The revolving door: antibiotic allergy labelling in a tertiary care centre.

BACKGROUND: Patients frequently report antibiotic allergies; however, only 10% of labelled patients have a true allergy. AIM: We investigated the documentation of antibiotic 'allergy' labels (AAL) and the effect of labelling on clinical outcomes, in a West Australian adult tertiary hospital. METHODS: Retrospective cross-sectional analysis of patients captured in the 2013 and 2014 National Antimicrobial Prescribing Surveys was carried out. Data were collected on documented antibiotic adverse drug reactions, antibiotic cost, prescribing appropriateness, prevalence of multi-drug resistant organisms, length of stay, intensive care admission and readmissions. RESULTS: Of the 687 patients surveyed, 278 (40%) were aged 70 or above, 365 (53%) were male and 279 (41%) were prescribed antibiotics. AAL were recorded in 122 (18%) patients and the majority were penicillin labels (n = 87; 71%). Details of AAL were documented for 80 of 141 (57%) individual allergy labels, with 61 describing allergic symptoms. Patients with beta-lactam allergy labels received fewer penicillins (P = 0.0002) and more aminoglycosides (P = 0.043) and metronidazole (P = 0.021) than patients without beta-lactam labels. Five patients received an antibiotic that was contraindicated according to their allergy status. Patients with AAL had significantly more hospital readmissions within 4 weeks (P = 0.001) and 6 months (P = 0.025) of discharge, compared with unlabelled patients. The majority (81%) of readmitted labelled patients had major infections. CONCLUSIONS: AAL are common, but poorly documented in hospital records. Patients with AAL are significantly more likely to require alternative antibiotics and hospital readmissions. There may be a role for antibiotic allergy delabelling to mitigate the clinical and economic burdens for patients with invalid allergy labels.

Hearing Impairment and Incident Frailty in Later Life: The Health in Men Study (HIMS).

OBJECTIVES: This study is designed to determine if hearing loss is associated with increased risk of frailty in later life. DESIGN: A prospective cohort study. SETTING AND PARTICIPANTS: We retrieved data of a community sample of men aged 70 years and above living in the metropolitan region of Perth, Western Australia. 3,285 participants who were free of frailty at the beginning of the study were followed for up to 17 years. Data were retrieved from the Health in Men Study (HIMS) and the Western Australian Data Linkage System (WADLS). MEASUREMENTS: Hearing loss was defined by self-report or by diagnosis recorded in the WADLS. Incident frailty was assessed using the Hospital Frailty Risk Score (HFRS). RESULTS: A total of 2,348 (71.5%) men developed frailty during follow up. The adjusted hazard ratio was 1.03 (95% CI: 0.95-1.12). The majority of the participants became frail by age 90 regardless of hearing condition. The time point where half of the group become frail was delayed by 14.4 months for men without hearing loss compared with hearing impaired men. CONCLUSIONS: Hearing loss is not associated with incident frailty in men aged 70 years or older when frailty was measured by HFRS. However, this statistically non-significant result could be due to the low sensitivity of study measures. Also, we found a trend that men with hearing loss were more likely to develop frailty compared with their normal-hearing peers, suggesting a potential association between hearing loss and frailty.