Anaphylaxis is a clinical emergency, and all healthcare professionals should be familiar with its recognition and acute and ongoing management. These guidelines have been prepared by the European Academy of Allergy and Clinical Immunology (EAACI) Taskforce on Anaphylaxis. They aim to provide evidence-based recommendations for the recognition, risk factor assessment, and the management of patients who are at risk of, are experiencing, or have experienced anaphylaxis. While the primary audience is allergists, these guidelines are also relevant to all other healthcare professionals. The development of these guidelines has been underpinned by two systematic reviews of the literature, both on the epidemiology and on clinical management of anaphylaxis. Anaphylaxis is a potentially life-threatening condition whose clinical diagnosis is based on recognition of a constellation of presenting features. First-line treatment for anaphylaxis is intramuscular adrenaline. Useful second-line interventions may include removing the trigger where possible, calling for help, correct positioning of the patient, high-flow oxygen, intravenous fluids, inhaled short-acting bronchodilators, and nebulized adrenaline. Discharge arrangements should involve an assessment of the risk of further reactions, a management plan with an anaphylaxis emergency action plan, and, where appropriate, prescribing an adrenaline auto-injector. If an adrenaline auto-injector is prescribed, education on when and how to use the device should be provided. Specialist follow-up is essential to investigate possible triggers, to perform a comprehensive risk assessment, and to prevent future episodes by developing personalized risk reduction strategies including, where possible, commencing allergen immunotherapy. Training for the patient and all caregivers is essential. There are still many gaps in the evidence base for anaphylaxis.

BackgroundExamining deaths caused by anaphylaxis may help identify factors that may decrease the risk of these unfortunate events. However, information on fatal anaphylaxis is limited. The objectives of our study were to examine all cases of fatal anaphylaxis in Ontario to determine cause of death, associated features, co factors and trends in mortality. The identification of these factors is important for developing effective strategies to overcome gaps in monitoring and treatment of patients with food allergies and risk for anaphylaxis.MethodsThis was a retrospective case-series analysis of all causes of anaphylaxis-related deaths using data from the Ontario Coroner’s database between 1986 and 2011. Quantitative data (e.g. demographic) were analyzed using descriptive statistics and frequency analysis using SPSS. Qualitative data were analyzed using content analysis of grounded theory methodology.ResultsWe found 92 deaths in the last 26 years related to anaphylaxis. Causes of death, in order of decreasing frequency, included food (40 cases), insect venom (30 cases), iatrogenic (16 cases), and idiopathic (6 cases). Overall, there appears to be a decline in the frequency of food related deaths, but an increase in iatrogenic causes of fatalities. We found factors associated with fatal anaphylaxis included: delayed epinephrine administration, asthma, allergy to peanut, food ingestion outside the home, and teenagers with food allergies.ConclusionsOur findings indicate the need to improve epinephrine auto-injector use in acute reactions, particularly for teens and asthmatics with food allergies. In addition, education can be improved among food service workers and food industry in order to help food allergic patients avoid potentially fatal allergens. The increasing trend in iatrogenic related anaphylaxis is concerning, and requires monitoring and more investigation.

To cite this article: Kastner M, Harada L, Waserman S. Gaps in anaphylaxis management at the level of physicians, patients, and the community: a systematic review of the literature. Allergy 2010; 65: 435–444.AbstractDiagnosis and management of anaphylaxis can be a challenge because reactions are often unexpected and progress quickly. The focus of anaphylaxis management has mostly been on the acute episode, with little attention given to the long‐term management of patients at risk. This is compounded by conflicting information in current guidelines and a general lack of agreement among clinicians about which management strategies are the most appropriate. We systematically reviewed the literature to identify and summarize studies that investigated gaps in anaphylaxis management. Our search included MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL, and Evidence‐Based Medicine Reviews. Studies were included if they addressed an outcome describing gaps in anaphylaxis knowledge, education, anaphylaxis management, and quality of life (QOL). Populations of interest were health care professionals involved in the care of patients at risk for anaphylaxis, and patients of any age, their parents, caregivers, and teachers in primary care, hospital or community settings. Of 5014 citations that were identified, the final 59 studies (selected from 75 full‐text articles) met the inclusion criteria. Two hundred and two gaps were identified and classified according to major themes: gaps in knowledge and anaphylaxis management (physicians and patients); gaps in follow‐up care (physicians); and QOL of patients and caregivers. Findings from this systematic review revealed gaps in anaphylaxis management at the level of physicians, patients, and the community. Findings will be used to provide a basis for developing interventional strategies to help address these deficiencies.

The risk perception research is widely focused on children as targets of risk. To date, very few studies have consulted with the impacted group to assess the perceptions of risk associated with the exposures of interest. Much less research has investigated the experiences of children at risk for anaphylaxis, their concerns, and the psychosocial stresses associated with risk. The present study explores the perceptions and experiences of Ontario students with anaphylaxis, and their parents regarding school as a safe place in order to inform school policy around risk management and coping. A "child-centered" analytical framework incorporating illustrative techniques within interpretative analysis is outlined. Five prominent themes: (a) social and environmental barriers to safety, (b) coping strategies, (c) emotional burden of responsibility, (d) balance of responsibility (transitions), and (e) redefining "normal" are discussed. Results found that "child-centered" techniques empowered children in a process that is meaningful and relevant to their lives. A preliminary framework for understanding what risk means to children highlighted the differences in how they cope in the public sphere of school.

The annual incidence rate of accidental exposure for children with peanut allergy is 12.5%. Children with a recent diagnosis and adolescents are at higher risk. Hence, education of allergic children and their families is crucial immediately after diagnosis and during adolescence. As many reactions were treated inappropriately, healthcare professionals require better education on anaphylaxis management.