Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38254221›Full record

ArticleAllergy, asthma, and clinical immunology : official journal of the Canadian Society of Allergy and Clinical Immunology2024

Resource utilization and cost assessment of a proactive penicillin allergy de-labeling program for low-risk inpatients.

Derek Lanoue, Adhora Mir, Carl van Walraven, Timothy Olynych, Caroline Nott, Derek R MacFadden

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Allergy, asthma, and clinical immunology : official journal of the Canadian Society of Allergy and Clinical Immunology, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
1.3field-weighted citation impact, top 21% of its field
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

3 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 3 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Clearance of penicillin allergies via direct oral provocation testing (DOPT): a systematic review.Antimicrobial stewardship & healthcare epidemiology : ASHE · 2025
    Article
  3. 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

6 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Derek LanoueDivision of Clinical Immunology and Allergy, McGill University, 1650 Cedar Ave., H3G1A4, Montreal, QC, Canada.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-7654-220X
Adhora MirThe Ottawa Hospital, Ottawa, ON, Canada.
Carl van WalravenThe Ottawa Hospital, Ottawa, ON, Canada.
Timothy OlynychThe Ottawa Hospital, Ottawa, ON, Canada.
Caroline NottThe Ottawa Hospital, Ottawa, ON, Canada.
Derek R MacFaddenThe Ottawa Hospital, Ottawa, ON, Canada. dmacfadden@toh.ca.
Ottawa Hospital · CAMcGill University · CA

Funding

Ottawa Hospital Research Institute 997394865
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundResource utilization and costs can impede proactive assessment and de-labeling of penicillin allergy among inpatients.

methodsOur pilot intervention was a proactive penicillin allergy de-labeling program for new inpatients with penicillin allergy. Patients deemed appropriate for a challenge with a low-risk penicillin allergy history were administered 250 mg amoxicillin and monitored for 1 h. We performed an explorative economic evaluation using various healthcare professional wages.

resultsOver two separate 2-week periods between April 2021 and March 2022, we screened 126 new inpatients with a penicillin allergy. After exclusions, 55 were appropriate for formal assessment. 19 completed the oral challenge, and 12 were directly de-labeled, resulting in a number needed to screen of 4 and a number needed to assess of 1.8 to effectively de-label one patient. The assessor's median time in the hospital per day de-labeling was 4h08 with a range of (0h05, 6h45). A single-site annual implementation would result in 715 penicillin allergy assessments with 403 patients de-labeled assuming 20,234 annual weekday admissions and an 8.9% penicillin allergy rate. Depending on the assessor used, the annual cost of administration would be between $21,476 ($53.29 per effectively de-labeled patient) for a pharmacy technician and $61,121 ($151.67 per effectively de-labeled patient) for a Nurse Practitioner or Physician Assistant.

conclusionA proactive approach, including a direct oral challenge for low-risk in-patients with penicillin allergy, appears safe and feasible. Similar programs could be implemented at other institutions across Canada to increase access to allergy assessment.

Indexed as

Adultbeta-lactamCost-analysisInpatientOral challengePenicillin

Identifiers

PMID38254221
PMCPMC10804656
OpenAlexW4391102198

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.