E J MacLaughlin1, J J Saseen, D C Malone. 1. School of Pharmacy, Texas Tech Health Sciences Center, Amarillo, TX 79106, USA. ericmac@cortex.ama.ttuhsc.edu
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To evaluate antibiotic selection and the cost effect of reported beta-lactam allergies. DESIGN: Retrospective medical records review comparing antimicrobial selection and costs in patients with a reported beta-lactam allergy with a group in which no such allergy had been documented. SETTING: University-based family medicine clinic. PATIENTS: Patients who were prescribed at least 1 antibiotic for an upper respiratory tract infection, otitis media, sinusitis, and/or a urinary tract infection were eligible. One thousand two hundred one patients were identified via ICD-9-CM (International Classification of Diseases, Ninth Revision, Clinical Modification) codes. Four hundred sixty-five patients were initially identified and an additional 195 family members were eligible for inclusion. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Comparison of antimicrobial selection and costs (by average wholesale price) between patients with and without a reported beta-lactam allergy. RESULTS: Of the 660 patients eligible for inclusion, 99 (15%) had a documented beta-lactam allergy. Of the patients with a documented allergy, only 33% had a description of their purported reaction. The mean antibiotic cost for patients with a beta-lactam allergy was significantly higher compared with those without a beta-lactam allergy ($26.81 vs $16.28, respectively; P =.004). Patients with a beta-lactam allergy were more likely to have received a cephalosporin, macrolide, or a miscellaneous agent (eg, quinolone, tetracycline, or nitrofurantoin) (P =.001). CONCLUSIONS: Patients with a beta-lactam allergy had higher antibiotic costs and were more likely to receive a broader-spectrum antibiotic. Most patients with a reported allergy did not have a description of their reaction. Skin testing may be of use in detecting true beta-lactam allergies; however, further study is needed to determine its cost-effectiveness.
OBJECTIVE: To evaluate antibiotic selection and the cost effect of reported beta-lactamallergies. DESIGN: Retrospective medical records review comparing antimicrobial selection and costs in patients with a reported beta-lactamallergy with a group in which no such allergy had been documented. SETTING: University-based family medicine clinic. PATIENTS: Patients who were prescribed at least 1 antibiotic for an upper respiratory tract infection, otitis media, sinusitis, and/or a urinary tract infection were eligible. One thousand two hundred one patients were identified via ICD-9-CM (International Classification of Diseases, Ninth Revision, Clinical Modification) codes. Four hundred sixty-five patients were initially identified and an additional 195 family members were eligible for inclusion. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Comparison of antimicrobial selection and costs (by average wholesale price) between patients with and without a reported beta-lactamallergy. RESULTS: Of the 660 patients eligible for inclusion, 99 (15%) had a documented beta-lactamallergy. Of the patients with a documented allergy, only 33% had a description of their purported reaction. The mean antibiotic cost for patients with a beta-lactamallergy was significantly higher compared with those without a beta-lactamallergy ($26.81 vs $16.28, respectively; P =.004). Patients with a beta-lactamallergy were more likely to have received a cephalosporin, macrolide, or a miscellaneous agent (eg, quinolone, tetracycline, or nitrofurantoin) (P =.001). CONCLUSIONS:Patients with a beta-lactamallergy had higher antibiotic costs and were more likely to receive a broader-spectrum antibiotic. Most patients with a reported allergy did not have a description of their reaction. Skin testing may be of use in detecting true beta-lactamallergies; however, further study is needed to determine its cost-effectiveness.
Authors: Martin Desrosiers; Gerald A Evans; Paul K Keith; Erin D Wright; Alan Kaplan; Jacques Bouchard; Anthony Ciavarella; Patrick W Doyle; Amin R Javer; Eric S Leith; Atreyi Mukherji; R Robert Schellenberg; Peter Small; Ian J Witterick Journal: Allergy Asthma Clin Immunol Date: 2011-02-10 Impact factor: 3.406
Authors: Kimberly G Blumenthal; Erica S Shenoy; Christy A Varughese; Shelley Hurwitz; David C Hooper; Aleena Banerji Journal: Ann Allergy Asthma Immunol Date: 2015-06-09 Impact factor: 6.347
Authors: David Vyles; James W Antoon; Allison Norton; Cosby A Stone; Jason Trubiano; Alexandra Radowicz; Elizabeth J Phillips Journal: Ann Allergy Asthma Immunol Date: 2020-03-26 Impact factor: 6.347