ArticleFederal practitioner : for the health care professionals of the VA, DoD, and PHS2026
Implementation of a Pharmacist-Led Penicillin Allergy Interview at a Veterans Care Facility.
Article in Federal practitioner : for the health care professionals of the VA, DoD, and PHS, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Evaluating a patient's β-lactam allergy involves a thorough review of electronic health records (EHRs), penicillin skin test, and observed oral challenge. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the impact of pharmacist-led penicillin allergy delabeling solely through an interview using the Allergy to β-Lactam Evaluation (ABLE) process. Methods: This single-facility, retrospective cohort study reviewed EHR notes. Patient eligibility for allergy profile modifications was determined using guidance from the ABLE process. Interviews were conducted with patients meeting inclusion criteria. A progress note was entered into the EHR following completion of the interview. Patients were compared to a historical control group and matched for allergy severity (immunoglobulin E [IgE]-mediated allergy, unknown, adverse drug reaction [ADR], and severe cutaneous or other non-IgE-mediated reaction). The primary outcome was the number of patient allergy ADRs that were removed or changed on their profile. Results: Six of 35 patients in the interviewed group had allergy profile modifications. The number of patients with a penicillin allergy/ADR modified regardless of change in their antibiotic regimen was statistically higher in the interviewed group compared with the control group: 6 (17.1%) vs 0 (0%) ( Conclusions: The study findings support the use of the ABLE process for penicillin allergy/ADR modification or clarification. Although the sample size was small, the ABLE process has the ability to positively impact individuals with inappropriate penicillin allergy documentation in the EHR.
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.