The results of the evaluation of the international testing “Acute reactions in children” among doctors of various specialties

Cover Page


Cite item

Full Text

Open Access Open Access
Restricted Access Access granted
Restricted Access Subscription or Fee Access

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Anaphylaxis is a situation at risk of death; thus, doctors should identify its symptoms and provide emergency assistance.

AIMS: This study aimed to conduct a comparative analysis of the level of knowledge on anaphylaxis in children among doctors of various specialties.

MATERIALS AND METHODS: The study was conducted anonymously using an online questionnaire (Google Forms) among five groups of doctors: allergologists-immunologists, resuscitators-anesthesiologists, emergency physicians, pediatricians, and students of accredited university graduates. The questionnaire included six tasks on anaphylaxis in children and four tasks on other diseases similar to anaphylaxis, and each had two questions (diagnosis and treatment) with three answer options; if one was correct, 1 point was given.

RESULTS: A total of 1871 respondents from nine countries filled out the questionnaire correctly. The average score of the allergists on anaphylaxis tasks was the highest (9 of 12 points) in comparison with other groups (p <0.001). The average score on non-anaphylaxis tasks was high in all groups (7 of 8 points). The level of knowledge of respondents did not correlate with age and work experience. In anaphylaxis tasks, allergists made the appropriate diagnosis in 83.7% of cases; resuscitators, pediatricians, and students in 2/3; and emergency physicians in 50%. For the treatment of anaphylaxis, allergists prescribed epinephrine in 66.7% of cases, and other groups in ≤50%. The percentage of correct answers in the tasks of food anaphylaxis (diagnosis) was the highest among allergists (80–96%), compared with other groups (36–82%) (p <0.001). In the treatment of food anaphylaxis, allergists prescribed epinephrine more often (up to 85%) than other groups (up to 77%). The percentage of correct responses of drug anaphylaxis among all groups was high; however, resuscitators responded better (diagnosis, 94%; treatment, 64%). All groups had the lowest level of knowledge on idiopathic anaphylaxis.

CONCLUSIONS: Anaphylaxis can be underdiagnosed in 50% of pediatric cases; however, even with correct diagnosis, epinephrine is not prescribed in half of the cases. Thus, increasing and maintaining the level of knowledge on anaphylaxis among doctors of various specialties, regardless of their length of service, are necessary.

Full Text

Restricted Access

About the authors

Alexander N. Pampura

Veltischev Research and Clinical Institute for Pediatrics and Pediatric Surgery

Email: apampura@pedklin.ru
ORCID iD: 0000-0001-5039-8473
SPIN-code: 9722-7961

MD, Dr. Sci. (Med.)

Россия, Moscow

Natalia V. Esakova

Veltischev Research and Clinical Institute for Pediatrics and Pediatric Surgery

Author for correspondence.
Email: env007@rambler.ru
ORCID iD: 0000-0001-8792-2670
SPIN-code: 6924-9726

MD, Cand. Sci. (Med.)

Россия, Moscow

Daria D. Dolotova

The Russian National Research Medical University named after N.I. Pirogov

Email: dariadolotova@gmail.com
ORCID iD: 0000-0002-5538-1109
SPIN-code: 1087-6660

MD, Cand. Sci. (Med.), Assistant Professor

Россия, Moscow

Irina N. Zakharova

Russian Medical Academy of Continuous Professional Education

Email: kafedra25@yandex.ru
ORCID iD: 0000-0003-4200-4598
SPIN-code: 4357-3897

MD, Dr. Sci. (Med.), Professor

Россия, Moscow

Nikolai F. Plavunov

Station of ambulance and emergency care name A.C. Puchkova; Moscow State University of Medicine and Dentistry named after A.I. Evdokimov

Email: info@ssnmp.mosgorzdrav.ru
ORCID iD: 0000-0002-1296-1760
SPIN-code: 8797-7297

MD, Dr. Sci. (Med.), Professor

Россия, Moscow; Moscow

Andrey U. Lekmanov

The Russian National Research Medical University named after N.I. Pirogov

Email: aulek@rambler.ru
ORCID iD: 0000-0003-0798-1625
SPIN-code: 3630-5061

MD, Dr. Sci. (Med.), Professor

Россия, Moscow

Valeriy A. Kadyshev

Station of ambulance and emergency care name A.C. Puchkova; Moscow State University of Medicine and Dentistry named after A.I. Evdokimov

Email: damask51@rambler.ru
ORCID iD: 0000-0002-1414-5337
SPIN-code: 7739-3396

MD, Cand. Sci. (Med.)

Россия, Moscow; Moscow

References

  1. Wang Y, Allen KJ, Suaini NH, et al. The global incidence and prevalence of anaphylaxis in children in the general population: a systematic review. Allergy. 2019;(74):1063–1080. doi: 10.1111/all.12702
  2. Turner PJ, Campbell DE, Motosue MS, Campbell RL. Global trends in anaphylaxis epidemiology and clinical implications. J Allergy Clin Immunol Pract. 2020;8(4):1169–1176. doi: 10.1016/j.jaip.2019.11.027
  3. Cardona V, Ansotegui IJ, Ebisawa M, et al. World allergy organization anaphylaxis guidance, 2020. World Allergy Organ J. 2020;13(10):100472. doi: 10.1016/j.waojou.2020.100472
  4. Muraro A, Worm M, Alviani C, et al. EAACI guidelines: Anaphylaxis (2021 update). European Academy of Allergy and Clinical Immunology, Food Allergy, Anaphylaxis Guidelines Group. Allergy. 2022;77(2):357–377. doi: 10.1111/all.15032
  5. Clinical recommendations. Anaphylactic shock. The Russian Association of Allergologists and Clinical Immunologists, Federation of Anesthesiologists and Resuscitators; 2020. 36 р. (In Russ).
  6. Munblit D, Treneva M, Korsunskiy I, et al. A national survey of Russian physicians’ knowledge of diagnosis and management of food-induced anaphylaxis. BMJ Open. 2017;7(7):e015901.
  7. González-Díaz SN, Villarreal-Gonzálezet RV, Fuentes-Laraal EI, et al. Knowledge of healthcare providers in the management of anaphylaxis. World Allergy Organization J. 2021;(14):100599. doi: 10.1016/j.waojou.2021.100599
  8. El-Sayed ZA, El-Owaidy R, Hussein SM, et al. Physicians’ knowledge and practice concerning diagnosis and management of anaphylaxis: The situation in Egypt. Afr J Emerg Med. 2021;11(4): 464–470. doi: 10.1016/j.afjem
  9. Fustiñana AL, Rino PB, Kohn-Loncarica GA. Detection and management of Anaphylaxis in children. Rev Chil Pediatr. 2019;90(1):44–51. doi: 10.32641/rchped.v90i1.839
  10. Grossman SL, Baumann BM, Peña BM, et al. Anaphylaxis knowledge and practice preferences of pediatric emergency medicine physicians: a national survey. J Pediatr. 2013;163(3):841–846. doi: 10.1016/j.jpeds.2013.02.050
  11. Wang J, Young MC, Nowak-Węgrzyn A. International survey of knowledge of food-induced anaphylaxis. Pediatr Allergy Immunol. 2014;25(7):644–650. doi: 10.1111/pai.12284
  12. Colleti JJ, Werther BC. Anaphylaxis knowledge among pediatric intensivists in Brazil: A multicenter survey. J Intensive Care Med. 2017;32(10):593–596. doi: 10.1177/0885066616659866
  13. Glants S. Medical and biological statistics. Moscow: Praktika; 1998. 459 p. (In Russ).
  14. Sedgwick P. Multiple hypothesis testing and Bonferroni’s correction. BMJ. 2014;(349):g6284. doi: 10.1136/bmj.g6284
  15. Olabarri M, Gonzalez-Peris S, Vázquez P, et al. Management of anaphylaxis in Spain: Pediatric emergency care providers’ knowledge. Eur J Emerg Med. 2019;26(3):163–167. doi: 10.1097/MEJ.0000000000000515
  16. Krugman SD, Chiaramonte DR, Matsui EC. Diagnosis and management of food-induced anaphylaxis: a national survey of pediatricians. Pediatrics. 2006;118(3):e554-60. doi: 10.1542/peds.2005-2906
  17. Lieberman JA, Camargo CA, Pistiner M, Wang J. Pediatrician perspectiveson symptom presentation and treatment of acute allergic reactions. Ann Allergy Asthma Immunol. 2021;126(3): 273–277. doi: 10.1016/j.anai.2020.11.010
  18. Wright CD, Longjohn M, Lieberman PL, Lieberman JA. An analysis of anaphylaxis cases at a single pediatric emergency department during a 1-year period. Ann Allergy Asthma Immunol. 2017;(118):461–464. doi: 10.1016/j.anai.2017.02.002
  19. Huang F, Chawla K, Jarvinen KM, Nowak-Wegrzyn A. Anaphylaxis in a New York City pediatric emergency department: Triggers, treatments, and outcomes. J Allergy Clin Immunol. 2012;(129): 162–168. doi: 10.1016/j.jaci.2011.09.018
  20. Erkoçoğlu M, Civelek E, Azkur D, et al. Knowledge and attitudes of primary care physicians regarding food allergy and anaphylaxis in Turkey. Allergol Immunopathol. 2013;41(5):292–297. doi: 10.1016/j.aller.2012.05.004
  21. Tanno LK, Demoly P. Anaphylaxis in children. Pediatr Allergy Immunol. 2020;31(Suppl 26):8–10. doi: 10.1111/pai.13336
  22. Isakova NV, Zakharova IN, Osmanov IM, et al. Anaphylaxis among children hospitalized with acute allergic reactions: A five-year retrospective analysis. Questions Children’s Dietetics. 2022;20(4): 21–30. doi: 10.20953/1727-5784-2022-4-21-30
  23. Bilò MB, Martini M, Tontini C, et al. Idiopathic anaphylaxis. Clin Exp Allergy. 2019;49(7):942–952. doi: 10.1111/cea.13402

Supplementary files

Supplementary Files
Action
1. JATS XML
Download
2. Fig. 1. Statistical significance of differences between groups, according to the score. Bold ― p <0.05; bold font with color highlighting ― p <0.005 (significance with the Bonferroni amendment).

Download (759KB)
Indexing metadata
3. Fig. 2. Percentage of points scored from the maximum possible for the diagnosis and treatment of anaphylaxis (Q1,2,4,5,6,10).

Download (523KB)
Indexing metadata
4. Fig. 3. The frequency of correct responses and the statistical significance of differences between groups separately for each task for the diagnosis and treatment of anaphylaxis (Q1,2,4,5,6,10) (bold ― p <0.05; bold font with color highlighting ― p <0.005 (significance with the Bonferroni amendment)).

Download (1MB)
Indexing metadata

Copyright © Pharmarus Print Media, 2023



This website uses cookies

You consent to our cookies if you continue to use our website.

About Cookies