxic or costly drugs than first-line antimicrobials. Optimizing antimicrobial therapy in patients with antibiotic allergy labels has become one of the priorities of antimicrobial stewardship programs (ASP) in several countries. This guidance document aims to make recommendations for the systematic approach to patients with suspected or confirmed antibiotic allergy based on current evidence. A panel of eleven members of involved Scientific Societies with expertise in the management of patients with suspected or confirmed antibiotic allergy formulated questions about the management of patients with suspected or confirmed antibiotic allergy. A systematic literature review was performed by a medical librarian. The questions were distributed among panel members who selected the most relevant references, summarized the evidence and formulated graded recommendations when possible. The answers to all questions were finally reviewed by all panel members. A systematic approach to patients with suspected or confirmed antibiotic allergy is recommended to improve antibiotic selection and, consequently clinical outcomes. A clinically oriented, 3-category risk-stratification strategy was recommended for patients with suspected antibiotic allergy. Complementary assessments should consider both clinical risk category and preferred antibiotic agent. Empirical therapy recommendations for the most relevant clinical syndromes in patients with suspected or confirmed β-lactam allergy were formulated. Recommendations on the implementation and monitoring of the impact of the guidelines were formulated. ASP and allergists should design and implement activities that facilitate the most adequate antibiotic use in these patients.(AU)
En la práctica clínica, un antecedente de alergia a los antibióticos, confirmada o sospechada, es frecuente y condiciona la selección de antibióticos, lo que requiere, con frecuencia, el uso de fármacos menos eficaces, más tóxicos o más caros que los antibióticos de primera línea. La optimización del uso de antibióticos en pacientes con este antecedente es una de las prioridades de los programas de optimización de uso de antibióticos (PROA) en varios países. Estas guías pretenden formular recomendaciones para evaluar de una manera sistemática a estos pacientes mediante una aproximación basada en la evidencia. Un panel multidisciplinar constituido por alergólogos, infectólogos, farmacéuticos hospitalarios e intensivistas formularon una serie de preguntas sobre el manejo de estos pacientes. Una documentalista realizó la revisión bibliográfica. Las preguntas se distribuyeron entre los miembros del grupo de trabajo, quienes seleccionaron las referencias más relevantes y formularon las correspondientes recomendaciones, que fueron revisadas y aprobadas por todos los miembros del grupo. Es necesaria una aproximación sistemática a los pacientes con antecedente de alergia a antibióticos para optimizar la selección del tratamiento antibiótico y mejorar los resultados clínicos de estos pacientes cuando precisan antibioterapia. El presente documento recomienda una estrategia de estratificación clínica del riesgo en 3 categorías. La recomendación de realizar evaluaciones complementarias se basa en el riesgo clínico y el antibiótico de primera línea necesario. Además, se formulan recomendaciones de tratamiento antibiótico empírico para los principales síndromes infecciosos en pacientes con alergia confirmada o sospechada. Finalmente se formulan recomendaciones sobre la implementación y monitorización del impacto de las recomendaciones de la guía. Los programas PROA y los alergólogos deben trabajar...(AU)
Subject(s)
Humans , Consensus , Hypersensitivity , Anti-Bacterial Agents , Drug HypersensitivityABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: Frontline providers frequently make time-sensitive antibiotic choices, but many feel poorly equipped to handle antibiotic allergies. OBJECTIVE: We hypothesized that a digital decision support tool could improve antibiotic selection and confidence when managing ß-lactam allergies. METHODS: A digital decision support tool was designed to guide non-allergist providers in managing patients with ß-lactam allergy labels. Non-allergists were asked to make decisions in clinical test cases without the tool, and then with it. These decisions were compared using paired t tests. Users also completed surveys assessing their confidence in managing antibiotic allergies. RESULTS: The tool's algorithm was validated by confirming its recommendations aligned with that of five allergists. Non-allergist providers (n = 102) made antibiotic management decisions in test cases, both with and without the tool. Use of the tool increased the proportion of correct decisions from 0.41 to 0.67, a difference of 0.26 (95% CI, 0.22-0.30; P < .001). Users were more likely to give full-dose antibiotics in low-risk situations, give challenge doses in medium-risk situations, and avoid the antibiotic and/or consult allergy departments in high-risk situations. A total of 98 users (96%) said the tool would increase their confidence when choosing antibiotics for patients with allergies. CONCLUSIONS: A point-of-care clinical decision tool provides allergist-designed guidance for non-allergists and is a scalable system for addressing antibiotic allergies, irrespective of allergist availability. This tool encouraged appropriate antibiotic use in low- and medium-risk situations and increased caution in high-risk situations. A digital support tool should be considered in quality improvement and antibiotic stewardship efforts.
Subject(s)
Drug Hypersensitivity , Hypersensitivity , Humans , beta-Lactams/adverse effects , Anti-Bacterial Agents/adverse effects , Drug Hypersensitivity/diagnosis , Drug Hypersensitivity/therapy , Surveys and Questionnaires , PenicillinsABSTRACT
Suspected or confirmed antibiotic allergy is a frequently encountered clinical circumstance that influences antimicrobial prescribing and often leads to the avoidable use of less efficacious and/or more toxic or costly drugs than first-line antimicrobials. Optimizing antimicrobial therapy in patients with antibiotic allergy labels has become one of the priorities of antimicrobial stewardship programs (ASP) in several countries. This guidance document aims to make recommendations for the systematic approach to patients with suspected or confirmed antibiotic allergy based on current evidence. A panel of eleven members of involved Scientific Societies with expertise in the management of patients with suspected or confirmed antibiotic allergy formulated questions about the management of patients with suspected or confirmed antibiotic allergy. A systematic literature review was performed by a medical librarian. The questions were distributed among panel members who selected the most relevant references, summarized the evidence and formulated graded recommendations when possible. The answers to all questions were finally reviewed by all panel members. A systematic approach to patients with suspected or confirmed antibiotic allergy is recommended to improve antibiotic selection and, consequently clinical outcomes. A clinically oriented, 3-category risk-stratification strategy was recommended for patients with suspected antibiotic allergy. Complementary assessments should consider both clinical risk category and preferred antibiotic agent. Empirical therapy recommendations for the most relevant clinical syndromes in patients with suspected or confirmed ß-lactam allergy were formulated. Recommendations on the implementation and monitoring of the impact of the guidelines were formulated. ASP and allergists should design and implement activities that facilitate the most adequate antibiotic use in these patients.
Subject(s)
Communicable Diseases , Drug Hypersensitivity , Hypersensitivity , Pharmacy Service, Hospital , Humans , Coronary Care Units , Anti-Bacterial Agents/therapeutic use , Hypersensitivity/drug therapyABSTRACT
Suspected or confirmed antibiotic allergy is a frequent clinical circumstance that influences antimicrobial prescription and often leads to the avoidable use of less efficacious and/or more toxic or costly drugs than first-line antimicrobials. Optimizing antimicrobial therapy in patients with antibiotic allergy labels has become one of the priorities of antimicrobial stewardship programs in several countries. These guidelines aim to make recommendations for the systematic approach to patients with suspected or confirmed antibiotic allergy based on current evidence. An expert panel (11 members of various scientific societies) formulated questions about the management of patients with suspected or confirmed antibiotic allergy. A systematic literature review was performed by a medical librarian. The questions were distributed among panel members who selected the most relevant references, summarized the evidence, and formulated graded recommendations when possible. The answers to all the questions were finally reviewed by all panel members. A systematic approach to patients with suspected or confirmed antibiotic allergy was recommended to improve antibiotic selection and, consequently, clinical outcomes. A clinically oriented, 3-category risk-stratification strategy was recommended for patients with suspected antibiotic allergy. Complementary assessments should consider both clinical risk category and preferred antibiotic agent. Empirical therapy recommendations for the most relevant clinical syndromes in patients with suspected or confirmed ß-lactam allergy were formulated, as were recommendations on the implementation and monitoring of the impact of the guidelines. Antimicrobial stewardship programs and allergists should design and implement activities that facilitate the most appropriate use of antibiotics in these patients.
Subject(s)
Communicable Diseases , Drug Hypersensitivity , Hypersensitivity , Pharmacy Service, Hospital , Humans , Coronary Care Units , Anti-Bacterial Agents/adverse effects , Communicable Diseases/drug therapy , Drug Hypersensitivity/therapy , Drug Hypersensitivity/drug therapy , Hypersensitivity/drug therapyABSTRACT
Suspected or confirmed antibiotic allergy is a frequent clinical circumstance that influences antimicrobial prescription and often leads to the avoidable use of less efficacious and/or more toxic or costly drugs than first-line antimicrobials. Optimizing antimicrobial therapy in patients with antibiotic allergy labels has become one of the priorities of antimicrobial stewardship programs in several countries. These guidelines aim to make recommendations for the systematic approach to patients with suspected or confirmed antibiotic allergy based on current evidence. An expert panel (11 members of various scientific societies) formulated questions about the management of patients with suspected or confirmed antibiotic allergy. A systematic literature review was performed by a medical librarian. The questions were distributed among panel members who selected the most relevant references, summarized the evidence, and formulated graded recommendations when possible. The answers to all the questions were finally reviewed by all panel members. A systematic approach to patients with suspected or confirmed antibiotic allergy was recommended to improve antibiotic selection and, consequently, clinical outcomes. A clinically oriented, 3-category risk-stratification strategy was recommended for patients with suspected antibiotic allergy. Complementary assessments should consider both clinical risk category and preferred antibiotic agent. Empirical therapy recommendations for the most relevant clinical syndromes in patients with suspected or confirmed ß-lactam allergy were formulated, as were recommendations on the implementation and monitoring of the impact of the guidelines. Antimicrobial stewardship programs and allergists should design and implement activities that facilitate the most appropriate use of antibiotics in these patients (AU)
En la práctica clínica, un antecedente de alergia a los antibióticos, confirmada o sospechada, es frecuente y condiciona la selección de antibióticos, requiriendo con frecuencia el uso de fármacos menos eficaces, más tóxicos o más caros que los antibióticos de primera línea. La optimización del uso de antibióticos en pacientes con este antecedente es una de las prioridades de los programas de optimización de uso de antibióticos (PROA) en varios países. Estas guías pretenden formular recomendaciones para evaluar de una manera sistemática a estos pacientes mediante una aproximación basada en la evidencia. Un panel multidisciplinar constituido por alergólogos, infectólogos, farmacéuticos hospitalarios e intensivistas formularon una serie de preguntas sobre el manejo de estos pacientes; una documentalista realizó la revisión bibliográfica. Las preguntas se distribuyeron entre los miembros del grupo de trabajo, quienes seleccionaron las referencias más relevantes y formularon las correspondientes recomendaciones, que fueron revisadas y aprobadas por todos los miembros del grupo. Es necesaria una aproximación sistemática a los pacientes con antecedentes de alergia a antibióticos para optimizar la selección del tratamiento antibiótico y mejorar los resultados clínicos de estos pacientes cuando precisan antibioterapia. El presente documento recomienda una estrategia de estratificación clínica del riesgo en 3 categorías. La recomendación de realizar evaluaciones complementarias se basa en el riesgo clínico y el antibiótico de primera línea necesario. Además, se formulan recomendaciones de tratamiento antibiótico empírico para los principales síndromes infecciosos en pacientes con alergia confirmada o sospechada. Finalmente, se formulan recomendaciones sobre la implementación y monitorización del impacto de las recomendaciones de la guía (AU)
Subject(s)
Humans , Drug Hypersensitivity/diagnosis , Drug Hypersensitivity/therapy , Anti-Bacterial Agents/adverse effects , Societies, Medical , Skin Tests , SpainABSTRACT
Antibiotic allergy labels (AALs) are commonly reported, with well-defined prevalence in the general population; several studies have now focused efforts on immunocompromised hosts. Understanding the prevalence of reported allergy labels and methods of antibiotic allergy evaluation and delabeling strategies has the potential to improve prescribing practices and clinical outcomes in this high-antibiotic use group. In this review, we will discuss the current literature on the prevalence, impact, and evaluations of AALs in immunocompromised hosts with a focus on beta-lactam (penicillin) allergy and sulfa-antibiotic (antimicrobial sulfurs) allergy labels.
Subject(s)
Drug Hypersensitivity , Anti-Bacterial Agents/adverse effects , Drug Hypersensitivity/epidemiology , Humans , Immunocompromised Host , Penicillins , beta-Lactams/adverse effectsABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: Beta-lactam allergies (BLAs) are common in hospitalized patients, including transplant recipients. BLA is associated with decreased use of preferred surgical site infection (SSI) prophylaxis and increased SSIs, but this has not been studied in the transplant population. METHODS: We reviewed adult heart, kidney, and liver transplant recipients between January 1, 2016 and December 31, 2019 to characterize reported BLA and collect SSI prophylaxis regimens at time of transplant. We compared the use of preferred SSI prophylaxis and SSI incidence based on reported BLA status. Post hoc we collected antibiotic days of therapy (DOT) (excluding pneumocystis prophylaxis) in the 30-day period posttransplant for patients without SSI. We utilized descriptive statistics for comparisons. RESULTS: Of 691 patients included (116 heart, 400 kidney, and 175 liver transplant recipients), 118 (17%) reported BLA. Rash and hives were the two most reported BLA reactions (36% and 24%), categorized as potential T-cell mediated and IgE mediated, respectively. Preferred SSI prophylaxis was prescribed in 13 (11%) patients with BLA and 573 (92%) without BLA (p < .001). No difference could be detected in SSI incidence between BLA and non-BLA patients (4.2 vs. 4.3%, p = 1.0). Of 659 without SSI, 169 (25.6%) received antibiotics within 30 days of transplant; mean antibiotic DOT for BLA and non-BLA patients were 3.5 ± 8.0 versus 2.3 ± 5.8, p = .12. CONCLUSION: BLA transplant recipients received nonpreferred SSI prophylaxis more frequently than non-BLA recipients, but there was no difference in 30-day SSIs between the groups. One-fourth of solid organ transplant recipients received systemic antibiotics within 30 days of transplant.