ArticlePediatric quality & safety
Reducing Admission for Anaphylaxis in a Pediatric Emergency Department Using a Clinical Decision Support Tool.
Article in Pediatric quality & safety. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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.
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.
Who cites it
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Post-anaphylaxis observation in the ED: a decade of data challenging the traditional 24-hour rule.International journal of emergency medicine · 2026Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Introduction: Anaphylaxis is a life-threatening condition necessitating emergent management. However, the benefits of prolonged observation and indications for hospitalization are not well established. Through the implementation of a disposition-focused clinical decision support tool (CDST), this quality improvement initiative aimed to reduce hospitalization for low-risk patients presenting to the pediatric emergency department (PED) with anaphylaxis from 49% to ≤12% within 12 months of implementation. Methods: The intervention included patients 18 years and younger of age presenting with anaphylaxis to the PED. A multidisciplinary team identified a 2006 evidence-based guideline as a significant contributor to hospitalization. The updated guideline incorporated a disposition-focused CDST that stratified patients as low-risk or high-risk and recommended discharge of low-risk patients after a 4-hour observation period. The primary outcome measure was the percentage of low-risk patients hospitalized. Balancing measures included low-risk patient 72-hour return rate and PED length of stay for all comers. Secondary outcomes included a focused cost analysis. Results: Fifty-three children preintervention and 43 children postintervention presenting with anaphylaxis met low-risk criteria. Postimplementation, hospitalization of low-risk patients decreased from 49% to 7% ( Conclusions: After implementing an evidence-based disposition-focused CDST, hospitalization of low-risk patients presenting to the PED with anaphylaxis significantly decreased without an increase in 72-hour returns. In addition, patient encounters demonstrated cost savings.
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.