Strategies to Increase Equitable Access to Penicillin Allergy Delabeling Interactions

Importance Patients with unconfirmed and potentially false penicillin allergy labels receive unnecessarily broad-spectrum antibiotics that can lead to worse health outcomes and antimicrobial resistance. While ambulatory care is a favorable setting to engage in penicillin allergy delabeling, the process of removing an incorrect penicillin allergy label has not been widely implemented. Objective To contextualize barriers to and facilitators of penicillin allergy delabeling from a diverse range of perspectives and inform actionable strategies. Design, Setting, and Participants This qualitative study used in-depth interviews and focus groups with patients who had a penicillin allergy label, clinicians, and other stakeholders from primary care clinics in 3 hospital networks in Boston, Massachusetts. Participants were recruited from March 1 through September 30, 2024. Main Outcome and Measures The primary outcome was participant-perceived factors influencing engagement in discussions about penicillin allergy delabeling. The analytic approach was informed by the updated Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research (CFIR), with a mixed inductive-deductive analysis that incorporated the CFIR Expert Recommendations for Implementing Change (ERIC) implementation strategy matching tool to map interview data to implementation strategies. Results The study included 119 participants (84 [71%] female), of whom 69 (58%) were patients and 50 (42%) were clinicians and stakeholders; 87 (73%) participated in interviews and 32 (27%) participated in focus groups. Six barriers to penicillin allergy delabeling emerged: (1) clinician avoidance of conversations about penicillin allergy labels, (2) patients not being asked about their penicillin allergy labels, (3) language barriers, (4) time constraints, (5) perceived elevated risk of removing a penicillin allergy, and (6) limited access to allergists. These barriers aligned with 5 ERIC strategies: (1) create new ways of delivering care, (2) identify champions, (3) use data experts, (4) alter incentive structures, and (5) conduct educational meetings. Conclusions and Relevance This qualitative study guided by implementation science identified strategies to overcome barriers to penicillin allergy delabeling. These strategies may inform the next steps for implementation science research to improve access to penicillin allergy testing and delabeling.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
JAMA Network Open
Published
2026-09-15
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1001/jamanetworkopen.2026.33825
Primary Topic
Drug-Induced Adverse Reactions
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
article

Strategies to Increase Equitable Access to Penicillin Allergy Delabeling Interactions

Yvane Ngassa, Kimberly G. Blumenthal, Olabimpe Asupoto, Kap Sum Foong et al.
JAMA Network Open
Drug-Induced Adverse Reactions
article

Strategies to Increase Equitable Access to Penicillin Allergy Delabeling Interactions

Yvane Ngassa, Kimberly G. Blumenthal, Olabimpe Asupoto, Kap Sum Foong, Valerie Stone, Rachel Tam, Alysse Wurcel, Madelyn Eippert, Denise Daudelin, Ivana Kohut, Stephen Bartels, Danielle Crabtree
article en

Abstract

Importance Patients with unconfirmed and potentially false penicillin allergy labels receive unnecessarily broad-spectrum antibiotics that can lead to worse health outcomes and antimicrobial resistance. While ambulatory care is a favorable setting to engage in penicillin allergy delabeling, the process of removing an incorrect penicillin allergy label has not been widely implemented. Objective To contextualize barriers to and facilitators of penicillin allergy delabeling from a diverse range of perspectives and inform actionable strategies. Design, Setting, and Participants This qualitative study used in-depth interviews and focus groups with patients who had a penicillin allergy label, clinicians, and other stakeholders from primary care clinics in 3 hospital networks in Boston, Massachusetts. Participants were recruited from March 1 through September 30, 2024. Main Outcome and Measures The primary outcome was participant-perceived factors influencing engagement in discussions about penicillin allergy delabeling. The analytic approach was informed by the updated Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research (CFIR), with a mixed inductive-deductive analysis that incorporated the CFIR Expert Recommendations for Implementing Change (ERIC) implementation strategy matching tool to map interview data to implementation strategies. Results The study included 119 participants (84 [71%] female), of whom 69 (58%) were patients and 50 (42%) were clinicians and stakeholders; 87 (73%) participated in interviews and 32 (27%) participated in focus groups. Six barriers to penicillin allergy delabeling emerged: (1) clinician avoidance of conversations about penicillin allergy labels, (2) patients not being asked about their penicillin allergy labels, (3) language barriers, (4) time constraints, (5) perceived elevated risk of removing a penicillin allergy, and (6) limited access to allergists. These barriers aligned with 5 ERIC strategies: (1) create new ways of delivering care, (2) identify champions, (3) use data experts, (4) alter incentive structures, and (5) conduct educational meetings. Conclusions and Relevance This qualitative study guided by implementation science identified strategies to overcome barriers to penicillin allergy delabeling. These strategies may inform the next steps for implementation science research to improve access to penicillin allergy testing and delabeling.

JAMA Network OpenVol. 9(9)
Boston University (US), Tufts University (US), Brigham and Women's Hospital (US), Boston Medical Center (US), Tufts Medical Center (US), Harvard University (US), Jacksonville College (US), Massachusetts General Hospital (US)
Openalex Percentile: Top 12%
Drug-Induced Adverse Reactions
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.