RESUMO
Background: Penicillin allergy is a common drug allergy diagnosis in pediatric patients; however, upon appropriate allergy testing, many of these patients are found not to have a true allergy. For patients with a reported allergy, alternative antibiotics are prescribed, which are less effective, more toxic, or more expensive. There is a lack of data evaluating allergies in hospitalized children and comparing allergy assessments conducted by pediatric allergists and pharmacists. Objective: To estimate the percentage of pediatric patients admitted with reported penicillin allergy who did not have a true penicillin allergy. Methods: This single-centre prospective cohort study included inpatients between 6 months and 17 years of age, with a documented penicillin allergy, who were admitted to the general pediatric and oncology units of a tertiary care children's hospital between November 2019 and March 2023. The allergy history, evaluation, and risk categorization were performed by pharmacists. The history was reviewed with the allergist, and the patient was then referred, underwent skin testing, or received oral amoxicillin challenge with monitoring for 1 hour. Results: Thirty patients were included, of whom 29 (97%) had delabelling of their penicillin allergy. Four patients (13%) had delabelling on the basis of history alone, without risk assessment. Twenty-five (83%) of the patients were assessed as having low risk; 24 of these had delabelling following oral challenge, and 1 did not complete the oral challenge because of transfer to another hospital. One patient (3%) was assessed as having moderate risk, with delabelling on the basis of results of skin testing and oral challenge. The pharmacist's and allergist's risk assessments were in agreement in 29 (97%) of the 30 cases. Conclusions: Pediatric patients, including those with oncologic malignancies, are often mislabelled as having a penicillin allergy. Pharmacists are able to accurately determine true allergy risk and delabel penicillin allergies for pediatric patients in the hospital setting.
Contexte: L'allergie à la pénicilline est un diagnostic d'allergie médicamenteuse courant chez les patients pédiatriques; cependant, après des tests d'allergie appropriés, bon nombre de ces patients ne présentent pas de véritable allergie. Pour ceux présentant une allergie signalée, des antibiotiques alternatifs sont prescrits, moins efficaces, plus toxiques ou plus coûteux. Peu de données permettent d'évaluer les allergies chez les enfants hospitalisés et de comparer les évaluations des allergies réalisées par les allergologues pédiatriques et les pharmaciens. Objectif: Estimer le pourcentage de patients pédiatriques admis avec une allergie à la pénicilline signalée, mais qui n'avaient pas de véritable allergie à la pénicilline. Méthodologie: Cette étude de cohorte prospective monocentrique comprenait des patients hospitalisés âgés de 6 mois à 17 ans, présentant une allergie documentée à la pénicilline, qui ont été admis dans les unités de pédiatrie générale et d'oncologie d'un hôpital pour enfants de soins tertiaires entre novembre 2019 et mars 2023. Les antécédents, l'évaluation et la catégorisation des risques de l'allergie ont été renseignés par les pharmaciens. L'anamnèse a été revue avec l'allergologue, et le patient a ensuite été référé, a subi un test cutané ou a reçu une provocation orale à l'amoxicilline avec surveillance pendant 1 heure. Résultats: Sur 30 patients inclus, 29 (97 %) ont vu un désétiquetage de leur allergie à la pénicilline. Quatre patients (13 %) ont bénéficié d'un désétiquetage sur la seule base de leurs antécédents, sans évaluation des risques. Vingt-cinq (83 %) patients ont été évalués comme présentant un faible risque; 24 d'entre eux ont bénéficié d'un désétiquetage à la suite d'une provocation orale, et 1 n'a pas terminé la provocation orale en raison d'un transfert vers un autre hôpital. Un patient (3 %) a été évalué comme présentant un risque modéré, avec un désétiquetage basé sur les résultats des tests cutanés et de la provocation orale. Les évaluations des risques par le pharmacien et l'allergologue concordaient dans 29 (97 %) des 30 cas. Conclusions: Les patients pédiatriques, y compris ceux atteints de cancers malins, sont souvent étiquetés à tort comme ayant une allergie à la pénicilline. Les pharmaciens sont en mesure de déterminer avec précision le risque réel d'allergie et de désétiqueter les allergies à la pénicilline chez les patients pédiatriques en milieu hospitalier.
RESUMO
INTRODUCTION: Brief Resolved Unexplained Events (BRUEs) are a common presentation among infants. While most of these events are benign and self-limited, guidelines published by the American Academy of Pediatrics inaccurately identify many patients as higher-risk of a serious underlying aetiology (positive predictive value 5%). Recently, new clinical prediction rules have been derived to more accurately stratify patients. This data were however geographically limited to the USA, with no large studies to date assessing the BRUE population in a different healthcare setting. The study's aim is to describe the clinical management and outcomes of infants presenting to Canadian hospitals with BRUEs and to externally validate the BRUE clinical prediction rules in identified cases. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: This is a multicentre retrospective study, conducted within the Canadian Paediatric Inpatient Research Network (PIRN). Infants (<1 year) presenting with a BRUE at one of 11 Canadian paediatric centres between 1 January 2017 and 31 December 2021 will be included. Eligible patients will be identified using diagnostic codes.The primary outcome will be the presence of a serious underlying illness. Secondary outcomes will include BRUE recurrence and length of hospital stay. We will describe the rates of hospital admissions and whether hospitalisation was associated with an earlier diagnosis or treatment. Variation across Canadian hospitals will be assessed using intraclass correlation coefficient. To validate the newly developed clinical prediction rule, measures of goodness of fit will be evaluated. For this validation, a sample size of 1182 is required to provide a power of 80% to detect patients with a serious underlying illness with a significance level of 5%. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: Ethics approval has been granted by the UBC Children's and Women's Research Board (H21-02357). The results of this study will be disseminated as peer-reviewed manuscripts and presentations at national and international conferences.