Return to sender: the need to re-address patient antibiotic allergy labels in Australia and New Zealand

Trubiano, J. A., Worth, L. J., Urbancic, K., Brown, T. M., Paterson, D. L. and Lucas, M. (2016) Return to sender: the need to re-address patient antibiotic allergy labels in Australia and New Zealand. Internal Medicine Journal, 46 11: 1311-1317. doi:10.1111/imj.13221


Author Trubiano, J. A.
Worth, L. J.
Urbancic, K.
Brown, T. M.
Paterson, D. L.
Lucas, M.
Title Return to sender: the need to re-address patient antibiotic allergy labels in Australia and New Zealand
Journal name Internal Medicine Journal   Check publisher's open access policy
ISSN 1445-5994
1444-0903
Publication date 2016-11-01
Sub-type Article (original research)
DOI 10.1111/imj.13221
Open Access Status Not yet assessed
Volume 46
Issue 11
Start page 1311
End page 1317
Total pages 7
Place of publication Richmond, VIC, Australia
Publisher Wiley-Blackwell Publishing Asia
Collection year 2017
Language eng
Formatted abstract
Background/Aim: Antibiotic allergies are frequently reported and have significant impacts upon appropriate prescribing and clinical outcomes. We surveyed infectious diseases physicians, allergists, clinical immunologists and hospital pharmacists to evaluate antibiotic allergy knowledge and service delivery in Australia and New Zealand.

Methods: An online multi-choice questionnaire was developed and endorsed by representatives of the Australasian Society of Clinical Immunology and Allergy (ASCIA) and the Australasian Society of Infectious Diseases (ASID). The 37-item survey was distributed in April 2015 to members of ASCIA, ASID, the Society of Hospital Pharmacists of Australia and the Royal Australasian College of Physicians.

Results: Of 277 respondents, 94% currently use or would utilise antibiotic allergy testing (AAT) and reported seeing up to 10 patients/week labelled as antibiotic-allergic. Forty-two per cent were not aware of or did not have AAT available. Most felt that AAT would aid antibiotic selection, antibiotic appropriateness and antimicrobial stewardship (79, 69 and 61% respectively). Patients with the histories of immediate hypersensitivity were more likely to be referred than those with delayed hypersensitivities (76 vs 41%, P = 0.0001). Lack of specialist physicians (20%) and personal experience (17%) were barriers to service delivery. A multidisciplinary approach was a preferred AAT model (53%). Knowledge gaps were identified, with the majority overestimating rates of penicillin/cephalosporin (78%), penicillin/carbapenem (57%) and penicillin/monobactam (39%) cross-reactivity.

Conclusions: A high burden of antibiotic allergy labelling and demand for AAT is complicated by a relative lack availability or awareness of AAT services in Australia and New Zealand. Antibiotic allergy education and deployment of AAT, accessible to community and hospital-based clinicians, may improve clinical decisions and reduce antibiotic allergy impacts. A collaborative approach involving infectious diseases physicians, pharmacists and allergists/immunologists is required.
Keyword Adverse drug reaction
Antibiotic allergy
Antibiotic allergy testing
Antimicrobial stewardship
Skin testing
Q-Index Code C1
Q-Index Status Provisional Code
Institutional Status UQ

Document type: Journal Article
Sub-type: Article (original research)
Collections: UQ Centre for Clinical Research Publications
HERDC Pre-Audit
Admin Only - UQCCR
 
Versions
Version Filter Type
Citation counts: TR Web of Science Citation Count  Cited 1 times in Thomson Reuters Web of Science Article | Citations
Scopus Citation Count Cited 0 times in Scopus Article
Google Scholar Search Google Scholar
Created: Tue, 22 Nov 2016, 11:09:56 EST by System User on behalf of Learning and Research Services (UQ Library)