John Oppenheimer1, Harold S Nelson. 1. Department of Internal Medicine, Section of Allergy and Immunology, Morristown Memorial Hospital, Morristown, New Jersey, USA.
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To provide the reader with a relevant review of the literature regarding skin testing in the allergist's office. DATA SOURCES: A PubMed search for the years 1970 through 2005 was performed using the following keywords: allergy skin testing, skin prick testing, and intradermal skin testing. STUDY SELECTION: Articles that highlighted aspects of sentinel to clinical allergists' use of skin testing in the office, such as methods of skin testing, intradermal vs skin prick testing, skin test devices, and methods of expressing skin test results, were selected for further review. RESULTS: Skin testing remains the central test to confirm an allergic response. It is minimally invasive and when performed correctly has good reproducibility. Results are easily quantifiable and correlate well with end organ challenge. It is imperative however that technicians who perform the skin tests and the clinicians who order or interpret these tests understand the characteristics of the specific tests they are administering. It is also important that the clinician express skin test results in a manner that allows easy interpretation by another physician. CONCLUSIONS: Allergists must consider controllable variables that affect skin test results and their interpretation. When not considered, they may be responsible for some of the inaccuracies associated with allergy skin testing.
OBJECTIVE: To provide the reader with a relevant review of the literature regarding skin testing in the allergist's office. DATA SOURCES: A PubMed search for the years 1970 through 2005 was performed using the following keywords: allergy skin testing, skin prick testing, and intradermal skin testing. STUDY SELECTION: Articles that highlighted aspects of sentinel to clinical allergists' use of skin testing in the office, such as methods of skin testing, intradermal vs skin prick testing, skin test devices, and methods of expressing skin test results, were selected for further review. RESULTS: Skin testing remains the central test to confirm an allergic response. It is minimally invasive and when performed correctly has good reproducibility. Results are easily quantifiable and correlate well with end organ challenge. It is imperative however that technicians who perform the skin tests and the clinicians who order or interpret these tests understand the characteristics of the specific tests they are administering. It is also important that the clinician express skin test results in a manner that allows easy interpretation by another physician. CONCLUSIONS: Allergists must consider controllable variables that affect skin test results and their interpretation. When not considered, they may be responsible for some of the inaccuracies associated with allergy skin testing.
Authors: Jorge F C Fernandes; Ernesto A Taketomi; Jose R Mineo; Diego O Miranda; Ronaldo Alves; Rafael O Resende; Leandro H Ynoue; Sun-Sang J Sung; Deise A O Silva Journal: Clin Immunol Date: 2010-03-31 Impact factor: 3.969
Authors: Ignacio J Ansotegui; Giovanni Melioli; Giorgio Walter Canonica; Luis Caraballo; Elisa Villa; Motohiro Ebisawa; Giovanni Passalacqua; Eleonora Savi; Didier Ebo; R Maximiliano Gómez; Olga Luengo Sánchez; John J Oppenheimer; Erika Jensen-Jarolim; David A Fischer; Tari Haahtela; Martti Antila; Jean J Bousquet; Victoria Cardona; Wen Chin Chiang; Pascal M Demoly; Lawrence M DuBuske; Marta Ferrer Puga; Roy Gerth van Wijk; Sandra Nora González Díaz; Alexei Gonzalez-Estrada; Edgardo Jares; Ayse Füsun Kalpaklioğlu; Luciana Kase Tanno; Marek L Kowalski; Dennis K Ledford; Olga Patricia Monge Ortega; Mário Morais Almeida; Oliver Pfaar; Lars K Poulsen; Ruby Pawankar; Harald E Renz; Antonino G Romano; Nelson A Rosário Filho; Lanny Rosenwasser; Mario A Sánchez Borges; Enrico Scala; Gian-Enrico Senna; Juan Carlos Sisul; Mimi L K Tang; Bernard Yu-Hor Thong; Rudolf Valenta; Robert A Wood; Torsten Zuberbier Journal: World Allergy Organ J Date: 2020-02-25 Impact factor: 4.084
Authors: Marek L Kowalski; Ignacio Ansotegui; Werner Aberer; Mona Al-Ahmad; Mubeccel Akdis; Barbara K Ballmer-Weber; Kirsten Beyer; Miguel Blanca; Simon Brown; Chaweewan Bunnag; Arnaldo Capriles Hulett; Mariana Castells; Hiok Hee Chng; Frederic De Blay; Motohiro Ebisawa; Stanley Fineman; David B K Golden; Tari Haahtela; Michael Kaliner; Connie Katelaris; Bee Wah Lee; Joanna Makowska; Ulrich Muller; Joaquim Mullol; John Oppenheimer; Hae-Sim Park; James Parkerson; Giovanni Passalacqua; Ruby Pawankar; Harald Renz; Franziska Rueff; Mario Sanchez-Borges; Joaquin Sastre; Glenis Scadding; Scott Sicherer; Pongsakorn Tantilipikorn; James Tracy; Vera van Kempen; Barbara Bohle; G Walter Canonica; Luis Caraballo; Maximiliano Gomez; Komei Ito; Erika Jensen-Jarolim; Mark Larche; Giovanni Melioli; Lars K Poulsen; Rudolf Valenta; Torsten Zuberbier Journal: World Allergy Organ J Date: 2016-10-12 Impact factor: 4.084
Authors: Michael J Epton; George I Town; Tristram Ingham; Kristin Wickens; David Fishwick; Julian Crane Journal: BMC Public Health Date: 2007-02-28 Impact factor: 3.295