Journal Article
Meta-Analysis
Review
Systematic Review
Add like
Add dislike
Add to saved papers

Frequency of self-reported drug allergy: A systematic review and meta-analysis with meta-regression.

BACKGROUND: Patients reporting drug allergy are treated with second-line therapies, with possible negative clinical and health consequences.

OBJECTIVE: To assess the prevalence of self-reported drug allergy.

METHODS: We performed a systematic review of observational studies assessing the prevalence of self-reported drug allergy. We searched 4 electronic databases. From selected studies, we extracted data on self-reported drug allergy prevalence, study design, participants' demographic characteristics, reported clinical manifestations, and suspected culprit drugs. We performed a random-effects meta-analysis followed by a meta-regression.

RESULTS: Fifty-three studies were included in the systematic review, assessing a total of 126,306 participants, of whom 8.3% (range across studies 0.7-38.5%) self-reported drug allergy. Cutaneous manifestations were reported by 68.2% of participants, and anaphylactic or systemic reactions were reported by 10.8%. Antibiotics, nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs, and anesthetics were the most frequently reported culprit drug classes. The frequency of self-reported drug allergy was higher in female (11.4%) than in male (7.2%) patients, adults (10.0%) than in children (5.1%), and in studies in the medical setting (15.9% in inpatients, 11.4% in outpatients) than in the general population (5.9%). The meta-analysis rendered a pooled prevalence of 7.9% (95% confidence interval 6.4-9.6), and the meta-regression identified study region, participants' age group, and study setting as factors associated with significant heterogeneity. Confirmation tests (including skin, in vitro, and drug provocation tests) were performed in only 3 studies.

CONCLUSION: The prevalence of self-reported drug allergy is highly variable and is higher in female patients, adults, and inpatients. To overcome this variability, further studies using confirmation tests are needed.

Full text links

We have located links that may give you full text access.
Can't access the paper?
Try logging in through your university/institutional subscription. For a smoother one-click institutional access experience, please use our mobile app.

Related Resources

For the best experience, use the Read mobile app

Mobile app image

Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university

For the best experience, use the Read mobile app

All material on this website is protected by copyright, Copyright © 1994-2024 by WebMD LLC.
This website also contains material copyrighted by 3rd parties.

By using this service, you agree to our terms of use and privacy policy.

Your Privacy Choices Toggle icon

You can now claim free CME credits for this literature searchClaim now

Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university

For the best experience, use the Read mobile app