11 Is emergency department transfer always required following anaphylaxis and epinephrine use?
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
Abstract Background Patients known for anaphylaxis are advised to always carry 2 epinephrine auto-injectors (EAI) with them. With epinephrine being the first-line treatment for anaphylaxis, current guidelines recommend prompt EAI administration, followed by observation in the emergency department (ED) for 4 hours. Data supporting transfer to the ED in all cases after epinephrine are sparse. Recent North American allergy guidelines no longer suggest that ED presentation after EAI use is required for all cases of anaphylaxis. Objectives We aimed to describe the need for additional ED treatment in children known for food-triggered anaphylaxis who received at least 1 EAI pre-hospital. Design/Methods Data on children under 18 years with food-induced anaphylaxis who received at least one dose of pre-hospital epinephrine was collected from the Cross-Canada Anaphylaxis REgistry (C-CARE) from seven hospitals. A standardized questionnaire obtained information on symptoms, allergens, comorbidities, and pre-hospital and in-hospital management. Multivariable logistic regression was performed to identify factors associated with ED management, among children who received 1, 2 or 3 or more doses of epinephrine pre-hospital. Results From 2011 to 2023, 1054 children with known food-triggered anaphylaxis and who used one or more EAIs pre-hospital were enrolled in C-CARE. The mean age at reaction was 8.2 (standard deviation [SD] 5.3) years, 648 (60.8%) were male and 82 (7.8%) of reactions were severe (defined as loss of bowel control, cyanosis, respiratory arrest, hypotension and/or circulatory collapse, dysrhythmia, severe bradycardia and/or cardiac arrest, confusion, and loss of consciousness). Primary triggers included peanuts (n=280; 26.6%) followed by tree nuts (n=173; 16.4%). 193 patients (18.3%) had known asthma and 201 received additional dose(s) of epinephrine in the ED, the majority of whom (177, 88.1%) received one dose. Only 2.9% of patients required admission. Among all patients, reactions to egg were less likely to require additional epinephrine (aOR 0.90; 95% CI 0.83, 0.99), and more likely with severe reactions (aOR 1.24; 95% CI 1.14-1.35). Among patients who received only one EAI pre-hospital, severe reactions (adjusted odds ratio [aOR] 1.19; 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.08-1.31) and reactions to tree nuts (aOR 1.12; 95% CI 1.04-1.20) were associated with increased odds of an additional dose of epinephrine in hospital. Conclusion One-fifth of anaphylaxis cases that used EAI require an additional dose of epinephrine in ED. Children with severe reactions and reactions to tree nuts are more likely to require additional doses; these cases should be considered for ED transfer and treatment following pre-hospital EAI use.
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction machine sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Le volet Gemma est une étiquette directe du modèle pour chaque travail de la base, lue sur la notice réduite au titre. Le volet Codex est un classifieur appris des 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et calibré sur les taux pondérés de l'échantillon; les champs sans appui suffisant ne portent aucun appel Codex. Le mode candidate est l'union des deux volets; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont pas des étiquettes humaines.
Scores du classifieur distillé par catégorie (deux têtes)
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,001 | 0,005 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Communication savante | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Science ouverte | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,005 | 0,000 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule source (Gemma direct ou Codex distillé), pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».