Experiencing a first food allergic reaction: a survey of parent and caregiver perspectives

BACKGROUND: Insufficient knowledge of food allergy and anaphylaxis has been identified by caregivers as an important barrier to coping, and a potential cause of fear and anxiety, particularly for those with children newly diagnosed with food allergy. The purpose of the study was to better understand the experiences of caregivers of children with a first allergic reaction to food, and to identify any deficiencies in the information received at diagnosis. METHODS: A mixed-methods study consisting of an online survey administered to the Anaphylaxis Canada online registry (a patient support group database of approximately 10,000 members), and a follow-up qualitative interview with a subset of survey participants. Analysis consisted of frequency analysis (quantitative and qualitative data) and descriptive statistics to calculate proportions and means with standard deviations. Qualitative analyses were guided by the constant comparative method of grounded theory methodology. RESULTS: Of 293 survey respondents, 208 were eligible to complete the survey (first allergic reaction to food within 12 months of the study), and 184 respondents consented. Identified gaps included education about food allergy, anaphylaxis management, for example, how to use epinephrine auto- injectors, and coping strategies for fear and anxiety. The qualitative follow-up study supported these findings, yielding 3 major themes: 1) lack of provision of information following the episode on the recognition and management of food allergy related allergic reactions, 2) prolonged wait times for an allergist, and 3) significant family anxiety. CONCLUSIONS: The online survey highlighted multiple deficiencies at diagnosis, findings which were supported by the follow up qualitative study. Results will inform the development of educational strategies for patients newly diagnosed with food allergy

World Allergy Organization-McMaster University Guidelines for Allergic Disease Prevention (GLAD-P): Probiotics

Background: Prevalence of allergic diseases in infants, whose parents and siblings do not have allergy, is approximately 10% and reaches 20–30% in those with an allergic first-degree relative. Intestinal microbiota may modulate immunologic and inflammatory systemic responses and, thus, influence development of sensitization and allergy. Probiotics have been reported to modulate immune responses and their supplementation has been proposed as a preventive intervention. Objective: The World Allergy Organization (WAO) convened a guideline panel to develop evidence-based recommendations about the use of probiotics in the prevention of allergy. Methods: We identified the most relevant clinical questions and performed a systematic review of randomized controlled trials of probiotics for the prevention of allergy. We followed the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) approach to develop recommendations. We searched for and reviewed the evidence about health effects, patient values and preferences, and resource use (up to November 2014). We followed the GRADE evidence-to-decision framework to develop recommendations. Results: Currently available evidence does not indicate that probiotic supplementation reduces the risk of developing allergy in children. However, considering all critical outcomes in this context, the WAO guideline panel determined that there is a likely net benefit from using probiotics resulting primarily from prevention of eczema. The WAO guideline panel suggests: a) using probiotics in pregnant women at high risk for having an allergic child; b) using probiotics in women who breastfeed infants at high risk of developing allergy; and c) using probiotics in infants at high risk of developing allergy. All recommendations are conditional and supported by very low quality evidence. Conclusions: WAO recommendations about probiotic supplementation for prevention of allergy are intended to support parents, clinicians and other health care professionals in their decisions whether to use probiotics in pregnancy and during breastfeeding, and whether to give them to infants

Food allergy management from the perspective of patients or caregivers, and allergists: a qualitative study

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>Research has shown that the long term management of food allergy is suboptimal. Our study aims to provide direction for improvement, by evaluating food allergy management from the perspective of, food allergic patients or their caregivers, and allergists in selected outpatient settings in Ontario.</p> <p>Methods</p> <p>This two-part study included an anonymous questionnaire completed by patients or their caregivers in allergy clinics, and a qualitative interview with allergists. In Part A, food allergic patients or their caregivers were surveyed about information they received on food allergy, their level of confidence with self-management, and their learning needs. In Part B, allergists were interviewed about teaching priorities and the challenges and strategies that currently exist in food allergy management. The questionnaire was developed and piloted at the Hamilton Health Sciences Corporation-McMaster University Medical Center Site. Using convenience sampling, participants were recruited from 6 allergy clinics in 5 Ontario cities. Patients of any age with food allergy who were evaluated by an allergist were considered for inclusion. Quantitative data was analyzed using descriptive statistics and frequency analysis. Audio recorded interviews with allergists were transcribed verbatim and analyzed using content analysis of grounded theory methodology.</p> <p>Results</p> <p>Ninety-two food allergic families in the care of 6 allergists in Toronto, Hamilton, London, Kitchener, and Kingston participated in the study. Key areas requiring improvement in food allergy management were identified: 33% of families were not shown how to use an epinephrine auto-injector with a trainer, only 57% were asked to demonstrate an auto-injector, despite being on average at their 5th visit, and only about 30% felt very confident about when and how to give an auto-injector. Fifty percent of families did not receive sufficient information on medical identification and 21% did not receive information about support groups. Interviews with allergists revealed limitations in time and nursing resources.</p> <p>Conclusions</p> <p>Our study highlights the educational gaps and overall experiences of food allergic families in Ontario, and the challenges faced by the allergists managing them.</p

Anaphylaxis-related deaths in Ontario: a retrospective review of cases from 1986 to 2011

BACKGROUND: Examining deaths caused by anaphylaxis may help identify factors that may decrease the risk of these unfortunate events. However, information on fatal anaphylaxis is limited. The objectives of our study were to examine all cases of fatal anaphylaxis in Ontario to determine cause of death, associated features, co factors and trends in mortality. The identification of these factors is important for developing effective strategies to overcome gaps in monitoring and treatment of patients with food allergies and risk for anaphylaxis. METHODS: This was a retrospective case-series analysis of all causes of anaphylaxis-related deaths using data from the Ontario Coroner’s database between 1986 and 2011. Quantitative data (e.g. demographic) were analyzed using descriptive statistics and frequency analysis using SPSS. Qualitative data were analyzed using content analysis of grounded theory methodology. RESULTS: We found 92 deaths in the last 26 years related to anaphylaxis. Causes of death, in order of decreasing frequency, included food (40 cases), insect venom (30 cases), iatrogenic (16 cases), and idiopathic (6 cases). Overall, there appears to be a decline in the frequency of food related deaths, but an increase in iatrogenic causes of fatalities. We found factors associated with fatal anaphylaxis included: delayed epinephrine administration, asthma, allergy to peanut, food ingestion outside the home, and teenagers with food allergies. CONCLUSIONS: Our findings indicate the need to improve epinephrine auto-injector use in acute reactions, particularly for teens and asthmatics with food allergies. In addition, education can be improved among food service workers and food industry in order to help food allergic patients avoid potentially fatal allergens. The increasing trend in iatrogenic related anaphylaxis is concerning, and requires monitoring and more investigation

Hodgkin's lymphoma presenting with markedly elevated IgE: a case report

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>Markedly elevated IgE as a manifestation of a lymphoproliferative disorder has been only rarely reported.</p> <p>Case Presentation</p> <p>We present the case of a 22 year old female referred to the adult Allergy & Clinical Immunology clinic for an extremely elevated IgE level, eventually diagnosed with Hodgkin's lymphoma. She had no history of atopy, recurrent infections, eczema or periodontal disease; stool was negative for ova & parasites. Chest X-ray revealed large bilateral anterior mediastinal masses that demonstrated prominent uptake on gallium scan. Mediastinal lymph node biopsy was consistent with Hodgkin's lymphoma, nodular sclerosing subtype, grade I/II.</p> <p>Conclusion</p> <p>Although uncommon, markedly elevated IgE may be a manifestation of a malignant process, most notably both Hodgkin's and Non-Hodgkin's lymphomas. This diagnosis should be considered in evaluating an otherwise unexplained elevation of IgE.</p

Peanut Allergen Reaction Thresholds during Controlled Food Challenges in 2 Canadian Randomized Studies (Canada-ARM1 and PISCES)

In 2 randomized studies addressing peanut allergy (Canada-Food Allergy Risk Management 1 [NCT01812798] and Peanut Immunotherapy Starting in Canada, Evaluation and DiScovery [NCT0 1601522]), we quantified peanut allergen thresholds to food challenge using Bayesian stacked model averaging to inform policy and clinical practice. About 50% of patients tolerated more than 70 mg (~ ¼ peanut)