Search

Objective: To determine whether the β-lactam allergy delabeling was safe and cost-saving in Primary Care (PC) patients., Design: We have conducted a retrospective chart review of PC patients with β-lactam allergy label evaluated in our Allergy Unit between 2017 and 2022. SITE: Allergy Department. Hospital Virgen del Rocio (Sevilla)., Participants: A total of 391 patients labeled for β-lactam allergy in PC were studied., Main Measurements: (a) Outcome evaluation of a β-lactam allergy delabeling procedure. (b) A ratio between the total e-prescribed antibiotic cost and the number of treatment days (the experimental daily antibiotic cost or EDAC) before and after delabeling was analyzed in delabeled and truly allergic patients., Results: The results of skin testing were positive in 9.2% of the reported cases (36 of 391 patients). The reactions to oral provocation challenge (OPC) occurred in 2.14% of the patients who underwent negative skin testing to offending β-lactam (in 15 of 699 OPC). A total of 307 patients (78.5%) were delabeled; 70 (17.9%) had a β-lactam selective response and 14 (3.59%) reacted to both penicillin and cephalosporin. The EDAC before and after the procedure in delabeled patients was significantly lower (0.88 € vs 0.62 €, p<10 -3 ), than that observed in truly allergic group (0.87 € vs. 0.76 €, p=not significant)., Conclusion: To delabel β-lactam allergy in Primary Care patients is safe in most patients, cost-saving in antibioticotherapy, and allows identify the main clinical β-lactam allergy phenotypes that benefit from this procedure., (Copyright © 2024 The Author(s). Publicado por Elsevier España S.L.U. All rights reserved.)

Background: Skin prick tests (SPTs), or intraepidermal tests, are often the first diagnostic approach for people with a suspected allergy. Together with the clinical history, SPTs allow doctors to draw conclusions on allergies based on the sensitization pattern. The purpose of this study is to investigate the potential cost consequences that would accrue to a Swiss University hospital after the adoption of computer vision-based SPTs., Methods: We conducted a cost-consequence analysis from a hospital's perspective to evaluate the potential cost consequences of using a computer vision-based system to read SPT results. The patient population consisted of individuals who were referred to the allergology department of one of the five university hospitals in Switzerland, Inselspital, whose allergology department averages 100 SPTs a week. We developed an early cost-consequence model comparing two SPT techniques; computer vision-based SPTs conducted with the aid of Nexkin DSPT and standard fully manual SPTs. Probabilistic sensitivity analysis and additional univariate sensitivity analyses were used to account for uncertainty., Results: The difference in average cost between the two alternatives from a hospital's perspective was estimated to be CHF 7 per SPT, in favour of the computer vison-based SPTs. Monte Carlo probabilistic simulation also indicated that SPTs conducted using the computer vision-based system were cost saving compared to standard fully manual SPTs. Sensitivity analyses additionally demonstrated the robustness of the base case result subject to plausible changes in all the input parameters, with parameters representing the costs associated with both SPT techniques having the largest influence on the incremental cost. However, higher sensitization prevalence rates seemed to favour the more accurate standard fully manual SPTs., Conclusion: Against the backdrop of rising healthcare costs especially in Switzerland, using computer-aided or (semi) automated diagnostic systems could play an important role in healthcare cost containment efforts. However, results should be taken with caution because of the uncertainty associated with the early nature of our analysis and the specific Swiss context adopted in this study., (© 2024. The Author(s).)