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).)

Importance: Early peanut introduction reduces the risk of developing peanut allergy, especially in high-risk infants. Current US recommendations endorse screening but are not cost-effective relative to other international strategies., Objective: To identify scenarios in which current early peanut introduction guidelines would be cost-effective., Design, Setting, and Participants: This simulation/cohort economic evaluation used microsimulations and cohort analyses in a Markov model to evaluate the cost-effectiveness of early peanut introduction with and without peanut skin prick test (SPT) screening in high-risk infants during an 80-year horizon from a societal perspective. Data were analyzed from April to May 2019., Exposures: High-risk infants with early-onset eczema and/or egg allergy underwent early peanut introduction with and without peanut SPT screening (100 000 infants per treatment strategy) using a dichotomous 8-mm SPT cutoff value (stipulated in the current US guideline)., Main Outcomes and Measures: Cost, quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs), net monetary benefit, peanut allergic reactions, severe allergic reactions, and deaths due to peanut allergy., Results: In the simulated cohort of 200 000 infants and using the base case during the model horizon, a no-screening approach had lower mean (SD) costs ($13 449 [$38 163] vs $15 279 [$38 995]) and higher mean (SD) gain in QALYs (29.25 [3.28] vs 29.23 [3.30]) vs screening but resulted in more allergic reactions (mean [SD], 1.07 [3.15] vs 1.01 [3.02]), severe allergic reactions (mean [SD], 0.53 [1.66] vs 0.52 [1.62]), and anaphylaxis involving cardiorespiratory compromise (mean [SD], 0.50 [1.59] vs 0.49 [1.47]) per individual. In deterministic SPT sensitivity analyses at base-case sensitivity and specificity rates, screening could be cost-effective at a high disutility rate (the negative effect of a food allergic reaction) (76-148 days of life traded) for an at-home vs in-clinic reaction in combination with high baseline peanut allergy prevalence among infants at high risk for peanut allergy and not yet exposed to peanuts. If an equivalent rate and disutility of accidental and index anaphylaxis was assumed and the 8-mm SPT cutoff had 0.85 sensitivity and 0.98 specificity, screening was cost-effective at a peanut allergy prevalence of 36%., Conclusions and Relevance: The results of this study suggest that the current screening approach to early peanut introduction could be cost-effective at a particular health utility for an in-clinic reaction, SPT sensitivity and specificity, and high baseline peanut allergy prevalence among high-risk infants. However, such conditions are unlikely to be plausible to realistically achieve. Further research is needed to define the health state utility associated with reaction location.

Competing Interests: Competing interests: None declared.

Background: Beta-lactams are the mainstay for treating methicillin-susceptible Staphylococcus aureus (MSSA) infections complicated by bacteremia due to superior outcomes compared with vancomycin. With approximately 11% of inpatients reporting a penicillin (PCN) allergy, many patients receive suboptimal treatment for MSSA bacteremia., Objective: Evaluate the cost-effectiveness of penicillin skin testing (PST) in adult patients with self-reported PCN allergy in an inpatient setting undergoing treatment for MSSA bacteremia., Methods: A decision analytic model was developed comparing an acute care PST intervention to a scenario with no confirmatory allergy testing. The primary outcome was the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) from the health-sector perspective over a 1-year time horizon using quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) as the measure for effectiveness. One-way and probabilistic sensitivity analyses were conducted to assess the uncertainty of the ICER estimation., Results: Over a 1-year time horizon, PST services applied to all MSSA bacteremia patients reporting a PCN-allergy would result in a cost per patient of $12,559 and 0.73 QALYs while no PST services would have a higher cost per patient of $13,219 and 0.66 QALYs per patient. This resulted in a cost-effectiveness estimate of -$9,429 per QALY gained. Varying the cost of implementing PST services determined a break-even point of $959.98 where any PST cost less than this amount would actually be cost saving., Conclusions: Patients reporting a PCN allergy on admission may receive sub-optimal alternative therapies to beta-lactams, such as vancomycin, for MSSA bacteremia. This economic analysis demonstrates that inpatient PST services confirming PCN allergy are cost-effective for patients with MSSA bacteremia., Competing Interests: TJM reports personal fees from Summit Therapeutics, G&W Laboratories, and Paratek Pharmaceuticals outside the submitted work. This does not alter our adherence to PLOS ONE policies on sharing data and materials.

Background: Allergic rhinitis is the most common type of allergy worldwide. The accuracy of skin testing for allergic rhinitis is still debated. This health technology assessment had two objectives: to determine the diagnostic accuracy of skin-prick and intradermal testing in patients with suspected allergic rhinitis and to estimate the costs to the Ontario health system of skin testing for allergic rhinitis., Methods: We searched All Ovid MEDLINE, Embase, and Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, Database of Abstracts of Reviews of Effects, CRD Health Technology Assessment Database, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, and NHS Economic Evaluation Database for studies that evaluated the diagnostic accuracy of skin-prick and intradermal testing for allergic rhinitis using nasal provocation as the reference standard. For the clinical evidence review, data extraction and quality assessment were performed using the QUADAS-2 tool. We used the bivariate random-effects model for meta-analysis. For the economic evidence review, we assessed studies using a modified checklist developed by the (United Kingdom) National Institute for Health and Care Excellence. We estimated the annual cost of skin testing for allergic rhinitis in Ontario for 2015 to 2017 using provincial data on testing volumes and costs., Results: We meta-analyzed seven studies with a total of 430 patients that assessed the accuracy of skin-prick testing. The pooled pair of sensitivity and specificity for skin-prick testing was 85% and 77%, respectively. We did not perform a meta-analysis for the diagnostic accuracy of intradermal testing due to the small number of studies (n = 4). Of these, two evaluated the accuracy of intradermal testing in confirming negative skin-prick testing results, with sensitivity ranging from 27% to 50% and specificity ranging from 60% to 100%. The other two studies evaluated the accuracy of intradermal testing as a stand-alone tool for diagnosing allergic rhinitis, with sensitivity ranging from 60% to 79% and specificity ranging from 68% to 69%. We estimated the budget impact of continuing to publicly fund skin testing for allergic rhinitis in Ontario to be between $2.5 million and $3.0 million per year., Conclusions: Skin-prick testing is moderately accurate in identifying subjects with or without allergic rhinitis. The diagnostic accuracy of intradermal testing could not be well established from this review. Our best estimate is that publicly funding skin testing for allergic rhinitis costs the Ontario government approximately $2.5 million to $3.0 million per year.

Background: Travelers to countries with high tuberculosis incidence can acquire infection during travel. We sought to compare four screening interventions for travelers from low-incidence countries, who visit countries with varying tuberculosis incidence., Methods: Decision analysis model: We considered hypothetical cohorts of 1,000 travelers, 21 years old, visiting Mexico, the Dominican Republic, or Haiti for three months. Travelers departed from and returned to the United States or Canada; they were born in the United States, Canada, or the destination countries. The time horizon was 20 years, with 3% annual discounting of future costs and outcomes. The analysis was conducted from the health care system perspective. Screening involved tuberculin skin testing (post-travel in three strategies, with baseline pre-travel tests in two), or chest radiography post-travel (one strategy). Returning travelers with tuberculin conversion (one strategy) or other evidence of latent tuberculosis (three strategies) were offered treatment. The main outcome was cost (in 2005 US dollars) per tuberculosis case prevented., Results: For all travelers, a single post-trip tuberculin test was most cost-effective. The associated cost estimate per case prevented ranged from $21,406 for Haitian-born travelers to Haiti, to $161,196 for US-born travelers to Mexico. In all sensitivity analyses, the single post-trip tuberculin test remained most cost-effective. For US-born travelers to Haiti, this strategy was associated with cost savings for trips over 22 months. Screening was more cost-effective with increasing trip duration and infection risk, and less so with poorer treatment adherence., Conclusion: A single post-trip tuberculin skin test was the most cost-effective strategy considered, for travelers from the United States or Canada. The analysis did not evaluate the use of interferon-gamma release assays, which would be most relevant for travelers who received BCG vaccination after infancy, as in many European countries. Screening decisions should reflect duration of travel, tuberculosis incidence, and commitment to treat latent infection.

Controversy exists concerning the appropriate use of skin testing and in vitro testing for the diagnosis of allergy, particularly inhalant allergy. Earlier comparisons of skin testing and in vitro testing concluded that skin testing had superior accuracy at lower expense. In light of new developments with in vitro allergy testing, however, this issue should be reconsidered. A review of the recent scientific literature indicates that in vitro and skin testing are highly correlated. However, without the existence of an independent gold standard for inhalant allergy, it is not possible to determine which test is more accurate. The accuracy of either test can be compromised if conducted using different protocols or having insufficient quality control. Given their respective trajectories for technological advancement, quantification, and quality control, in vitro testing may offer the more standardized approach. Although the cost per test of in vitro testing remains greater than that of skin testing, the per-patient costs of the two modalities appear to be comparable, given the greater number of allergens typically used in skin testing. In summary, both skin testing and in vitro testing are acceptable as frontline diagnostic tools.