Scott P. Commins, Tilo Biedermann, Sarah K. McGill, Carin Ottosson, Marija Perusko, Eleanor F. Saunders, Marianne van Hage
{"title":"Letter to the Editor—Re: Sabouraud-Leclerc D, Mariotte D, Bradatan E, et al. Food Anaphylaxis: Eight Food Allergens Without Mandatory Labelling Highlighted by the French Allergy-Vigilance Network. Clinical and Experimental Allergy. 2025;0:1–8. Doi: 10.1111/cea.70130","authors":"Scott P. Commins, Tilo Biedermann, Sarah K. McGill, Carin Ottosson, Marija Perusko, Eleanor F. Saunders, Marianne van Hage","doi":"10.1111/cea.70179","DOIUrl":"10.1111/cea.70179","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":10207,"journal":{"name":"Clinical and Experimental Allergy","volume":"56 1","pages":"115-116"},"PeriodicalIF":5.2,"publicationDate":"2025-11-20","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"145562863","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
{"title":"Comment on ‘Identification of the Top 15 Drugs Associated With Anaphylaxis: A Pharmacovigilance Study’","authors":"Hinpetch Daungsupawong, Viroj Wiwanitkit","doi":"10.1111/cea.70180","DOIUrl":"10.1111/cea.70180","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":10207,"journal":{"name":"Clinical and Experimental Allergy","volume":"56 1","pages":"113-114"},"PeriodicalIF":5.2,"publicationDate":"2025-11-20","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"145562828","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Paul J. Turner, Elizabeth Angier, Karen Brunas, Sarah Burrell, Max Chisholm, Emily Derrick, Matt Doyle, Catrina Drummond, Helen Evans-Howells, Adam Fox, Mudiyur Gopi, Nasreen Khan, Susan Leech, Sian Ludman, Nick Makwana, Tom Marrs, Karina Montagni, Sophie Padua, Nandinee Patel, George Raptis, Ella Stoneham, Deepan Vyas, Amena Warner, Simon Williams, Katherine Cowan
Background
Demand for paediatric allergy services has risen significantly over the past 20 years. National health datasets suggest almost 40% of children have an allergy diagnosis. Existing service standards from the Royal College of Paediatrics and Child Health (RCPCH) have focused on specific disease care pathways and the interface between primary and secondary care services. Given strategic changes to NHS children and young people's services, we undertook a collaborative project between RCPCH and the British Society of Allergy and Clinical Immunology (BSACI) to define service priorities for Paediatric Allergy Care accreditation in the UK.
Methods
A BSACI working group developed 29 potential service standards. A consultation was then undertaken amongst BSACI members to identify indicative priorities. Potential standards were then prioritised using methodology adapted from the James Lind Alliance, by 24 stakeholders representing patients/patient groups (9), commissioners (2) and healthcare professionals (13).
Results
Seventeen strategic priorities were identified, under the following 6 themes: service delivery, prevention, diagnostics, management, communication, maintaining standards/education. These included: setting a minimum staffing mix for multidisciplinary teams providing paediatric allergy care (medical specialist(s), specialist nurse, dietitian, health psychologist); prompt recognition and management of complex, multisystem allergic disease; working within a regional network to ensure access to specialist paediatric allergy services; use of integrated care pathways and supporting primary care accordingly; supporting early access to interventions proven to reduce the risk of atopic disease (with consideration to potential barriers to access, including language, cultural, socioeconomic factors and other communication barriers); offering a referral pathway for disease-modifying treatment where appropriate and effective transitioning to adult care.
Conclusions
These priorities form a basis for the delivery of high-quality care to children and young people affected by allergic disease.
{"title":"Identifying and Prioritising BSACI Service Standards for Paediatric Allergy in the United Kingdom","authors":"Paul J. Turner, Elizabeth Angier, Karen Brunas, Sarah Burrell, Max Chisholm, Emily Derrick, Matt Doyle, Catrina Drummond, Helen Evans-Howells, Adam Fox, Mudiyur Gopi, Nasreen Khan, Susan Leech, Sian Ludman, Nick Makwana, Tom Marrs, Karina Montagni, Sophie Padua, Nandinee Patel, George Raptis, Ella Stoneham, Deepan Vyas, Amena Warner, Simon Williams, Katherine Cowan","doi":"10.1111/cea.70176","DOIUrl":"10.1111/cea.70176","url":null,"abstract":"<div>\u0000 \u0000 \u0000 <section>\u0000 \u0000 <h3> Background</h3>\u0000 \u0000 <p>Demand for paediatric allergy services has risen significantly over the past 20 years. National health datasets suggest almost 40% of children have an allergy diagnosis. Existing service standards from the Royal College of Paediatrics and Child Health (RCPCH) have focused on specific disease care pathways and the interface between primary and secondary care services. Given strategic changes to NHS children and young people's services, we undertook a collaborative project between RCPCH and the British Society of Allergy and Clinical Immunology (BSACI) to define service priorities for Paediatric Allergy Care accreditation in the UK.</p>\u0000 </section>\u0000 \u0000 <section>\u0000 \u0000 <h3> Methods</h3>\u0000 \u0000 <p>A BSACI working group developed 29 potential service standards. A consultation was then undertaken amongst BSACI members to identify indicative priorities. Potential standards were then prioritised using methodology adapted from the James Lind Alliance, by 24 stakeholders representing patients/patient groups (9), commissioners (2) and healthcare professionals (13).</p>\u0000 </section>\u0000 \u0000 <section>\u0000 \u0000 <h3> Results</h3>\u0000 \u0000 <p>Seventeen strategic priorities were identified, under the following 6 themes: service delivery, prevention, diagnostics, management, communication, maintaining standards/education. These included: setting a minimum staffing mix for multidisciplinary teams providing paediatric allergy care (medical specialist(s), specialist nurse, dietitian, health psychologist); prompt recognition and management of complex, multisystem allergic disease; working within a regional network to ensure access to specialist paediatric allergy services; use of integrated care pathways and supporting primary care accordingly; supporting early access to interventions proven to reduce the risk of atopic disease (with consideration to potential barriers to access, including language, cultural, socioeconomic factors and other communication barriers); offering a referral pathway for disease-modifying treatment where appropriate and effective transitioning to adult care.</p>\u0000 </section>\u0000 \u0000 <section>\u0000 \u0000 <h3> Conclusions</h3>\u0000 \u0000 <p>These priorities form a basis for the delivery of high-quality care to children and young people affected by allergic disease.</p>\u0000 </section>\u0000 </div>","PeriodicalId":10207,"journal":{"name":"Clinical and Experimental Allergy","volume":"56 1","pages":"7-14"},"PeriodicalIF":5.2,"publicationDate":"2025-11-16","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1111/cea.70176","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"145534297","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"OA","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Allison R Loiselle, Courtney A Chau, Jessica K Johnson, Jennifer LeBovidge, Lynda Schneider, Wendy Smith Begolka
{"title":"Barriers to Seeking Mental Health Services for Atopic Dermatitis Patients and Caregivers.","authors":"Allison R Loiselle, Courtney A Chau, Jessica K Johnson, Jennifer LeBovidge, Lynda Schneider, Wendy Smith Begolka","doi":"10.1111/cea.70178","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1111/cea.70178","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":10207,"journal":{"name":"Clinical and Experimental Allergy","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":5.2,"publicationDate":"2025-11-15","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"145523039","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Nuno Lourenço-Silva, Bernardo Sousa-Pinto, Antonio Bognanni, Matteo Martini, Michal Ordak, Giovanni Paoletti, Sara Gil-Mata, Rita Amaral, Anna Bedbrook, Patrizia Bonadonna, Luisa Brussino, G. Walter Canonica, João Coutinho-Almeida, Alvaro A. Cruz, Wienczyslawa Czarlewski, Mark Dykewicz, Mattia Giovannini, Bilun Gemicioglu, Juan Carlos Ivancevich, Ludger Klimek, Violeta Kvedariene, Desiree E. Larenas-Linnemann, Manuel Marques-Cruz, André Moreira, Marek Niedoszytko, Ana Margarida Pereira, Nikolaos G. Papadopoulos, Nhân Pham-Thi, Frederico S. Regateiro, Sanna K. Toppila-Salmi, Boleslaw Samolinski, Joaquin Sastre, Luís Taborda-Barata, Tuuli Thomander, Ilgım Vardaloğlu Koyuncu, Arunas Valiulis, Leticia de las Vecillas, Maria Teresa Ventura, Jolanta Walusiak-Skorupa, Yi-Kui Xiang, Oliver Pfaar, João A. Fonseca, Torsten Zuberbier, Holger J. Schünemann, Danilo di Bona, Jean Bousquet, Rafael José Vieira
<p>Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) are the paradigm for questions on causal inference but often face challenges in generalisability due to strict eligibility criteria. In allergic rhinitis (AR), this limitation is particularly relevant, with RCTs on AR displaying an overrepresentation of patients with severe disease and not providing sufficiently detailed information on the impact of comorbidities on treatment effectiveness [<span>1-4</span>]. Mobile health (mHealth) applications provide an opportunity to collect large-scale patient-reported data that can complement traditional trial evidence and broaden our understanding of treatment effectiveness in routine care [<span>5</span>]. However, to adequately use mHealth data for that purpose, approaches to adequately deal with confounding must be applied.</p><p>In this study, we aimed to use mHealth data to compare the short-term effectiveness of three common AR medication classes: oral antihistamines (OAH), intranasal corticosteroids (INCS), and fixed-combination intranasal antihistamine plus corticosteroid sprays (INAH+INCS). In particular, we aimed to compare these three medication classes on symptom relief within 24 h, while also exploring whether treatment effects differed according to the presence of self-reported comorbid asthma. To deal with confounding, we applied a target trial emulation approach [<span>6</span>].</p><p>A full description of the Methods is available on https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.17215607. We included adult users of the MASK-air app with self-reported AR. MASK-air is a validated app that allows daily reporting of AR symptoms on visual analogue scales (VAS) together with medication use. We included users who completed symptom assessments before and after taking one of the aforementioned medication classes, within a 24-h interval. Measurements less than 60 min apart were excluded. Outcomes were changes in global, nasal, ocular, and asthma-related symptoms (VAS, 0–100).</p><p>To address confounding, we used inverse probability of treatment weighting based on pre-treatment symptom scores, age, sex, ARIA severity score, and asthma status. We then estimated average treatment effects using Bayesian mixed-effects regression models, with patient and month of the year as random effects [<span>7, 8</span>].</p><p>A full description of the Results is available on https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.17215607. A total of 648 treatment days were analysed, with a median participant age of 37 years; 37.8% reported asthma. The median interval between pre- and post-medication entries was 480 min (IQR = 568). Most treatment days involved OAH (64.2%), followed by INCS (25.5%) and INAH+INCS (10.3%).</p><p>Compared with OAH, both INCS and INAH+INCS were associated with significantly greater improvements in global symptoms (mean VAS difference = −4.25 [95% CrI = −6.69, −1.15] and −7.27 [−10.30, −4.07], respectively) (Table 1). Both also improved ocular symptoms, while INCS showed superiority ove
{"title":"Assessment of the Effectiveness of Allergic Rhinitis Medications Using a Target Trial Emulation Approach Based on Mobile Health Data","authors":"Nuno Lourenço-Silva, Bernardo Sousa-Pinto, Antonio Bognanni, Matteo Martini, Michal Ordak, Giovanni Paoletti, Sara Gil-Mata, Rita Amaral, Anna Bedbrook, Patrizia Bonadonna, Luisa Brussino, G. Walter Canonica, João Coutinho-Almeida, Alvaro A. Cruz, Wienczyslawa Czarlewski, Mark Dykewicz, Mattia Giovannini, Bilun Gemicioglu, Juan Carlos Ivancevich, Ludger Klimek, Violeta Kvedariene, Desiree E. Larenas-Linnemann, Manuel Marques-Cruz, André Moreira, Marek Niedoszytko, Ana Margarida Pereira, Nikolaos G. Papadopoulos, Nhân Pham-Thi, Frederico S. Regateiro, Sanna K. Toppila-Salmi, Boleslaw Samolinski, Joaquin Sastre, Luís Taborda-Barata, Tuuli Thomander, Ilgım Vardaloğlu Koyuncu, Arunas Valiulis, Leticia de las Vecillas, Maria Teresa Ventura, Jolanta Walusiak-Skorupa, Yi-Kui Xiang, Oliver Pfaar, João A. Fonseca, Torsten Zuberbier, Holger J. Schünemann, Danilo di Bona, Jean Bousquet, Rafael José Vieira","doi":"10.1111/cea.70173","DOIUrl":"10.1111/cea.70173","url":null,"abstract":"<p>Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) are the paradigm for questions on causal inference but often face challenges in generalisability due to strict eligibility criteria. In allergic rhinitis (AR), this limitation is particularly relevant, with RCTs on AR displaying an overrepresentation of patients with severe disease and not providing sufficiently detailed information on the impact of comorbidities on treatment effectiveness [<span>1-4</span>]. Mobile health (mHealth) applications provide an opportunity to collect large-scale patient-reported data that can complement traditional trial evidence and broaden our understanding of treatment effectiveness in routine care [<span>5</span>]. However, to adequately use mHealth data for that purpose, approaches to adequately deal with confounding must be applied.</p><p>In this study, we aimed to use mHealth data to compare the short-term effectiveness of three common AR medication classes: oral antihistamines (OAH), intranasal corticosteroids (INCS), and fixed-combination intranasal antihistamine plus corticosteroid sprays (INAH+INCS). In particular, we aimed to compare these three medication classes on symptom relief within 24 h, while also exploring whether treatment effects differed according to the presence of self-reported comorbid asthma. To deal with confounding, we applied a target trial emulation approach [<span>6</span>].</p><p>A full description of the Methods is available on https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.17215607. We included adult users of the MASK-air app with self-reported AR. MASK-air is a validated app that allows daily reporting of AR symptoms on visual analogue scales (VAS) together with medication use. We included users who completed symptom assessments before and after taking one of the aforementioned medication classes, within a 24-h interval. Measurements less than 60 min apart were excluded. Outcomes were changes in global, nasal, ocular, and asthma-related symptoms (VAS, 0–100).</p><p>To address confounding, we used inverse probability of treatment weighting based on pre-treatment symptom scores, age, sex, ARIA severity score, and asthma status. We then estimated average treatment effects using Bayesian mixed-effects regression models, with patient and month of the year as random effects [<span>7, 8</span>].</p><p>A full description of the Results is available on https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.17215607. A total of 648 treatment days were analysed, with a median participant age of 37 years; 37.8% reported asthma. The median interval between pre- and post-medication entries was 480 min (IQR = 568). Most treatment days involved OAH (64.2%), followed by INCS (25.5%) and INAH+INCS (10.3%).</p><p>Compared with OAH, both INCS and INAH+INCS were associated with significantly greater improvements in global symptoms (mean VAS difference = −4.25 [95% CrI = −6.69, −1.15] and −7.27 [−10.30, −4.07], respectively) (Table 1). Both also improved ocular symptoms, while INCS showed superiority ove","PeriodicalId":10207,"journal":{"name":"Clinical and Experimental Allergy","volume":"56 2","pages":"176-179"},"PeriodicalIF":5.2,"publicationDate":"2025-11-09","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12879269/pdf/","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"145480981","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"OA","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
John Coveney, Tom Roberts, Sylvia Stoianova, Nicholas Sargant
{"title":"Airway, Breathing or Circulation Failure in Fatal Food Anaphylaxis: A Nationally Representative Case Series.","authors":"John Coveney, Tom Roberts, Sylvia Stoianova, Nicholas Sargant","doi":"10.1111/cea.70175","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1111/cea.70175","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":10207,"journal":{"name":"Clinical and Experimental Allergy","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":5.2,"publicationDate":"2025-11-07","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"145457780","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Laura Romero-Sánchez, Francisco Gude, Arturo González-Quintela, Manuela Alonso-Sampedro, Óscar Lado-Baleato, Carmen Fernández-Merino, Flora Miranda-Pena, Carmen Vidal
{"title":"Uncovering Mite Sensitisation: Epidemiological Insights From a General Population Study.","authors":"Laura Romero-Sánchez, Francisco Gude, Arturo González-Quintela, Manuela Alonso-Sampedro, Óscar Lado-Baleato, Carmen Fernández-Merino, Flora Miranda-Pena, Carmen Vidal","doi":"10.1111/cea.70174","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1111/cea.70174","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":10207,"journal":{"name":"Clinical and Experimental Allergy","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":5.2,"publicationDate":"2025-11-05","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"145451050","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Louise J. Michaelis, Thomas Owen, Andrew D. Bright, Lucy Sherwin-Robson
<div> <section> <h3> Introduction</h3> <p>The recommended first-line treatment for anaphylaxis in the community is intramuscular injection of adrenaline. The treatment is a standardised dose of either a 150 μg or a 300 μg adrenaline auto-injector (AAI) device depending upon the patient's weight. Currently, no standardised mechanisms exist to transition patients onto the higher 300 μg dose when they reach 25–30 kg (depending upon the manufacturer).</p> </section> <section> <h3> Methods</h3> <p>We undertook analysis of NHS prescriptions data dispensed in the community in England to identify rates of non-standard AAI dose prescribing. Non-standard prescribing is defined as patients who are likely to have exceeded the 25–30 kg threshold but still received a 150 μg dose. Data were limited to the most recent AAI prescription for an individual patient that occurred in the last 2 years (December 2022–2024). Patient weight at the time of prescribing was approximated using an age-to-weight correlation model. AAI recommended switching weights, based on device metadata, were compared to the patients' approximated weight to identify non-standard prescribing. Statistical comparison between rates of non-standard prescribing and patient deprivation was computed using Kendall's Tau correlation coefficient. A complementary analysis to identify patients who received a 300 μg dose but were likely under the 25–30 kg threshold was also carried out.</p> </section> <section> <h3> Results</h3> <p>Overall, 46,999 patients were identified as having received a 150 μg strength injector in their most recent AAI prescription; of these, over 95% received two or more devices in line with national guidance. Estimates based on age for weight growth centiles show that between 9480 (20.2%) and at least 1747 (3.7%) of those prescribed a 150 μg autoinjector were likely to exceed the weight threshold for this dose. Using a Resuscitation Council UK guideline of age 6 years for switching to a 300 μg dose, the estimated proportion prescribed a non-standard AAI dose increases to 23,059 patients (49.1%). Estimated rates of non-standard AAI prescribing were found to be higher in areas of England with the most deprivation. Conservative estimates found only 67 children likely under 25 kg and 330 children likely under 30 kg who received a 300 μg dose.</p> </section> <section> <h3> Conclusions</h3> <p>This analysis of community AAI prescriptions in England suggests that underdosing of AAI prescriptions in children and adults is not uncommon. Healthcare professionals with patients at risk of anaphy
{"title":"Adrenaline Auto-Injector Prescribing in Primary Care in England: An Analysis of Non-Standard Dosing","authors":"Louise J. Michaelis, Thomas Owen, Andrew D. Bright, Lucy Sherwin-Robson","doi":"10.1111/cea.70163","DOIUrl":"10.1111/cea.70163","url":null,"abstract":"<div>\u0000 \u0000 \u0000 <section>\u0000 \u0000 <h3> Introduction</h3>\u0000 \u0000 <p>The recommended first-line treatment for anaphylaxis in the community is intramuscular injection of adrenaline. The treatment is a standardised dose of either a 150 μg or a 300 μg adrenaline auto-injector (AAI) device depending upon the patient's weight. Currently, no standardised mechanisms exist to transition patients onto the higher 300 μg dose when they reach 25–30 kg (depending upon the manufacturer).</p>\u0000 </section>\u0000 \u0000 <section>\u0000 \u0000 <h3> Methods</h3>\u0000 \u0000 <p>We undertook analysis of NHS prescriptions data dispensed in the community in England to identify rates of non-standard AAI dose prescribing. Non-standard prescribing is defined as patients who are likely to have exceeded the 25–30 kg threshold but still received a 150 μg dose. Data were limited to the most recent AAI prescription for an individual patient that occurred in the last 2 years (December 2022–2024). Patient weight at the time of prescribing was approximated using an age-to-weight correlation model. AAI recommended switching weights, based on device metadata, were compared to the patients' approximated weight to identify non-standard prescribing. Statistical comparison between rates of non-standard prescribing and patient deprivation was computed using Kendall's Tau correlation coefficient. A complementary analysis to identify patients who received a 300 μg dose but were likely under the 25–30 kg threshold was also carried out.</p>\u0000 </section>\u0000 \u0000 <section>\u0000 \u0000 <h3> Results</h3>\u0000 \u0000 <p>Overall, 46,999 patients were identified as having received a 150 μg strength injector in their most recent AAI prescription; of these, over 95% received two or more devices in line with national guidance. Estimates based on age for weight growth centiles show that between 9480 (20.2%) and at least 1747 (3.7%) of those prescribed a 150 μg autoinjector were likely to exceed the weight threshold for this dose. Using a Resuscitation Council UK guideline of age 6 years for switching to a 300 μg dose, the estimated proportion prescribed a non-standard AAI dose increases to 23,059 patients (49.1%). Estimated rates of non-standard AAI prescribing were found to be higher in areas of England with the most deprivation. Conservative estimates found only 67 children likely under 25 kg and 330 children likely under 30 kg who received a 300 μg dose.</p>\u0000 </section>\u0000 \u0000 <section>\u0000 \u0000 <h3> Conclusions</h3>\u0000 \u0000 <p>This analysis of community AAI prescriptions in England suggests that underdosing of AAI prescriptions in children and adults is not uncommon. Healthcare professionals with patients at risk of anaphy","PeriodicalId":10207,"journal":{"name":"Clinical and Experimental Allergy","volume":"56 1","pages":"30-40"},"PeriodicalIF":5.2,"publicationDate":"2025-11-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1111/cea.70163","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"145430496","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"OA","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
R Soegiharto, B J Hengevelt, N Boekema-Bakker, I A M Groenewegen, A C Knulst, J M P A Van den Reek, H Röckmann
{"title":"Exploring the Disease Duration of Urticaria and Associated Determinants in Primary Care.","authors":"R Soegiharto, B J Hengevelt, N Boekema-Bakker, I A M Groenewegen, A C Knulst, J M P A Van den Reek, H Röckmann","doi":"10.1111/cea.70170","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1111/cea.70170","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":10207,"journal":{"name":"Clinical and Experimental Allergy","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":5.2,"publicationDate":"2025-10-30","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"145408493","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Itziar Eusebio-Cartagena, Rodrigo Jiménez-Saiz, Vanesa Esteban, Emilio Nuñez-Borque, Alessandra Ruiz-Sánchez, Carmelo Escudero, Silvia Sánchez-García, Juan Trujillo, Audrey Dunn-Galvin, María Dolores P Ibáñez-Sandin, Pablo Rodríguez Del Río
{"title":"Comparison Between a Rush and a Conventional Oral Immunotherapy Protocol to Treat Cow's Milk and Hen's Egg Allergy. CompITO Study Methodology.","authors":"Itziar Eusebio-Cartagena, Rodrigo Jiménez-Saiz, Vanesa Esteban, Emilio Nuñez-Borque, Alessandra Ruiz-Sánchez, Carmelo Escudero, Silvia Sánchez-García, Juan Trujillo, Audrey Dunn-Galvin, María Dolores P Ibáñez-Sandin, Pablo Rodríguez Del Río","doi":"10.1111/cea.70168","DOIUrl":"10.1111/cea.70168","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":10207,"journal":{"name":"Clinical and Experimental Allergy","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":5.2,"publicationDate":"2025-10-30","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"145408448","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
扫码关注我们
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：
京公网安备 11010802042870号