Infection · 2026
Nationwide survey on penicillin allergy delabeling among German healthcare professionals: knowledge, attitudes and perceived barriers.
СтатьяНазвание и аннотация: Перевод в очереди
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Joost Insa, Tometten Lukas, Barry Joanne, Weber Alexandra, Koch Till, Nuernberg Hannah, Moeser Anne, Friedrichs Anette, Eirmbter Barbara, Hennigs Annette, Khatamzas Elham
Аннотация
PURPOSE: Penicillin allergy (PA) delabeling optimizes antibiotic prescribing and is a recognized antimicrobial stewardship (AMS) tool. We aimed to characterize current practices and knowledge of PA delabeling in German non-allergist healthcare professionals to define barriers and facilitators for a wider implementation of delabeling strategies.
METHODS: A nationwide web-based, anonymous survey was distributed to physicians and hospital pharmacists. It covered four domains: demographics, access to AMS, allergy assessment and attitude towards PA delabeling. Responses were analysed using descriptive and inferential statistics.
RESULTS: A total of 504 responses (249 physicians, 255 pharmacists) were analysed. While 86% of respondents were familiar with the concept of delabeling, only 32% had ever performed it, mostly fewer than 6 times in the past year. 12% of physicians regularly took extended allergy histories, and just 2% always used a standardized method. Only ~ 30% of respondents had onsite access to allergy services. Barriers included lack of time, experience and guidance. Pharmacists frequently cited PA management as outside their role. Despite limited experience, 88% of physicians and 71% of pharmacists expressed interest in delabeling if supported by clear algorithms and institutional support.
CONCLUSION: PA delabeling by non-allergists is of great relevance to physicians and pharmacists in Germany but not routinely integrated in clinical pathways, due to missing guidelines, limited resources and unclear role definitions. However, the results of this study highlight the considerable strong potential for implementing structured delabeling strategies-if they are supported by adequate training, clear protocols and sufficiently resourced antimicrobial stewardship teams.
METHODS: A nationwide web-based, anonymous survey was distributed to physicians and hospital pharmacists. It covered four domains: demographics, access to AMS, allergy assessment and attitude towards PA delabeling. Responses were analysed using descriptive and inferential statistics.
RESULTS: A total of 504 responses (249 physicians, 255 pharmacists) were analysed. While 86% of respondents were familiar with the concept of delabeling, only 32% had ever performed it, mostly fewer than 6 times in the past year. 12% of physicians regularly took extended allergy histories, and just 2% always used a standardized method. Only ~ 30% of respondents had onsite access to allergy services. Barriers included lack of time, experience and guidance. Pharmacists frequently cited PA management as outside their role. Despite limited experience, 88% of physicians and 71% of pharmacists expressed interest in delabeling if supported by clear algorithms and institutional support.
CONCLUSION: PA delabeling by non-allergists is of great relevance to physicians and pharmacists in Germany but not routinely integrated in clinical pathways, due to missing guidelines, limited resources and unclear role definitions. However, the results of this study highlight the considerable strong potential for implementing structured delabeling strategies-if they are supported by adequate training, clear protocols and sufficiently resourced antimicrobial stewardship teams.