Search

Background: The prevalence of hypersensitivity reactions to radiological contrast media (RCM) is increasing owing to the improved performance of diagnostic and therapeutic tests that require RCMs. Objective: We carried out a year-long real-life observational study to prospectively evaluate patients referred to the allergy department from primary care, the emergency department, and other specialties with suspected moderate-to-severe RCM hypersensitivity reactions. Methods: To study the costs of evaluating RCM hypersensitivity reactions, we systematically recorded direct and indirect costs.Results: Sixty-nine patients with previous reactions to RCM were evaluated in the allergy department from June 1, 2017, to May 31, 2018.Total direct health care costs were €10 715.84, with a mean (SD) cost per patient of €155.30 (77.08). Specifically, direct non–health care costs reached €1605.42 (mean, €23.27 [41.14]), and indirect costs were €6490.85 (mean, €94.07 [110.61]). In summary, the total cost was €18 812.11, that is, a mean cost of €272.64 (164.77). Conclusions: Our study shows that the costs of an elective evaluation of hypersensitivity reactions to RCM are low, thus confirming that correct and safe management of affected patients are cost-effective. Therefore, our efforts should be directed toward ensuring the necessary logistics.

Objective: During its first year, the AWARE study assessed disease activity, patient quality of life (QOL), and treatment patterns in chronic urticaria (CU) refractory to H1-antihistamines (H1-AH) in clinical practice. Methods: We performed an observational, prospective (24 months), international, multicenter study. The inclusion criteria were age ≥18 years and H1-AH–refractory CU (>2 months). At each visit, patients completed questionnaires to assess disease burden (Urticaria Control Test [UCT]), disease activity (7 day-Urticaria Activity Score [UAS7]), and QOL (Dermatology Life Quality index [DLQI], Chronic Urticaria Quality of Life Questionnaire [CU-Q2oL], and Angioedema Quality of Life Questionnaire [AE-QoL]). We present data for Spain. Results: The study population comprised 270 evaluable patients (73.3% female, mean [SD] age, 48.9 [14.7] years). At baseline, 89.3% were prescribed a CU treatment. After 1 year, first- and second-line treatments became less frequent and third-line treatments became more frequent. At baseline, 47.0% of patients experienced angioedema; at 1 year, this percentage had fallen to 11.8%. The mean (SD) AE-QoL score decreased from 45.2 (28.7) to 24.0 (25.8). The mean (SD) UCT score decreased from 7.0 (4.5) to 12.1 (4.1). According to UAS7, 38.2% of patients reported absence of wheals and itch in the previous 7 days at 1 year compared with 8.3% at baseline. The mean (SD) DLQI score decreased from 8.0 (7.4) to 2.8 (4.6). At the 1-year visit, the percentage of patients reporting a high or very high impact on QOL fell from 29.9% to 9.6%. Conclusions: H1-AH–refractory CU in Spain is characterized by absence of symptoms and a considerable impact on QOL. Continuous follow-up of CU patients and third-line therapies reduce disease burden and improve patients’ QOL.

Background: Few studies have evaluated adherence to anaphylaxis guidelines in emergency departments (EDs). Objective: The objective of this study was to evaluate adherence to anaphylaxis guidelines in the ED of a tertiary hospital. Methods: Medical records of patients attended in the ED of University Hospital of Salamanca, Spain were reviewed. Those patients fulfilling the anaphylaxis criteria proposed by the NIAID/FAAN were selected. Results: During a 1-year period, we identified 89 patients (74 adults and 15 children). The anaphylactic reaction was moderate in 65% of adults, severe in 34%, and very severe in 1%. In children, all reactions were moderate. Fewer than half of the patients (42%) received adrenaline in the ED; this was administered intramuscularly in only 19% of cases. As for the severity of the reaction, 65% of patients with moderate reactions and 42% with severe reactions were not treated with adrenaline. At discharge from the ED, an adrenaline auto-injector was recommended to only 5.6% of patients. Fifty-two percent of patients received a documented allergy referral (57% adults vs 27% children, P=.047), 29% instructions about avoidance of triggers (31% adults vs 20% children, NS), and 51% written instructions for recognition of anaphylaxis warning signs (41% adults vs 100% children, P