TY - JOUR
T1 - Outcomes of allergy/immunology follow-up after an emergency department evaluation for anaphylaxis
AU - Campbell, Ronna L.
AU - Park, Miguel A.
AU - Kueber, Michael A.
AU - Lee, Sangil
AU - Hagan, John B.
N1 - Funding Information:
This study was supported by the Small Grants Program of the Department of Emergency Medicine, Mayo Clinic , Rochester, Minn.
Funding Information:
Conflicts of interest: M. A. Park has received consultancy fees from Baxter for a virtual advisory board. J. B. Hagan has received research support from the National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute , National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases , GlaxoSmithKline , AstraZeneca , and Small Grants Program ; and has received travel support from MedImmune. The rest of the authors declare that they have no relevant conflicts of interest.
Publisher Copyright:
© 2014 American Academy of Allergy, Asthma & Immunology.
Copyright:
Copyright 2016 Elsevier B.V., All rights reserved.
PY - 2015/1/1
Y1 - 2015/1/1
N2 - Background: Anaphylaxis guidelines currently recommend referring patients with anaphylaxis seen in the emergency department (ED) to an allergist for follow up. Objective: The objective of our study was to evaluate outcomes of allergy/immunology follow-up after an ED visit for anaphylaxis. Methods: A retrospective health records review was conducted from April 2008 to August 2012. Charts were reviewed independently by 2 allergists to determine outcomes. Descriptive statistics with corresponding 95% CIs were calculated. Results: Among 573 patients seen in the ED who met anaphylaxis diagnostic criteria, 217 (38%) had a documented allergy/immunology follow-up. After allergy/immunology evaluation, 16 patients (7% [95% CI, 5%-12%]) had anaphylaxis ruled out. Among those with an unknown ED trigger (n= 74), 24 (32% [95% CI, 23%-44%]) had a trigger identified; and, among those who had a specific suspected ED trigger (n= 143), 9 (6% [95% CI, 3%-12%]) had a trigger identified in a category other than the one suspected in the ED, and 28 (20% [95% CI, 14%-27%]) had an unknown trigger. Thus, there were a total of 77 patients (35% [95% CI, 29%-42%]) who had an alteration in the diagnosis of anaphylaxis or trigger after allergy/immunology evaluation. Four patients (2% [95% CI, 0.7%-4.6%]) were diagnosed with a mast cell activation disorder, and 13 patients (6% [95% CI, 4%-10%]) underwent immunotherapy or desensitization. Conclusion: Overall, 35% of the patients with suspected anaphylaxis in the ED had an alteration in the diagnosis or suspected trigger after allergy/immunology evaluation. These results underscore the importance of allergy/immunology follow-up after an ED visit for anaphylaxis.
AB - Background: Anaphylaxis guidelines currently recommend referring patients with anaphylaxis seen in the emergency department (ED) to an allergist for follow up. Objective: The objective of our study was to evaluate outcomes of allergy/immunology follow-up after an ED visit for anaphylaxis. Methods: A retrospective health records review was conducted from April 2008 to August 2012. Charts were reviewed independently by 2 allergists to determine outcomes. Descriptive statistics with corresponding 95% CIs were calculated. Results: Among 573 patients seen in the ED who met anaphylaxis diagnostic criteria, 217 (38%) had a documented allergy/immunology follow-up. After allergy/immunology evaluation, 16 patients (7% [95% CI, 5%-12%]) had anaphylaxis ruled out. Among those with an unknown ED trigger (n= 74), 24 (32% [95% CI, 23%-44%]) had a trigger identified; and, among those who had a specific suspected ED trigger (n= 143), 9 (6% [95% CI, 3%-12%]) had a trigger identified in a category other than the one suspected in the ED, and 28 (20% [95% CI, 14%-27%]) had an unknown trigger. Thus, there were a total of 77 patients (35% [95% CI, 29%-42%]) who had an alteration in the diagnosis of anaphylaxis or trigger after allergy/immunology evaluation. Four patients (2% [95% CI, 0.7%-4.6%]) were diagnosed with a mast cell activation disorder, and 13 patients (6% [95% CI, 4%-10%]) underwent immunotherapy or desensitization. Conclusion: Overall, 35% of the patients with suspected anaphylaxis in the ED had an alteration in the diagnosis or suspected trigger after allergy/immunology evaluation. These results underscore the importance of allergy/immunology follow-up after an ED visit for anaphylaxis.
KW - Anaphylaxis
KW - Emergency medicine
KW - Follow-up studies
KW - Immunologic desensitization
KW - Mast cell disease
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=84920841977&partnerID=8YFLogxK
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=84920841977&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1016/j.jaip.2014.07.011
DO - 10.1016/j.jaip.2014.07.011
M3 - Article
C2 - 25577624
AN - SCOPUS:84920841977
SN - 2213-2198
VL - 3
SP - 88
EP - 93
JO - Journal of Allergy and Clinical Immunology: In Practice
JF - Journal of Allergy and Clinical Immunology: In Practice
IS - 1
ER -