Intervention in anaphylaxis: the experience of one paediatric centre based on NORA reports

INTRODUCTION: Intramuscular adrenaline administration is the primary intervention in anaphylaxis. AIM: To analyse the data on intervention in children admitted due to anaphylaxis to the tertiary paediatric centre and compare them to the data from the Network for Online-Registration of Anaphylaxis. MATERIAL AND METHODS: A validated structured on-line questionnaire was used to collect data concerning the first and second-line intervention in anaphylaxis. The study was conducted in cooperation with the European Anaphylaxis Registry. RESULTS: The study group comprised 114 children (76 boys, 66.87%) aged 5 months–17 years with the predominance of moderate-to-severe anaphylaxis (grade III in Ring and Messmer’s, and grade IV in Mueller’s scale). In 103 (90.4%) children the first line of medical intervention was provided by medical staff. In the first-line intervention 39 (34.8%) children were given adrenaline. Five (4.4%) children were given the second dose of adrenaline and were admitted to the intensive care unit. In the second-line intervention adrenaline was given to 12 (15.6%) children. In one third it was at least the second reaction to the same trigger. Children treated with adrenaline were older (9.3 ±4.8 years), in comparison to those not treated (7.3 ±4.6 years, p = 0.034). Directly after the episode of anaphylaxis the children got the prescription for the adrenaline autoinjector in 35.1%, emergency training in 7.9%, and counselling on the avoidance of the anaphylaxis trigger in 30.7%. Grade III R&M reaction increased 3-fold the odds of AAI prescription (95% CI: 1.08–8.15). CONCLUSIONS: There is a strong need to continue education on proper management of anaphylaxis in children.