ORIGINAL PAPER
Don't we overestimate drug allergies in children?
More details
Hide details
1
Medical University of Lodz, Łódź, Poland
(Copernicus Memorial Hospital, Department of Pediatrics and Allergy)
Online publication date: 2023-09-25
Corresponding author
Joanna Jerzyńska
Medical University of Lodz, Copernicus Memorial Hospital, Department of Pediatrics and Allergy, Piłsudskiego 71,
90-328 Łódź, Poland
Int J Occup Med Environ Health. 2023;36(5):632-42
KEYWORDS
TOPICS
ABSTRACT
Objectives: On average about 10% of parents report hypersensitivity to at least 1 drug in their children. After diagnosis process a few of these reactions
are being confirmed as drug hypersensitivity reactions. The aim of the study was to assess the real-life prevalence of drug hypersensitivity
in children based on drug provocation tests. Material and Methods: The authors included 113 children, aged 4–18 years, referred to Pediatrics
and Allergy Clinic in Łódź, Poland, due to incidence of adverse reaction during treatment. Medical history regarding allergies to drugs was taken
in accordance to the form developed by the United States Food and Drug Administration Adverse Event Reporting System. Skin prick tests, intradermal
test and drug provocation test were performed in all patients. Results: In all 113 patients suspected of drug allergy, after all diagnostic
procedures, the authors proved IgE-mediated allergy to β-lactams, nonsteroid anti-inflammatory drugs, local anesthetics in 19 patients (16.8%).
Previous history of allergy was a risk factor for drug allergy in studied patients (p = 0.001). The most frequent symptoms of allergy were urticaria and erythematous papular rash. Conclusions: Drug allergy is a difficult problem in the practice of a doctor and is difficult to diagnose, especially in the pediatric population. It seems that too often isolated symptoms reported during infection or disease are taken as a symptom of drug allergy, and
not as a symptom resulting from the course of the disease. Int J Occup Med Environ Health. 2023;36(5):632–42