Quality of the Triage of Children With Anaphylaxis at the Emergency Department.

OBJECTIVE: Early recognition of symptoms is essential in anaphylaxis management. The Canadian Paediatric Emergency Triage and Acuity Scale prioritizes anaphylaxis to level I or II (resuscitation or emergency). We analyzed the accuracy of pediatric anaphylaxis triage. METHODS: This was a retrospective review of the triage charts (adaptation of the Canadian Paediatric Emergency Triage and Acuity Scale) of 137 children attended for anaphylaxis at our pediatric emergency department. Per triages' accuracy, charts were divided into TR1 (levels I-II) and TR2 (levels III-V), comparing demographics, initial triage level given by initial assessment (Paediatric Assessment Triangle), vital signs, observations recorded by the staff, and waiting times for physician. RESULTS: Forty-six (33.3%) were triaged correctly (TR1 group), and 91 (66.7%) were not. Median ages were similar (TR1: 5 years [interquartile range, 13.1 years] vs TR2: 4.5 years [interquartile range, 14.5 years]; P = 0.837). Initial triage level 5 was given by Paediatric Assessment Triangle to 69.5% of TR1 and 83% of TR2 cases (P = 0.001; likelihood ratio for TR2: 1.985 [95% confidence interval, 1.11-3.49]). Vital signs were normal in 71.7% of TR1 and 94.5% of TR2 patients (P < 0.001; likelihood ratio for TR2: 2.602 [95% confidence interval, 1.22-5.52]). Symptoms suggestive of anaphylaxis (mention of 2 different organs) were recorded in 45.6% of TR1 and 48.3% of TR2 charts (P = 0.08). Median waiting times were 3 minutes (interquartile range, 26 minutes) and 11 minutes (interquartile range, 111 minutes) for TR1 and TR2, respectively (P = 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: Current triage, based on severity perception, missed most of the cases. Anaphylaxis-defining symptoms were overlooked. Inaccurate triage delayed medical attention. Improving measures, such as emphasizing symptom recognition and defining anaphylaxis risk discriminators, is mandatory to improve their identification.

Comparison of conventional and component-resolved diagnostics by two different methods (Advia-Centaur/Microarray-ISAC) in pollen allergy.

BACKGROUND: Component-resolved diagnostics (CRD) has recently been introduced into clinical allergology. OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to assess the contribution that this new diagnostic technique makes to conventional diagnosis in patients with pollen allergy, comparing CRD with conventional technologies, and to compare 2 CRD methods, Advia-Centaur and Microarray-ISAC. METHODS: Serum samples from 120 pollen-allergic patients were obtained. Immunoglobulin (Ig) E to total extracts (CAP System) and individual allergens using both CRD methods were determined. RESULTS: The 3 diagnostic methods were in agreement in 62.5% of cases. In 30%, the CRD modified the conventional diagnosis either by detecting new relevant sensitizations (mainly to Olea) or by ruling out clinically irrelevant sensitizations caused by panallergens. The main differences between the 2 CRD methods were the deficiency in the ISAC version we used (ISAC-CRD-89) to detect sensitizations to Salsola and Plantago and that Advia-Centaur did not detect sensitizations to cypress. For all allergens except for Par j 1, a significant association in the frequency of sensitization was seen with the 2 CRD techniques and good agreement when comparing the results of the 2 methods in all cases. Significant correlation was found in the concentration of specific IgE in the 2 techniques for the most prevalent allergens in our setting. The results of the different profilins analyzed using Microarray-ISAC were superimposable although somewhat lower in the case of Phl p 12. CONCLUSIONS: Component-resolved diagnostics modified the conventional diagnosis in 30% of cases. The results from the 2 CRD methods showed good agreement and correlation for most allergens.

Specific immunotherapy with standardized latex extract versus placebo in latex-allergic patients.

BACKGROUND: Allergy to natural rubber latex proteins continues to be an important medical problem among health care professionals, but also in multioperated children. Clinical manifestations range from urticaria to angioedema, rhinoconjunctivitis, bronchial asthma and anaphylactic shock. METHODS: The aim of this study was to investigate the efficacy and safety of a 12-month latex-specific immunotherapy in sensitized patients, most often health care workers. Twenty-three patients with latex rhinoconjunctivitis (20 of whom also had asthma) were included in this randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial (11 in the active group, 12 in the placebo group). Treatment efficacy was assessed by means of symptom and medication scores. Conjunctival provocation tests and quantitative skin prick tests were also performed. RESULTS: The clinical index (derived by combining changes from baseline of six efficacy variables during the treatment period) did not differ significantly between treatment groups. Change from baseline of rhinitis, conjunctivitis, skin symptoms, asthma symptoms, medication score and cutaneous reactivity were not significantly different between the two groups. A nonsignificant difference in conjunctival reactivity was observed in favor of the active group (p = 0.09). Systemic reactions were much higher in the specific immunotherapy than in the placebo group. CONCLUSIONS: The present study failed to show a significant improvement of symptoms and medication scores, probably because of the low level of symptoms at baseline and the low maintenance dose of therapy, even if allergen-specific conjunctival reactivity decreased in the active group. Moreover, the incidence of systemic reactions was very high in the active group.