Anaphylactic response to topical fluorescein 2% eye drops: a case report

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Introduction</p> <p>The intravenous use of fluorescein 10% during retinal angiography can cause severe systemic reactions including, on rare occasions, anaphylaxis. Fluorescein 2% eye drops are used extensively for clinical examination and diagnosis, but to the best of our knowledge, they have only been reported as being responsible for a systemic anaphylactic response on two previous occasions.</p> <p>Case presentation</p> <p>We report the case of a 51-year-old woman who developed an anaphylactic reaction when she was administered fluorescein sodium 2% eye drops after cataract surgery. This was the second time she had been exposed to fluorescein. She had brittle asthma and a history of anaphylaxis following exposure to a variety of drug and food allergens. She was successfully resuscitated and recovered completely over a period of two days.</p> <p>Conclusions</p> <p>Fluorescein 2% drops are universally used in general practice, ophthalmology, optometry, and casualty departments. Our case report reveals the potential for this benign eye drop to cause a life-threatening systemic reaction and emphasises the importance of considering this consequence when administering topical fluorescein 2% to a patient with a history of anaphylaxis to other allergens.</p

Serious Shortcomings in the Management of Children with Anaphylaxis in Scottish Schools

BACKGROUND: The United Kingdom incidence of anaphylaxis has increased very sharply over the last decade, with the highest rates of hospital admissions occurring in school-aged children. This raises concerns about the extent to which schools are aware of approaches to the prevention and treatment of anaphylaxis. METHODS AND FINDINGS: We undertook a national postal survey of 250 Scottish schools enquiring about approaches to managing children considered to be at risk of anaphylaxis. We obtained responses from 148 (60%) schools, 90 (61%) of which reported having at least one at risk child. Most (80%) schools with children considered to be at risk reported having personalised care plans and invariably reported having at least one member of staff trained in the emergency treatment of anaphylaxis. Access to adrenaline was available on-site in 97% of these schools. However, significantly fewer schools without children considered to be at risk reported having a trained member of staff (48%, p < 0.001), with access to adrenaline being very poor (12%, p < 0.001). Overall, 59% of respondents did not feel confident in their school's ability to respond in an emergency situation. CONCLUSIONS: Most schools with children considered to be at risk of anaphylaxis report using personal care plans and having a member of staff trained in the use of, and with access to, adrenaline. The picture is, however, less encouraging in schools without known at risk children, both in relation to staff training and access to adrenaline. The majority of schools with at risk children have poorly developed strategies for preventing food-triggered anaphylaxis reactions. There is a need for detailed national guidelines for all schools, which the Scottish Executive must now ensure are developed and implemented

Eight years of severe allergic reactions in Finland : a register-based report

Peer reviewe

An invitation to grieve: reconsidering critical incident responses by support teams in the school setting

This paper proposes that consideration could be given to an invitational intervention rather than an expectational intervention when support personnel respond to a critical incident in schools. Intuitively many practitioners know that it is necessary for guidance/counselling personnel to intervene in schools in and following times of trauma. Most educational authorities in Australia have mandated the formulation of a critical incident intervention plan. This paper defines the term critical incident and then outlines current intervention processes, discussing the efficacy of debriefing interventions. Recent literature suggests that even though it is accepted that a planned intervention is necessary, there is scant evidence as to the effectiveness of debriefing interventions in stemming later symptoms of post traumatic stress disorder. The authors of this paper advocate for an expressive therapy intervention that is invitational rather than expectational, arguing that not all people respond to trauma in the same way and to expect that they will need to recall and retell what has happened is most likely a dangerous assumption. A model of invitation using Howard Gardner’s (1983) multiple intelligences is proposed so that students are invited to grieve and understand emotionally what is happening to them following a critical incident