Raja Ali S, Lindsell Christopher J, Bernstein Jonathan A, Codispoti Christopher D, Moellman Joseph J
Department of Emergency Medicine, University of Cincinnati, Cincinnati, OH 45221-0769, USA.
Ann Emerg Med. 2009 Jul;54(1):72-7. doi: 10.1016/j.annemergmed.2008.12.034. Epub 2009 Feb 13.
Patient-reported penicillin allergies are often unreliable and can result in unnecessary changes in antibiotic therapy. Although penicillin allergy skin testing is commonly performed in allergy clinics, it has not been used in emergency departments (EDs) to verify self-reported allergies. We hypothesize that ED-based testing is possible and that the false-positive rate of patients with self-reported penicillin allergy are greater than 90%.
This prospective observational cohort study enrolled a convenience sample of ED patients with a self-reported penicillin allergy. Patients were enrolled by one of 2 emergency physicians who performed skin prick and intracutaneous tests with penicillin major and minor determinants. The total testing time was 30 minutes. The proportion of false-positive self-reported allergies was computed with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) by using the score method.
A total of 150 patients (mean age 42 years; SD 16 years; 46% men; 47% black) were enrolled. The false-positive rate for self-reported penicillin allergy was 137 of 150 (91.3%; 95% CI 85.3% to 95.1%). There were no adverse reactions associated with penicillin skin testing. Compared with patients with a false-positive penicillin allergy result (confirmed by negative penicillin skin testing result), patients reporting a true penicillin allergy confirmed by positive penicillin skin test results tended to be more frequently men (61.5% versus 44.5%; Delta 17.0%; 95% CI -13.5% to 42%), black (69.2% versus 44.5%; Delta 24.7%; 95% CI -6.9% to 46.8%), and have no family history of drug allergy (7.7% versus 17.5%; Delta9.8%; 95% CI -20.9% to 20.4%), but self-reported other drug allergies more frequently (61.5% versus 38.7%; Delta 22.9%; 95% CI -7.7% to 47.5%).
Penicillin skin testing is feasible in the ED setting. A substantial number of patients who self-report a penicillin allergy do not exhibit immunoglobulin E-mediated sensitization to penicillin major and minor determinants. Penicillin testing in the ED may allow the use of more appropriate antibiotics for patients presenting with a history of penicillin allergy.
患者自述的青霉素过敏情况往往不可靠,可能导致抗生素治疗的不必要改变。虽然青霉素过敏皮肤试验在过敏诊所较为常用,但在急诊科尚未用于验证患者自述的过敏情况。我们推测在急诊科进行该项检测是可行的,且自述青霉素过敏患者的假阳性率超过90%。
这项前瞻性观察性队列研究纳入了方便样本中自述青霉素过敏的急诊科患者。患者由2名急诊医生之一招募,这些医生用青霉素主要和次要决定簇进行皮肤点刺试验和皮内试验。总检测时间为30分钟。采用评分法计算自述过敏假阳性率的95%置信区间(CI)。
共纳入150例患者(平均年龄42岁;标准差16岁;男性46%;黑人47%)。自述青霉素过敏的假阳性率为150例中的137例(91.3%;95%CI 85.3%至95.1%)。青霉素皮肤试验未出现不良反应。与青霉素过敏结果为假阳性的患者(青霉素皮肤试验结果为阴性证实)相比,青霉素皮肤试验结果为阳性证实为真正青霉素过敏的患者男性比例往往更高(61.5%对44.5%;差值17.0%;95%CI -13.5%至42%)、黑人比例更高(69.2%对44.5%;差值24.7%;95%CI -6.9%至46.8%),且无药物过敏家族史的比例更高(7.7%对17.5%;差值9.8%;95%CI -20.9%至20.4%),但自述其他药物过敏的比例更高(61.5%对38.7%;差值22.9%;95%CI -7.7%至47.5%)。
青霉素皮肤试验在急诊科环境中是可行的。大量自述青霉素过敏的患者对青霉素主要和次要决定簇未表现出免疫球蛋白E介导的致敏。急诊科的青霉素检测可能使有青霉素过敏史的患者能够使用更合适的抗生素。