Evidence map›Paper›PMID 21808856›Full record

ArticleClinics (Sao Paulo, Brazil)2011

Anaphylaxis in Latin America: a report of the online Latin American survey on anaphylaxis (OLASA).

Dirceu Sole, Juan Carlos Ivancevich, Mario Sanchez Borges, Magna Adaci Coelho, Nelson A Rosario, Ledit Ramón Francisco Ardusso, Luis Antônio Guerra Bernd, Latin American Anaphylaxis Working Group

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Clinics (Sao Paulo, Brazil), 2011. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 16 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
16citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

16 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Latin American anaphylaxis registry.The World Allergy Organization journal · 2023
    Article
  4. Knowledge of healthcare providers in the management of anaphylaxis.The World Allergy Organization journal · 2021
    Article
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Challenges of managing food allergy in the developing world.The World Allergy Organization journal · 2019
    Review
  8. Article
  9. Anaphylaxis in an emergency care setting: a one year prospective study in children and adults.Scandinavian journal of trauma, resuscitation and emergency medicine · 2017
    Article
  10. Why a registry of Chronic Urticaria (CUR) is needed.The World Allergy Organization journal · 2017
    Article
  11. Article
  12. Particularities of allergy in the Tropics.The World Allergy Organization journal · 2016
    Review
  13. Review
  14. International consensus on (ICON) anaphylaxis.The World Allergy Organization journal · 2014
    Article
  15. Article
  16. Pediatrics in Clinics: highlights.Clinics (Sao Paulo, Brazil) · 2012
    Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

8 authors.

Dirceu SoleDivision of Allergy, Clinical Immunology and Rheumatology Department of Pediatrics, Federal University of São Paulo, São Paulo, Brazil. dirceusole.dped@epm.br
Juan Carlos Ivancevich
Mario Sanchez Borges
Magna Adaci Coelho
Nelson A Rosario
Ledit Ramón Francisco Ardusso
Luis Antônio Guerra Bernd
Latin American Anaphylaxis Working Group

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectivesThe aims of the Online Latin American Survey of Anaphylaxis (OLASA) were to identify the main clinical manifestations, triggers, and treatments of severe allergic reactions in patients who were seen by allergists from July 2008 to June 2010 in 15 Latin American countries and Portugal (n =634).

resultsOf all patients, 68.5% were older than 18 years, 41.6% were male, and 65.4% experienced the allergic reaction at home. The etiologic agent was identified in 87.4% of cases and predominantly consisted of drugs (31.2%), foods (23.3%), and insect stings (14.9%). The main symptom categories observed during the acute episodes were cutaneous (94.0%) and respiratory (79.0%). The majority of patients (71.6%) were treated initially by a physician (office/emergency room) within the first hour after the reaction occurred (60.2%), and 43.5% recovered in the first hour after treatment. Most patients were treated in an emergency setting, but only 37.3% received parenteral epinephrine alone or associated with other medication. However, 80.5% and 70.2% were treated with corticosteroids or antihistamines (alone or in association), respectively. A total of 12.9% of the patients underwent reanimation maneuvers, and 15.2% were hospitalized. Only 5.8% of the patients returned to the emergency room after discharge, with 21.7% returning in the first 6 hours after initial treatment.

conclusionThe main clinical manifestations of severe allergic reactions were cutaneous. The etiologic agents that were identified as causing these acute episodes differed according to age group. Following in order: drugs (31.2%), foods (23.3% and insect stings (14.9%) in adults with foods predominance in children. Treatment provided for acute anaphylactic reactions was not appropriate. It is necessary to improve educational programs in order to enhance the knowledge on this potentially fatal emergency.

Indexed as

AnaphylaxisAdolescentAdultAgedAged, 80 and overAge DistributionAnti-Allergic AgentsChildChild, PreschoolEpinephrineFemaleHealth SurveysHumansInfantLatin AmericaMaleAnti-Allergic AgentsEpinephrine

Identifiers

PMID21808856
PMCPMC3129950

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.