Search

Oral immunotherapy (OIT) emerged into clinical practice, and its delivery highlights the multifaceted expertise of registered nurses (RN) as central to allergy/immunology interprofessional collaborative teams. The allergist‐RN model of clinical evidenced‐based OIT provision is presented. RN competencies, role components, and intervention examples are included to assist RNs and allergists in maximizing RN capabilities. RNs’ patient-centered focus, and the ability to evaluate and incorporate physical, psychological, and sociological patient aspects are assets to OIT teams. RNs can establish best practices, initiate scholarly inquiry, and disseminate new knowledge to interdisciplinary colleagues. RNs also implement allergist-prescribed standing protocols within their legal practice scope by using their clinical judgment during evaluation of a patient receiving OIT. The same RN may serve as a nurse clinician, patient and family educator, case manager, research collaborator, and OIT program manager. Allergy/immunology practices use diverse staffing models, which thus require adaptation of presented descriptions per clinical team needs and resources.

Background: U.S. national emergency was declared in mid-March 2020 due to the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic. Subsequently, a period of stay-at-home orders, regulatory changes, evolving medical recommendations, and food supply chain disruptions occurred. There is little published research on how such changes affected food allergy management for children with this diagnosis. Objective: The study goal was to identify parent perspectives with regard to if and/or how pandemic-related regulatory changes and evolving medical recommendations have affected food allergy management. Methods: A survey was distributed to parents of children with food allergy. An electronic Internet forms survey link was available for completion during July 2020. Data were presented as descriptive statistics, cleaned, and coded into a spreadsheet before analysis . Frequencies and percentage were calculated to describe participants’ characteristics and responses. Results: Of 377 responses, 359 met inclusion criteria. Concerns about COVID-19 exposure were expressed in 65.7% about accessing an emergency department and 73.6% had school reentry concerns; 66% had not discussed recommended anaphylaxis management algorithm changes with a provider; 85.8% had not discussed the temporary U.S. Food and Drug Administration food labeling policy with a provider. Most (62%) reported shortages of preferred safe food brands. 62% spent more time cooking safe foods from scratch. With regard to the recommendation by the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) for classroom dining, 57.7% planned to request modifications. With regard to the CDC’s recommendation to use inhalers versus nebulizers, 37.7% had not discussed the topic with a provider. Ninety-two written comments were analyzed and grouped into seven themes. Conclusion: New pandemic-related regulations, food supply chain disruptions, and evolving medical recommendations resulted in intensified burdens for respondents, including the increased time needed to complete food allergy management and school reentry concerns. Study results can inform clinical team members (e.g., physicians, nurses, dieticians) of effects that pandemic-related changes may have on this patient population, with subsequent consideration of patient-specific screening, education, and shared decision-making with regard to risk mitigation needs.