Anaphylaxis and onsite treatment in schools, kindergartens, and nurseries

Seigo Korematsu,Minako Kaku,Shun Kitada,Mie Etoh,Hiroko Kai,Miho Joh,Kazue Nakano,Midori Nakamura,Kensho Sato,Yoshiyuki Wakita,Shigetaka Matsumoto,Kimihiro Yada,Akikazu Andou,Shun Ishiwa,Tamotsu Fujimoto
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/ped.14973
Abstract:Background: There have been no reports on both anaphylaxis incidence rate in schools, kindergarten, and nurseries, or how teachers have treated these children. This study was a fact-finding survey aimed at determining if appropriate responses to anaphylaxis onset were implemented in Oita Prefecture, Japan. Methods: The Oita Prefectural Allergy Control Committee administered a questionnaire using Google forms to all public and private schools, public and private kindergartens, certified child-care facilities, and day-care centers in the prefecture. Results: Responses to the questionnaire were obtained from 597 institutions, of which 125 890 children were affiliated with the responding institutions. Forty-eight children developed symptoms for which an adrenaline auto-injector was recommended in an Oita guideline. Among these children, three used the adrenaline auto-injector, three were prescribed the adrenaline auto-injector but were unable to use it, 27 were unable to use it as they were not prescribed an adrenaline auto-injector, and the final 15 responded that they handled their symptoms via another method because none of the above options apply. Conclusions: Most children who developed symptoms which an adrenaline auto-injector was recommended had no prescription for an adrenaline auto-injector. There is thus a need for appropriate response training to anaphylaxis whether or not an adrenaline auto-injector was prescribed.
What problem does this paper attempt to address?