Medical clown support is associated with better quality of life of children with food allergy starting oral immunotherapy

Author(s):  
Naama Epstein Rigbi ◽  
Naama Schwartz ◽  
Michael R Goldberg ◽  
Michael B Levy ◽  
Liat Nachshon ◽  
...  
2012 ◽  
Vol 129 (2) ◽  
pp. AB29 ◽  
Author(s):  
J.M. Factor ◽  
M.R. Lester ◽  
L.M. Mendelson ◽  
J.O. Lee ◽  
J. Sproviero ◽  
...  

2020 ◽  
Vol 145 (2) ◽  
pp. AB136
Author(s):  
Justin Greiwe ◽  
William Lavery ◽  
Jonathan Bernstein ◽  
Umesh Singh

2021 ◽  
Vol 42 (2) ◽  
pp. 118-123
Author(s):  
Aikaterini Anagnostou

Food allergies are common and affect 6‐8% of children in the United States; they pose a significant burden on the quality of life of children with allergy and their caregivers due to multiple daily restrictions. Despite the recommended dietary avoidance, reactions tend to occur due to unintentional exposure to the allergenic food trigger. Fear of accidental ingestions with potentially severe reactions, including anaphylaxis and death, creates anxiety in individuals with food allergy. Oral immunotherapy has emerged as a form of active and potentially disease-modifying treatment for common food allergies encountered in childhood. The efficacy of oral immunotherapy is high, with the majority of participants achieving desensitization and, as a result, protection from trace exposures and improved quality of life. The main risk of oral immunotherapy consists of allergic reactions to treatment. In general, rates of allergic reactions and anaphylaxis are reported to be higher in individuals pursuing therapy options, but most subjects who undergo oral immunotherapy will likely experience mild or moderate reactions during treatment. Adverse events tend to reduce in both frequency and number in the maintenance period. The use of immune modulators alongside oral immunotherapy has been suggested, with the aim to improve efficacy and safety, and to facilitate the overall process. It is evident that the landscape of food allergy management is changing and that the future looks brighter, with different options emerging over time. The process of how to choose the appropriate option becomes a discussion between the clinician and the patient, which involves a joint review of the current medical evidence but also the patient's preference for balancing particular attributes of the treatment. By working together, providers and patients will ensure achievement of the best possible outcome for children with food allergies.


Author(s):  
Francesca Mori ◽  
Mattia Giovannini ◽  
Simona Barni ◽  
Rodrigo Jiménez-Saiz ◽  
Daniel Munblit ◽  
...  

The prevalence of food allergy has increased in recent years, especially in children. Food allergen avoidance and symptomatic drugs in case of an allergic reaction remain the standard of care in food allergy. Nevertheless, increasing attention has been given to the possibility to treat food allergy, through immunotherapy, particularly oral immunotherapy (OIT). Several OIT protocols and clinical trials have been published. Most of them focus on children allergic to milk, egg, or peanuts, although recent studies developed protocols for other foods, such as wheat and different nuts. OIT efficacy in randomized controlled trials is usually evaluated as the possibility for patients to achieve desensitization, while the issue of a possible long-term sustained unresponsiveness has not been completely addressed. Here, we evaluated current OIT knowledge, focusing on the results of clinical trials and current guidelines. Specifically, we wanted to highlight what is known in terms of OIT efficacy and effectiveness, safety, and impact on quality of life. For each aspect, we reported the pros and the cons, inferable from published literature. In conclusion, even though many protocols, reviews and meta-analysis have been published on this topic, OIT remains a controversial therapy and no definitive generalized conclusion may be drawn so far. It should be an option provided by specialized teams, when both patients and their families are prone to adhere to the proposed protocol. Efficacy, long-term effectiveness, possible role of adjuvant therapies, risk of severe reactions including anaphylaxis or eosinophilic esophagitis, and impact on the quality of life of both children and caregivers are all aspects that should be discussed before starting OIT. Future studies are needed to provide firm clinical and scientific evidence, which should also consider patient reported outcomes.


2016 ◽  
Vol 137 (2) ◽  
pp. AB255
Author(s):  
Na'ama Epstein Rigbi ◽  
Yitzhak Katz ◽  
Michael R. Goldberg ◽  
Michael B. Levy ◽  
Liat Nachshon ◽  
...  

Allergy ◽  
2017 ◽  
Vol 72 (12) ◽  
pp. 1883-1890 ◽  
Author(s):  
N. Epstein Rigbi ◽  
M. R. Goldberg ◽  
M. B. Levy ◽  
L. Nachshon ◽  
K. Golobov ◽  
...  

Allergy ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 75 (10) ◽  
pp. 2623-2632 ◽  
Author(s):  
Na'ama Epstein‐Rigbi ◽  
Michael R. Goldberg ◽  
Michael B. Levy ◽  
Liat Nachshon ◽  
Arnon Elizur

2021 ◽  
Vol 12 ◽  
Author(s):  
Francesca Mori ◽  
Mattia Giovannini ◽  
Simona Barni ◽  
Rodrigo Jiménez-Saiz ◽  
Daniel Munblit ◽  
...  

The prevalence of food allergy has increased in recent years, especially in children. Allergen avoidance, and drugs in case of an allergic reaction, remains the standard of care in food allergy. Nevertheless, increasing attention has been given to the possibility to treat food allergy, through immunotherapy, particularly oral immunotherapy (OIT). Several OIT protocols and clinical trials have been published. Most of them focus on children allergic to milk, egg, or peanut, although recent studies developed protocols for other foods, such as wheat and different nuts. OIT efficacy in randomized controlled trials is usually evaluated as the possibility for patients to achieve desensitization through the consumption of an increasing amount of a food allergen, while the issue of a possible long-term sustained unresponsiveness has not been completely addressed. Here, we evaluated current pediatric OIT knowledge, focusing on the results of clinical trials and current guidelines. Specifically, we wanted to highlight what is known in terms of OIT efficacy and effectiveness, safety, and impact on quality of life. For each aspect, we reported the pros and the cons, inferable from published literature. In conclusion, even though many protocols, reviews and meta-analysis have been published on this topic, pediatric OIT remains a controversial therapy and no definitive generalized conclusion may be drawn so far. It should be an option provided by specialized teams, when both patients and their families are prone to adhere to the proposed protocol. Efficacy, long-term effectiveness, possible role of adjuvant therapies, risk of severe reactions including anaphylaxis or eosinophilic esophagitis, and impact on the quality of life of both children and caregivers are all aspects that should be discussed before starting OIT. Future studies are needed to provide firm clinical and scientific evidence, which should also consider patient reported outcomes.


PEDIATRICS ◽  
2018 ◽  
Vol 142 (Supplement 4) ◽  
pp. S242.2-S243
Author(s):  
Salma Bahreinian ◽  
Elinor Simons

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document