TL;DR: Findings suggest that specialist care of asthma is of benefit for patients with asthma in a large HMO, and specifically, the allergists' patients conformed more closely to national asthma management guidelines and reported better quality of life than did the generalist's patients.
Abstract: Objective: To examine the differences in medical management and quality of life between patients with asthma who receive their primary asthma care from allergists and those who receive their care from generalists in a large health maintenance organization (HMO). Methods: We conducted a cross-sectional study of patients with asthma in a large HMO (Kaiser Permanente, Northwest Region, Portland, Ore). Participants were 392 individuals aged 15 through 55 years with physician-diagnosed asthma, taking antiasthma medications, reporting current asthma symptoms, and receiving asthma care from an allergist or from a generalist. Primary outcomes include characteristics of asthma, health care utilization, and quality of life. Results: Patients cared for by allergists tended to have more severe asthma than those cared for by generalists ( P P P P P P P P P Conclusions: These findings suggest that specialist care of asthma is of benefit for patients with asthma in a large HMO. Specifically, the allergists' patients conformed more closely to national asthma management guidelines and reported better quality of life than did the generalists' patients. Arch Intern Med. 1997;157:1201-1208
TL;DR: The aims of this position paper were to provide recommendations for the investigation of immediate‐type perioperative hypersensitivity reactions and to provide practical information that can assist clinicians in planning and carrying out investigations.
Abstract: Perioperative immediate hypersensitivity reactions are rare. Subsequent allergy investigation is complicated by multiple simultaneous drug exposures, the use of drugs with potent effects and the many differential diagnoses to hypersensitivity in the perioperative setting. The approach to the investigation of these complex reactions is not standardized, and it is becoming increasingly apparent that collaboration between experts in the field of allergy/immunology/dermatology and anaesthesiology is needed to provide the best possible care for these patients. The EAACI task force behind this position paper has therefore combined the expertise of allergists, immunologists and anaesthesiologists. The aims of this position paper were to provide recommendations for the investigation of immediate-type perioperative hypersensitivity reactions and to provide practical information that can assist clinicians in planning and carrying out investigations.
TL;DR: The results suggest that the NIAID/FAAN criteria are highly sensitive but less specific and are likely to be useful in the ED for the diagnosis of anaphylaxis.
Abstract: Background Diagnostic criteria were proposed at the Second Symposium on the Definition and Management of Anaphylaxis convened by the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases/Food Allergy and Anaphylaxis Network (NIAID/FAAN). Validation is needed before these criteria can be widely adapted into clinical practice. Objective Our aim was to retrospectively assess the diagnostic accuracy of the NIAID/FAAN criteria for the diagnosis of anaphylaxis in emergency department (ED) patients. Methods A retrospective cohort study of ED patients presenting from April to October 2008 was conducted. Patients given a diagnosis of an allergic reaction or anaphylaxis and a subset of patients with related diagnoses were included. Electronic medical records were reviewed and data were abstracted to determine whether the NIAID/FAAN criteria were met. Records were also independently reviewed in a blinded fashion by 2 experienced attending allergists. Final diagnosis by allergists was considered the reference standard. Results Of 214 patients, 86 (40.2%) met the NIAID/FAAN criteria for anaphylaxis. Allergists gave 61 (28.5%) patients diagnoses of anaphylaxis, 59 (96.7%) of whom satisfied the NIAID/FAAN criteria. The interrater agreement between allergists was substantial (κ = 0.77). The test characteristics of the NIAID/FAAN criteria were as follows: sensitivity, 96.7% (95% CI, 88.8% to 99.1%); specificity, 82.4% (95% CI, 75.5% to 87.6%); positive predictive value, 68.6% (95% CI, 58.2% to 77.4%); negative predictive value, 98.4% (95% CI, 94.5% to 99.6%); positive likelihood ratio, 5.48; and negative likelihood ratio, 0.04. Conclusions These results suggest that the NIAID/FAAN criteria are highly sensitive but less specific and are likely to be useful in the ED for the diagnosis of anaphylaxis.
TL;DR: A survey of World Allergy Organization member societies to obtain information about the status of the specialty of allergy worldwide found that allergists were ranked as the fifth most likely clinicians to see cases of allergic asthma, third most likely to see allergic rhinitis, and fourth mostlikely to see eczema or sinusitis.
Abstract: In 2004 the World Allergy Organization's Specialty and Training Council conducted a survey of World Allergy Organization (WAO) member societies to obtain information about the status of the specialty of allergy worldwide. Responses were received from 33 countries, representing a population of 1.39 billion people, of whom it was estimated that 22% may suffer from some form of allergic disease. Allergy was reported by 23 respondents to be a certified or accredited specialty in their country, and the number of certified allergists per head of population ranged from 1:25 million to 1:16,000. Allergists were ranked as the fifth most likely clinicians to see cases of allergic asthma, third most likely to see allergic rhinitis, and fourth most likely to see eczema or sinusitis. Nine countries only reported that children with allergic diseases would be seen by a pediatrician with appropriate training. The survey results highlight a pressing need for the development of allergy services worldwide.
TL;DR: Now, the authors come to offer you the right catalogues of book to open that will show you the amazing benefits of reading a book.
Abstract: More than 50 million Americans, one out of five, suffer from hay fever, asthma, and other allergic diseases. Many of these conditions are caused by exposure to allergens in indoor environments such as the house, work, and school--where we spend as much as 98 percent of our time.Developed by medical, public health, and engineering professionals working together, this unique volume summarizes what is known about indoor allergens, how they affect human health, the magnitude of their effect on various populations, and how they can be controlled. The book addresses controversies, recommends research directions, and suggests how to assist and educate allergy patients, as well as professionals.Indoor Allergens presents a wealth of information about common indoor allergens and their varying effects, from significant hay fever to life-threatening asthma. The volume discusses sources of allergens, from fungi and dust mites to allergenic chemicals, plants, and animals, and examines practical measures for their control.Indoor Allergens discusses how the human airway and immune system respond to inhaled allergens and assesses patient testing methods, covering the importance of the patient's medical history and outlining procedures and approaches to interpretation for skin tests, in vitro diagnostic tests, and tests of patients' pulmonary function.This comprehensive and practical volume will be important to allergists and other health care providers; public health professionals; specialists in building design, construction, and maintenance; faculty and students in public health; and interested allergy patients.