儿科三级护理中心在开放式食物挑战期间使用紧急后备资源的情况。

Samantha Knox, Jaclyn Bjelac, Wei Liu, Brian Schroer
{"title":"儿科三级护理中心在开放式食物挑战期间使用紧急后备资源的情况。","authors":"Samantha Knox, Jaclyn Bjelac, Wei Liu, Brian Schroer","doi":"10.2500/jfa.2020.2.200015","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Oral food challenge (OFC) remains the criterion standard diagnostic procedure for food allergy. Although the need for OFCs has increased, some allergists may not perform them due to the risk for adverse events and lack of backup resources.</p><p><strong>Objective: </strong>The study aimed to elucidate the frequency of reactions in which emergency backup resources were used and reported on various challenge outcomes at a tertiary pediatric hospital.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>We retrospectively reviewed children and young adults (ages, 0-21 years) who completed OFCs in 2013-2018 at Cleveland Clinic Children's Hospital. Demographics, atopic history, culprit food, reaction history, and diagnostic testing as well as challenge details and outcomes were collected and analyzed.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>A total of 1269 challenges of 812 unique patients ages 5 months to 21 years were reviewed. More than half of challenges were performed in patients with a history of a reaction and positive testing result before challenge. The foods with the highest proportion of allergic outcomes were egg, sesame, and baked egg. More than one-third of challenge reactions were grade 3 or 4 anaphylaxis when using a food-induced anaphylaxis grading scale. Epinephrine was used for reactions in 7.2% of all challenges. Reactions in five challenges (0.4%) prompted utilization of backup emergency resources.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>On review of nearly 1300 OFCs, emergency backup resources were rarely used, despite a large proportion of moderate-to-severe reactions. The need for backup resources during food challenges is rare, which suggests that most typical allergy offices are able to treat OFC reactions.</p>","PeriodicalId":73751,"journal":{"name":"Journal of food allergy","volume":"2 2","pages":"152-160"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2020-12-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11250617/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Use of emergency backup resources during open food challenges at a pediatric tertiary care center.\",\"authors\":\"Samantha Knox, Jaclyn Bjelac, Wei Liu, Brian Schroer\",\"doi\":\"10.2500/jfa.2020.2.200015\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Oral food challenge (OFC) remains the criterion standard diagnostic procedure for food allergy. Although the need for OFCs has increased, some allergists may not perform them due to the risk for adverse events and lack of backup resources.</p><p><strong>Objective: </strong>The study aimed to elucidate the frequency of reactions in which emergency backup resources were used and reported on various challenge outcomes at a tertiary pediatric hospital.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>We retrospectively reviewed children and young adults (ages, 0-21 years) who completed OFCs in 2013-2018 at Cleveland Clinic Children's Hospital. Demographics, atopic history, culprit food, reaction history, and diagnostic testing as well as challenge details and outcomes were collected and analyzed.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>A total of 1269 challenges of 812 unique patients ages 5 months to 21 years were reviewed. More than half of challenges were performed in patients with a history of a reaction and positive testing result before challenge. The foods with the highest proportion of allergic outcomes were egg, sesame, and baked egg. More than one-third of challenge reactions were grade 3 or 4 anaphylaxis when using a food-induced anaphylaxis grading scale. Epinephrine was used for reactions in 7.2% of all challenges. Reactions in five challenges (0.4%) prompted utilization of backup emergency resources.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>On review of nearly 1300 OFCs, emergency backup resources were rarely used, despite a large proportion of moderate-to-severe reactions. The need for backup resources during food challenges is rare, which suggests that most typical allergy offices are able to treat OFC reactions.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":73751,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of food allergy\",\"volume\":\"2 2\",\"pages\":\"152-160\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2020-12-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11250617/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of food allergy\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.2500/jfa.2020.2.200015\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of food allergy","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.2500/jfa.2020.2.200015","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

背景:口服食物挑战(OFC)仍然是食物过敏的标准诊断程序。尽管对 OFC 的需求有所增加,但由于存在不良事件风险和缺乏后备资源,一些过敏学家可能不会进行 OFC:本研究旨在阐明一家三级儿科医院使用紧急备用资源的反应频率,并报告各种挑战结果:我们对克利夫兰诊所儿童医院 2013-2018 年完成 OFC 的儿童和年轻成人(0-21 岁)进行了回顾性研究。我们收集并分析了人口统计学、特应性病史、罪魁祸首食物、反应史、诊断测试以及挑战细节和结果:结果:共审查了 812 名年龄在 5 个月至 21 岁之间的患者的 1269 项挑战。半数以上的挑战者在挑战前有过敏反应史且检测结果呈阳性。出现过敏结果比例最高的食物是鸡蛋、芝麻和烤鸡蛋。根据食物诱发过敏性休克分级表,超过三分之一的挑战反应属于 3 级或 4 级过敏性休克。在所有挑战中,有 7.2% 的反应使用了肾上腺素。有 5 次挑战(0.4%)中的反应需要使用后备急救资源:在对近 1300 次 OFC 进行审查后发现,尽管中度至重度反应占很大比例,但很少使用紧急后备资源。在食物挑战中很少需要使用后备资源,这表明大多数典型的过敏办公室都有能力治疗 OFC 反应。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Use of emergency backup resources during open food challenges at a pediatric tertiary care center.

Background: Oral food challenge (OFC) remains the criterion standard diagnostic procedure for food allergy. Although the need for OFCs has increased, some allergists may not perform them due to the risk for adverse events and lack of backup resources.

Objective: The study aimed to elucidate the frequency of reactions in which emergency backup resources were used and reported on various challenge outcomes at a tertiary pediatric hospital.

Methods: We retrospectively reviewed children and young adults (ages, 0-21 years) who completed OFCs in 2013-2018 at Cleveland Clinic Children's Hospital. Demographics, atopic history, culprit food, reaction history, and diagnostic testing as well as challenge details and outcomes were collected and analyzed.

Results: A total of 1269 challenges of 812 unique patients ages 5 months to 21 years were reviewed. More than half of challenges were performed in patients with a history of a reaction and positive testing result before challenge. The foods with the highest proportion of allergic outcomes were egg, sesame, and baked egg. More than one-third of challenge reactions were grade 3 or 4 anaphylaxis when using a food-induced anaphylaxis grading scale. Epinephrine was used for reactions in 7.2% of all challenges. Reactions in five challenges (0.4%) prompted utilization of backup emergency resources.

Conclusion: On review of nearly 1300 OFCs, emergency backup resources were rarely used, despite a large proportion of moderate-to-severe reactions. The need for backup resources during food challenges is rare, which suggests that most typical allergy offices are able to treat OFC reactions.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信