Epinephrine auto-injector carriage and use practices among US children, adolescents, and adults

Christopher M. Warren, Justin M. Zaslavsky, Kristin Kan, Jonathan M. Spergel, Ruchi S Gupta*

*Corresponding author for this work

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

3 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

Background: Previous studies have suggested that epinephrine auto-injector (EAI) carriage and emergency use practices could be suboptimal for patients prescribed these devices for anaphylaxis management. Objective: To characterize EAI prescription fill rates, carriage, and use practices and associated factors and perceived barriers to recommended anaphylaxis management behaviors in US children, adolescents, and adults. Methods: Survey data were collected for adults (n = 450) and parents of children (n = 255) and adolescents (n = 212) who had been prescribed an EAI. Of eligible participants, survey completion rates were higher than 90%. A multiple-group structural equation model was fit to test adjusted associations. Results: Most patients (89%) filled their EAI prescriptions; however, of those who did not, the most commonly cited barriers to filling prescriptions were no history of reactions (26%) and EAI cost (25%). Forty-four percent carried at least 1 EAI “all the time” and 24% carried multiple EAIs. Sixty-five percent of respondents reported a personal history of EAI use. Most adults (52%) reported that an EAI was not used, although it would have been beneficial during their most severe allergic reaction. The most frequently given reasons for not using an EAI among respondents owning one were that an EAI was not available (45%) followed by their allergy was undiagnosed at the time (35%). To improve clinical anaphylaxis management, 61% of patients desired more effective patient education and 47% desired more time dedicated to patient education during the physician visit. Conclusion: These data suggest that current anaphylaxis management practices are suboptimal but could be facilitated through lowering EAI-related out-of-pocket costs and improving patient education efforts.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)479-491
Number of pages13
JournalAnnals of Allergy, Asthma and Immunology
Volume121
Issue number4
DOIs
StatePublished - Oct 1 2018

Fingerprint

Epinephrine
Anaphylaxis
Patient Education
Prescriptions
Hypersensitivity
Structural Models
Practice Management
Health Expenditures
Emergencies
Parents
Physicians
Costs and Cost Analysis
Equipment and Supplies
Surveys and Questionnaires

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Immunology and Allergy
  • Immunology
  • Pulmonary and Respiratory Medicine

Cite this

Warren, Christopher M. ; Zaslavsky, Justin M. ; Kan, Kristin ; Spergel, Jonathan M. ; Gupta, Ruchi S. / Epinephrine auto-injector carriage and use practices among US children, adolescents, and adults. In: Annals of Allergy, Asthma and Immunology. 2018 ; Vol. 121, No. 4. pp. 479-491.
@article{8cbccc00150c49a488ad5cde09df20ed,
title = "Epinephrine auto-injector carriage and use practices among US children, adolescents, and adults",
abstract = "Background: Previous studies have suggested that epinephrine auto-injector (EAI) carriage and emergency use practices could be suboptimal for patients prescribed these devices for anaphylaxis management. Objective: To characterize EAI prescription fill rates, carriage, and use practices and associated factors and perceived barriers to recommended anaphylaxis management behaviors in US children, adolescents, and adults. Methods: Survey data were collected for adults (n = 450) and parents of children (n = 255) and adolescents (n = 212) who had been prescribed an EAI. Of eligible participants, survey completion rates were higher than 90{\%}. A multiple-group structural equation model was fit to test adjusted associations. Results: Most patients (89{\%}) filled their EAI prescriptions; however, of those who did not, the most commonly cited barriers to filling prescriptions were no history of reactions (26{\%}) and EAI cost (25{\%}). Forty-four percent carried at least 1 EAI “all the time” and 24{\%} carried multiple EAIs. Sixty-five percent of respondents reported a personal history of EAI use. Most adults (52{\%}) reported that an EAI was not used, although it would have been beneficial during their most severe allergic reaction. The most frequently given reasons for not using an EAI among respondents owning one were that an EAI was not available (45{\%}) followed by their allergy was undiagnosed at the time (35{\%}). To improve clinical anaphylaxis management, 61{\%} of patients desired more effective patient education and 47{\%} desired more time dedicated to patient education during the physician visit. Conclusion: These data suggest that current anaphylaxis management practices are suboptimal but could be facilitated through lowering EAI-related out-of-pocket costs and improving patient education efforts.",
author = "Warren, {Christopher M.} and Zaslavsky, {Justin M.} and Kristin Kan and Spergel, {Jonathan M.} and Gupta, {Ruchi S}",
year = "2018",
month = "10",
day = "1",
doi = "10.1016/j.anai.2018.06.010",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "121",
pages = "479--491",
journal = "Annals of Allergy, Asthma and Immunology",
issn = "1081-1206",
publisher = "American College of Allergy, Asthma and Immunology",
number = "4",

}

Epinephrine auto-injector carriage and use practices among US children, adolescents, and adults. / Warren, Christopher M.; Zaslavsky, Justin M.; Kan, Kristin; Spergel, Jonathan M.; Gupta, Ruchi S.

In: Annals of Allergy, Asthma and Immunology, Vol. 121, No. 4, 01.10.2018, p. 479-491.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

TY - JOUR

T1 - Epinephrine auto-injector carriage and use practices among US children, adolescents, and adults

AU - Warren, Christopher M.

AU - Zaslavsky, Justin M.

AU - Kan, Kristin

AU - Spergel, Jonathan M.

AU - Gupta, Ruchi S

PY - 2018/10/1

Y1 - 2018/10/1

N2 - Background: Previous studies have suggested that epinephrine auto-injector (EAI) carriage and emergency use practices could be suboptimal for patients prescribed these devices for anaphylaxis management. Objective: To characterize EAI prescription fill rates, carriage, and use practices and associated factors and perceived barriers to recommended anaphylaxis management behaviors in US children, adolescents, and adults. Methods: Survey data were collected for adults (n = 450) and parents of children (n = 255) and adolescents (n = 212) who had been prescribed an EAI. Of eligible participants, survey completion rates were higher than 90%. A multiple-group structural equation model was fit to test adjusted associations. Results: Most patients (89%) filled their EAI prescriptions; however, of those who did not, the most commonly cited barriers to filling prescriptions were no history of reactions (26%) and EAI cost (25%). Forty-four percent carried at least 1 EAI “all the time” and 24% carried multiple EAIs. Sixty-five percent of respondents reported a personal history of EAI use. Most adults (52%) reported that an EAI was not used, although it would have been beneficial during their most severe allergic reaction. The most frequently given reasons for not using an EAI among respondents owning one were that an EAI was not available (45%) followed by their allergy was undiagnosed at the time (35%). To improve clinical anaphylaxis management, 61% of patients desired more effective patient education and 47% desired more time dedicated to patient education during the physician visit. Conclusion: These data suggest that current anaphylaxis management practices are suboptimal but could be facilitated through lowering EAI-related out-of-pocket costs and improving patient education efforts.

AB - Background: Previous studies have suggested that epinephrine auto-injector (EAI) carriage and emergency use practices could be suboptimal for patients prescribed these devices for anaphylaxis management. Objective: To characterize EAI prescription fill rates, carriage, and use practices and associated factors and perceived barriers to recommended anaphylaxis management behaviors in US children, adolescents, and adults. Methods: Survey data were collected for adults (n = 450) and parents of children (n = 255) and adolescents (n = 212) who had been prescribed an EAI. Of eligible participants, survey completion rates were higher than 90%. A multiple-group structural equation model was fit to test adjusted associations. Results: Most patients (89%) filled their EAI prescriptions; however, of those who did not, the most commonly cited barriers to filling prescriptions were no history of reactions (26%) and EAI cost (25%). Forty-four percent carried at least 1 EAI “all the time” and 24% carried multiple EAIs. Sixty-five percent of respondents reported a personal history of EAI use. Most adults (52%) reported that an EAI was not used, although it would have been beneficial during their most severe allergic reaction. The most frequently given reasons for not using an EAI among respondents owning one were that an EAI was not available (45%) followed by their allergy was undiagnosed at the time (35%). To improve clinical anaphylaxis management, 61% of patients desired more effective patient education and 47% desired more time dedicated to patient education during the physician visit. Conclusion: These data suggest that current anaphylaxis management practices are suboptimal but could be facilitated through lowering EAI-related out-of-pocket costs and improving patient education efforts.

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85054435143&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=85054435143&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1016/j.anai.2018.06.010

DO - 10.1016/j.anai.2018.06.010

M3 - Article

C2 - 29936229

AN - SCOPUS:85054435143

VL - 121

SP - 479

EP - 491

JO - Annals of Allergy, Asthma and Immunology

JF - Annals of Allergy, Asthma and Immunology

SN - 1081-1206

IS - 4

ER -