Greiwe Justin, Oppenheimer John, Bird J Andrew, Fleischer David M, Pongracic Jacqueline A, Greenhawt Matthew
Bernstein Allergy Group, Inc., Cincinnati, Ohio; Division of Immunology/Allergy Section, Department of Internal Medicine, the University of Cincinnati College of Medicine, Cincinnati, Ohio.
Department of Internal Medicine, UMDNJ-Rutgers and Pulmonary and Allergy Associates, Summit, NJ.
J Allergy Clin Immunol Pract. 2020 Nov-Dec;8(10):3348-3355. doi: 10.1016/j.jaip.2020.07.035.
The oral food challenge (OFC) is the criterion standard for diagnosing food allergy, but prior studies indicate many allergists may not be using OFCs for various reasons. To better understand current OFC trends, practices, and barriers, the American Academy of Allergy Asthma and Immunology (AAAAI) Adverse Reactions to Foods Committee subcommittee updated a 19-item survey (previously administered in 2009) and sent it to AAAAI and American College of Allergy, Asthma, and Immunology (ACAAI) membership. There were a total of 546 respondents who represented approximately a 10% response rate. Among the 546 respondents, compared with 2009, significantly more providers offer OFCs (95% vs 84.5%), offer >10 OFCs per month (17% vs 5.6%), obtain informed consent (82.2% vs 53.6%), and performed OFCs in fellowship (71% vs 45%) (all P < .001). Fellowship OFC training was limited, with 56% performing <10 OFCs in fellowship and 29% performing none. Although 94% see patients <12 months of age, 35.5% do not offer OFCs for early peanut introduction. Although 79% dedicate a supervising medical provider (MD, NP, PA) and 86% have a written OFC protocol, only 60% had a standardized reaction treatment protocol and 56% prepared emergency medications before OFC. Compared with 2009, there was significant worsening of perceived barriers to performing OFCs, including time (65.6% vs 55%), space (55.3% vs 27.1%), staffing (59.6% vs 44.3%), experience (16.9% vs 11.5%), and hospital proximity (10.9% vs 7.9%), though reimbursement as a barrier improved (45.9% vs 53.7%) (all P < .01). Compared with 2009, although more providers offer OFCs, multiple perceived barriers to performing OFCs have worsened. Hesitancy to challenge infants and emergency preparedness issues are emerging potential concerns.
口服食物激发试验(OFC)是诊断食物过敏的标准方法,但先前的研究表明,许多过敏症专科医生可能由于各种原因未采用OFC。为了更好地了解当前OFC的趋势、实践和障碍,美国过敏、哮喘与免疫学会(AAAAI)食物不良反应委员会小组委员会更新了一项包含19个项目的调查问卷(该问卷曾于2009年发放),并将其发送给AAAAI和美国过敏、哮喘与免疫学会(ACAAI)的成员。共有546名受访者,回复率约为10%。在这546名受访者中,与2009年相比,提供OFC的医疗服务提供者显著增多(95%对84.5%),每月提供超过10次OFC的比例增加(17%对5.6%),获取知情同意的比例上升(82.2%对53.6%),且在培训期间进行OFC的比例提高(71%对45%)(所有P值均<0.001)。培训期间的OFC培训有限,56%的人在培训期间进行的OFC少于10次,29%的人一次都未进行。尽管94%的人诊治12个月以下的患儿,但35.5%的人不提供用于早期引入花生的OFC。尽管79%的人指定了监督医疗人员(医生、执业护士、助理医师),86%的人有书面的OFC方案,但只有60%的人有标准化的反应治疗方案,56%的人在OFC前准备了急救药物。与2009年相比,进行OFC时感知到的障碍显著恶化,包括时间(65.6%对55%)、空间(55.3%对27.1%)、人员配备(59.6%对44.3%)、经验(16.9%对11.5%)和医院距离(10.9%对7.9%),不过作为障碍的报销问题有所改善(45.9%对53.7%)(所有P值均<0.01)。与2009年相比,尽管有更多的医疗服务提供者提供OFC,但进行OFC时多种感知到的障碍却恶化了。对挑战婴儿的犹豫以及应急准备问题正成为潜在的担忧。