Cargando…

Evaluating the management of anaphylaxis in US emergency departments: Guidelines vs. practice

BACKGROUND: Anaphylaxis is characterized by acute episodes of potentially life-threatening symptoms that are often treated in the emergency setting. Current guidelines recommend: 1) quick diagnosis using standard criteria; 2) first-line treatment with epinephrine; and 3) discharge with a prescriptio...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Russell, W. Scott, Farrar, Judith Rosen, Nowak, Richard, Hays, Daniel P., Schmitz, Natalie, Wood, Joseph, Miller, Judi
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Second Affiliated Hospital of Zhejiang University School of Medicine 2013
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4129832/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/25215101
http://dx.doi.org/10.5847/wjem.j.issn.1920-8642.2013.02.003
_version_ 1782330263709155328
author Russell, W. Scott
Farrar, Judith Rosen
Nowak, Richard
Hays, Daniel P.
Schmitz, Natalie
Wood, Joseph
Miller, Judi
author_facet Russell, W. Scott
Farrar, Judith Rosen
Nowak, Richard
Hays, Daniel P.
Schmitz, Natalie
Wood, Joseph
Miller, Judi
author_sort Russell, W. Scott
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: Anaphylaxis is characterized by acute episodes of potentially life-threatening symptoms that are often treated in the emergency setting. Current guidelines recommend: 1) quick diagnosis using standard criteria; 2) first-line treatment with epinephrine; and 3) discharge with a prescription for an epinephrine auto-injector, written instructions regarding long-term management, and a referral (preferably, allergy) for follow-up. However, studies suggest low concordance with guideline recommendations by emergency medicine (EM) providers. The study aimed to evaluate how emergency departments (EDs) in the United States (US) manage anaphylaxis in relation to guideline recommendations. METHODS: This was an online anonymous survey of a random sample of EM health providers in US EDs. RESULTS: Data analysis included 207 EM providers. For respondent EDs, approximately 9% reported using agreed-upon clinical criteria to diagnose anaphylaxis; 42% reported administering epinephrine in the ED for most anaphylaxis episodes; and <50% provided patients with a prescription for an epinephrine auto-injector and/or an allergist referral on discharge. Most provided some written materials, and follow-up with a primary care clinician was recommended. CONCLUSIONS: This is the first cross-sectional survey to provide “real-world” data showing that practice in US EDs is discordant with current guideline recommendations for the diagnosis, treatment, and follow-up of patients with anaphylaxis. The primary gaps are low (or no) utilization of standard criteria for defining anaphylaxis and inconsistent use of epinephrine. Prospective research is recommended.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-4129832
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2013
publisher Second Affiliated Hospital of Zhejiang University School of Medicine
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-41298322014-09-11 Evaluating the management of anaphylaxis in US emergency departments: Guidelines vs. practice Russell, W. Scott Farrar, Judith Rosen Nowak, Richard Hays, Daniel P. Schmitz, Natalie Wood, Joseph Miller, Judi World J Emerg Med Original Article BACKGROUND: Anaphylaxis is characterized by acute episodes of potentially life-threatening symptoms that are often treated in the emergency setting. Current guidelines recommend: 1) quick diagnosis using standard criteria; 2) first-line treatment with epinephrine; and 3) discharge with a prescription for an epinephrine auto-injector, written instructions regarding long-term management, and a referral (preferably, allergy) for follow-up. However, studies suggest low concordance with guideline recommendations by emergency medicine (EM) providers. The study aimed to evaluate how emergency departments (EDs) in the United States (US) manage anaphylaxis in relation to guideline recommendations. METHODS: This was an online anonymous survey of a random sample of EM health providers in US EDs. RESULTS: Data analysis included 207 EM providers. For respondent EDs, approximately 9% reported using agreed-upon clinical criteria to diagnose anaphylaxis; 42% reported administering epinephrine in the ED for most anaphylaxis episodes; and <50% provided patients with a prescription for an epinephrine auto-injector and/or an allergist referral on discharge. Most provided some written materials, and follow-up with a primary care clinician was recommended. CONCLUSIONS: This is the first cross-sectional survey to provide “real-world” data showing that practice in US EDs is discordant with current guideline recommendations for the diagnosis, treatment, and follow-up of patients with anaphylaxis. The primary gaps are low (or no) utilization of standard criteria for defining anaphylaxis and inconsistent use of epinephrine. Prospective research is recommended. Second Affiliated Hospital of Zhejiang University School of Medicine 2013 /pmc/articles/PMC4129832/ /pubmed/25215101 http://dx.doi.org/10.5847/wjem.j.issn.1920-8642.2013.02.003 Text en Copyright: © World Journal of Emergency Medicine http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/3.0 This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-Noncommercial-Share Alike 3.0 Unported, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
spellingShingle Original Article
Russell, W. Scott
Farrar, Judith Rosen
Nowak, Richard
Hays, Daniel P.
Schmitz, Natalie
Wood, Joseph
Miller, Judi
Evaluating the management of anaphylaxis in US emergency departments: Guidelines vs. practice
title Evaluating the management of anaphylaxis in US emergency departments: Guidelines vs. practice
title_full Evaluating the management of anaphylaxis in US emergency departments: Guidelines vs. practice
title_fullStr Evaluating the management of anaphylaxis in US emergency departments: Guidelines vs. practice
title_full_unstemmed Evaluating the management of anaphylaxis in US emergency departments: Guidelines vs. practice
title_short Evaluating the management of anaphylaxis in US emergency departments: Guidelines vs. practice
title_sort evaluating the management of anaphylaxis in us emergency departments: guidelines vs. practice
topic Original Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4129832/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/25215101
http://dx.doi.org/10.5847/wjem.j.issn.1920-8642.2013.02.003
work_keys_str_mv AT russellwscott evaluatingthemanagementofanaphylaxisinusemergencydepartmentsguidelinesvspractice
AT farrarjudithrosen evaluatingthemanagementofanaphylaxisinusemergencydepartmentsguidelinesvspractice
AT nowakrichard evaluatingthemanagementofanaphylaxisinusemergencydepartmentsguidelinesvspractice
AT haysdanielp evaluatingthemanagementofanaphylaxisinusemergencydepartmentsguidelinesvspractice
AT schmitznatalie evaluatingthemanagementofanaphylaxisinusemergencydepartmentsguidelinesvspractice
AT woodjoseph evaluatingthemanagementofanaphylaxisinusemergencydepartmentsguidelinesvspractice
AT millerjudi evaluatingthemanagementofanaphylaxisinusemergencydepartmentsguidelinesvspractice