首页> 外文期刊>The Journal of Allergy and Clinical Immunology >Is structured allergy history sufficient when assessing patients with asthma and rhinitis in general practice?
【24h】

Is structured allergy history sufficient when assessing patients with asthma and rhinitis in general practice?

机译:在一般实践中评估哮喘和鼻炎患者时,结构性过敏史是否足够?

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
           

摘要

BACKGROUND: Many United Kingdom patients with asthma and rhinitis are allergic, but in primary care few diagnostic and management decisions are made with formal allergy assessment. Arguably, knowing a patient's atopic status might be helpful in distinguishing the cause of disease and in selecting appropriate treatments. OBJECTIVES: Our objective was to estimate the extent to which a formal allergy assessment (a structured allergy history and skin prick tests to 5 common aeroallergens) would improve the precision of allergy diagnosis compared with a patient's self-report or the structured allergy history alone. METHODS: One hundred twenty-seven patients with asthma, rhinitis, or both were recruited from 4 general practices in Wessex, United Kingdom. Allergy status based on the patient's opinion and on structured allergy history alone was compared with formal allergy assessment. Assessments were validated by an independent allergy specialist reviewing the files. Patients were given written advice specific to their allergies and followed up 3 months later to assess satisfaction, recall, and effect on health and behavior. RESULTS: Self-reporting misclassified allergic status in many patients. A structured allergy history alone was little better and resulted in false-positive rates for cat allergy of 32%, grass pollen of 48%, house dust mite of 75%, tree pollen of 54%, and dog of 27% compared with formal allergy assessment. Skin prick testing combined with a structured history was essential to reach a correct causative diagnosis. Three months later, 41% patients had made changes to lifestyle, medications, or both, and 18% reported clinical improvement. CONCLUSIONS: Skin prick testing improves the accuracy of an assessment of allergic status based on patient opinion or a structured allergy history alone.
机译:背景:许多英国的哮喘和鼻炎患者是过敏性的,但是在初级保健中,很少有通过正式的过敏评估做出诊断和管理决定的。可以说,了解患者的特应性状况可能有助于区分疾病原因和选择适当的治疗方法。目的:我们的目标是评估与患者的自我报告或仅结构化过敏史相比,正式的过敏评估(结构化过敏史和针对5种常见气变应原的皮肤点刺试验)可提高过敏诊断准确性的程度。方法:从英国韦塞克斯的4种常规方法中招募了127例哮喘,鼻炎或两者兼有的患者。将基于患者意见和仅基于结构性过敏史的过敏状态与正式过敏评估进行比较。评估由独立的过敏专家对文件进行验证。给予患者针对其过敏的书面建议,并在3个月后进行随访,以评估其满意度,召回率以及对健康和行为的影响。结果:在许多患者中,自我报告错误分类的过敏状态。仅结构性过敏史略有好转,与正式过敏相比,猫过敏的假阳性率为32%,草花粉为48%,屋尘螨为75%,树花粉为54%,狗为27%。评定。皮肤点刺测试与结构化病史相结合对于正确诊断病因至关重要。三个月后,有41%的患者改变了生活方式和/或药物,或两者都有,并且18%的患者报告了临床改善。结论:皮肤点刺测试提高了基于患者意见或仅基于结构性过敏史的过敏状态评估的准确性。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号