Dataset Information

Autoinjectors Preferred for Intramuscular Epinephrine in Anaphylaxis and Allergic Reactions.

ABSTRACT:

Introduction

Epinephrine is the treatment of choice for anaphylaxis. We surveyed emergency department (ED) healthcare providers regarding two methods of intramuscular (IM) epinephrine administration (autoinjector and manual injection) for the management of anaphylaxis and allergic reactions and identified provider perceptions and preferred method of medication delivery.

Methods

This observational study adhered to survey reporting guidelines. It was performed through a Web-based survey completed by healthcare providers at an academic ED. The primary outcomes were assessment of provider perceptions and identification of the preferred IM epinephrine administration method by ED healthcare providers.

Results

Of 217 ED healthcare providers invited to participate, 172 (79%) completed the survey. Overall, 82% of respondents preferred the autoinjector method of epinephrine administration. Providers rated the autoinjector method more favorably for time required for training, ease of use, convenience, satisfaction with weight-based dosing, risk of dosing errors, and speed of administration (p<0.001 for all comparisons). However, manual injection use was rated more favorably for risk of provider self-injury and patient cost (p<0.001 for both comparisons). Three participants (2%) reported a finger stick injury from an epinephrine autoinjector.

Conclusion

ED healthcare providers preferred the autoinjector method of IM epinephrine administration for the management of anaphylaxis or allergic reactions. Epinephrine autoinjector use may reduce barriers to epinephrine administration for the management of anaphylaxis in the ED.

SUBMITTER: Campbell RL

PROVIDER: S-EPMC5102607 | biostudies-literature | 2016 Nov

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Autoinjectors Preferred for Intramuscular Epinephrine in Anaphylaxis and Allergic Reactions.

Campbell Ronna L RL Bellolio M Fernanda MF Motosue Megan S MS Sunga Kharmene L KL Lohse Christine M CM Rudis Maria I MI

The western journal of emergency medicine 20161007 6

<h4>Introduction</h4>Epinephrine is the treatment of choice for anaphylaxis. We surveyed emergency department (ED) healthcare providers regarding two methods of intramuscular (IM) epinephrine administration (autoinjector and manual injection) for the management of anaphylaxis and allergic reactions and identified provider perceptions and preferred method of medication delivery.<h4>Methods</h4>This observational study adhered to survey reporting guidelines. It was performed through a Web-based su ...[more]

PMID: 27833688

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundThe US older adult population (age ≥65 years) is increasing and may be at increased risk for severe anaphylaxis. Little is known about the health care use for acute allergic reactions (AAR), including anaphylaxis, among older adults.ObjectiveTo characterize trends in emergency department (ED) visits and hospitalizations for AAR and anaphylaxis among US older adults from 2006 to 2014 and examine factors associated with severe anaphylaxis.MethodsWe performed cross-sectional analyses of trends in ED visits and hospitalizations among older adults using data from the Nationwide Emergency Department Sample and the National (Nationwide) Inpatient Sample in 2006 to 2014. We used International Classification of Diseases, Ninth Revision, Clinical Modification diagnostic codes to identify visits for AAR, including anaphylaxis. Multivariable logistic regression modeling was used to identify factors associated with severe anaphylaxis (cardiac arrest, intubation, and death).ResultsIn 2006 to 2014, older adults experienced approximately 1,019,967 AAR-related ED visits, 173,844 AAR-related hospitalizations, 93,795 anaphylaxis-related ED visits, and 72,677 anaphylaxis-related hospitalizations. Whereas AAR-related ED visit and hospitalization rates remained stable (P = .28 and .16, respectively), anaphylaxis-related ED visit and hospitalization rates increased significantly over time (37 visits/100,000 in 2006 to 51 in 2014, P < .001; and from 13 hospitalizations/100,000 in 2006 to 23 in 2014, P < .001), especially hospitalization rates for drug-related anaphylaxis (47 hospitalizations/100,000 in 2006 to 85 in 2014; P < .001). Risk factors for anaphylaxis-related death included older age and drug-related trigger.ConclusionsIn a nationally representative sample of US older adults, the rate of anaphylaxis-related ED visits and hospitalizations increased over time. Drug-related triggers represented a substantial portion of increased health care use and are a growing risk in this vulnerable population.

Project description:Importance:Children experiencing anaphylaxis at school may lack access to a personal epinephrine device, prompting recent legislation permitting undesignated (eg, non-student specific) stock epinephrine autoinjector units at school. However, epinephrine device costs vary, and the cost-effectiveness of undesignated school stock epinephrine is uncharacterized to date. Objective:To define value-based strategies for undesignated school stock epinephrine programs. Design, Setting, and Participants:Markov simulations of the Chicago Public Schools system were used over extended time horizons to model 2 school stock epinephrine autoinjector policies to provide access for at-risk students. The dates of the data used in the analysis were September 2017 to June 2018 (the 2017-2018 school year). Main Outcomes and Measures:This study compared the following 3 strategies: no school undesignated epinephrine supply, school undesignated supplemental epinephrine supply (supplemental model), and school undesignated universal epinephrine supply (universal model). The base-case model assumed a 10-fold reduced fatality risk with having undesignated stock epinephrine units available vs not having undesignated stock epinephrine units available. Costs of school stock epinephrine units available for acquisition by schools were evaluated from a societal perspective. Quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs) and total epinephrine acquisition expenses were calculated. Results:Based on Markov simulations of the Chicago Public Schools system (371 382 students), the cost was $107 816 (95% CI, $107 382-$108 250) for no school undesignated epinephrine supply compared with $108 160 (95% CI, $107 725-$108 595) for the supplemental model and $100 397 (95% CI, $99 979-$100 815) for the universal model. Undesignated stock epinephrine improved outcomes, with 26.869 (95% CI, 26.841-26.897) QALYs accrued as the model concluded compared with 26.867 (95% CI, 26.839-26.896) QALYs for the strategy without undesignated stock epinephrine. When comparing supplemental model stock epinephrine to the strategy without undesignated devices, the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio was high at $268 811 per QALY in the base-case simulation. However, the cost of the supplemental model fell below $100 000 per QALY when the annual undesignated epinephrine acquisition costs did not exceed $338 per school (compared with stock epinephrine unavailability). The universal model dominated all others and was associated with significant cost savings ($7419 per student at risk who would otherwise be prescribed an individual school epinephrine supply). Conclusions and Relevance:Undesignated school stock epinephrine is cost-effective at device acquisition costs not exceeding $338 per school per year, although a universal model vs a supplemental model is associated with superior health and economic outcomes.

Dataset Information

Autoinjectors Preferred for Intramuscular Epinephrine in Anaphylaxis and Allergic Reactions.

Introduction

Methods

Results

Conclusion

Publications

Autoinjectors Preferred for Intramuscular Epinephrine in Anaphylaxis and Allergic Reactions.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets