Anaphylaxis is a clinical emergency, and all healthcare professionals should be familiar with its recognition and acute and ongoing management. These guidelines have been prepared by the European Academy of Allergy and Clinical Immunology (EAACI) Taskforce on Anaphylaxis. They aim to provide evidence-based recommendations for the recognition, risk factor assessment, and the management of patients who are at risk of, are experiencing, or have experienced anaphylaxis. While the primary audience is allergists, these guidelines are also relevant to all other healthcare professionals. The development of these guidelines has been underpinned by two systematic reviews of the literature, both on the epidemiology and on clinical management of anaphylaxis. Anaphylaxis is a potentially life-threatening condition whose clinical diagnosis is based on recognition of a constellation of presenting features. First-line treatment for anaphylaxis is intramuscular adrenaline. Useful second-line interventions may include removing the trigger where possible, calling for help, correct positioning of the patient, high-flow oxygen, intravenous fluids, inhaled short-acting bronchodilators, and nebulized adrenaline. Discharge arrangements should involve an assessment of the risk of further reactions, a management plan with an anaphylaxis emergency action plan, and, where appropriate, prescribing an adrenaline auto-injector. If an adrenaline auto-injector is prescribed, education on when and how to use the device should be provided. Specialist follow-up is essential to investigate possible triggers, to perform a comprehensive risk assessment, and to prevent future episodes by developing personalized risk reduction strategies including, where possible, commencing allergen immunotherapy. Training for the patient and all caregivers is essential. There are still many gaps in the evidence base for anaphylaxis.

BackgroundThe long-term sequelae of coronavirus disease 2019 (Covid-19) in children remain poorly characterised. This study aimed to assess long-term outcomes in children previously hospitalised with Covid-19 and associated risk factors.MethodsThis is a prospective cohort study of children (≤18 years old) admitted with confirmed Covid-19. Children admitted to the hospital between April 2, 2020 and August 26, 2020, were included. Telephone interview using the International Severe Acute Respiratory and emerging Infection Consortium (ISARIC) Covid-19 Health and Wellbeing paediatric follow-up survey. Persistent symptoms (>5 months) were further categorised by system(s) involved.Findings518 of 853 (61%) of eligible children were available for the follow-up assessment and included in the study. Median age was 10.4 years (IQR, 3–15.2) and 270 (52.1%) were girls; median follow-up since hospital discharge was 256 (223–271) days. At the time of the follow-up interview 126 (24.3%) participants reported persistent symptoms among which fatigue (53, 10.7%), sleep disturbance (36, 6.9%,) and sensory problems (29, 5.6%) were the most common. Multiple symptoms were experienced by 44 (8.4%) participants. Risk factors for persistent symptoms were: older age “6–11 years” (odds ratio 2.74 (95% confidence interval 1.37 to 5.75) and “12–18 years” (2.68, 1.41 to 5.4); and a history of allergic diseases (1.67, 1.04 to 2.67).InterpretationA quarter of children experienced persistent symptoms months after hospitalization with acute covid-19 infection, with almost one in ten experiencing multi-system involvement. Older age and allergic diseases were associated with higher risk of persistent symptoms at follow-up.

The FAQLQ-PF is psychometrically robust, with excellent reliability and validity.

Anaphylaxis has been defined as a 'severe, life-threatening generalized or systemic hypersensitivity reaction'. However, data indicate that the vast majority of foodtriggered anaphylactic reactions are not life-threatening. Nonetheless, severe lifethreatening reactions do occur and are unpredictable. We discuss the concepts surrounding perceptions of severe, life-threatening allergic reactions to food by different stakeholders, with particular reference to the inclusion of clinical severity as a factor in allergy and allergen risk management. We review the evidence regarding factors that might be used to identify those at most risk of severe allergic reactions to food, and the consequences of misinformation in this regard. For example, a significant proportion of food-allergic children also have asthma, yet almost none will experience a fatal food-allergic reaction; asthma is not, in itself, a strong predictor for fatal anaphylaxis. The relationship between dose of allergen exposure and symptom severity is unclear. While dose appears to be a risk factor in at least a subgroup of patients, studies report that individuals with prior anaphylaxis do not have a lower eliciting dose than those reporting previous mild reactions. It is therefore important to consider severity and sensitivity as separate factors, as a highly sensitive individual will not necessarily experience severe symptoms during an allergic reaction. We identify the knowledge gaps that need to be addressed to improve our ability to better identify those most at risk of severe food-induced allergic reactions.