Author
Listed:
- Noriyuki Yanagida
- Takanori Imai
- Sakura Sato
- Motohiro Ebisawa
Abstract
Background: The use of oral food challenges (OFCs) in clinics is limited because they are complicated and associated with anaphylactic symptoms. To increase their use, it is necessary to develop novel, effective, and safe methods. However, the effectiveness of different OFCs has not been compared. Objective: To investigate the effect of ingestion methods on wheat allergy symptoms and treatment during OFCs. Method: Without changing the total challenge dose, we changed the administration method from a 5-installment dose titration every 15 min (15-min interval method) to 3 installments every 30 min (30-min interval method). We retrospectively reviewed and compared the results of 65 positive 15-min interval wheat challenge tests conducted between July 2005 and February 2008 and 87 positive 30-min interval tests conducted between March 2008 and December 2009. Results: A history of immediate symptoms was more common for the 30-min interval method; however, no difference between methods was observed in other background parameters. Switching from the 15-min to the 30-min interval method did not increase symptoms or require treatment. The rate of cardiovascular symptoms (p = 0.032), and adrenaline use (p = 0.017) was significantly lower with the 30-min interval method. The results did not change after adjusting for the effects of immediate symptom history in multivariate analysis. Conclusion: This study suggests that the 30-min interval method reduces the risk of adverse events, compared to the 15-min interval method.
Suggested Citation
Noriyuki Yanagida & Takanori Imai & Sakura Sato & Motohiro Ebisawa, 2015.
"Do Longer Intervals between Challenges Reduce the Risk of Adverse Reactions in Oral Wheat Challenges?,"
PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 10(12), pages 1-9, December.
Handle:
RePEc:plo:pone00:0143717
DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0143717
Download full text from publisher
Corrections
All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0143717. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.
If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.
We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .
If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.
For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: plosone (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/ .
Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through
the various RePEc services.