4.5 Article

Design and validation of pictograms in a pediatric anaphylaxis action plan

Journal

PEDIATRIC ALLERGY AND IMMUNOLOGY
Volume 26, Issue 3, Pages 223-233

Publisher

WILEY
DOI: 10.1111/pai.12349

Keywords

anaphylaxis; action plan; emergency department; pictograms

Ask authors/readers for more resources

BackgroundCurrent anaphylaxis action plans (AAPs) are based on written instructions without inclusion of pictograms. ObjectivesTo develop an AAP with pictorial aids and to prospectively validate the pictogram components of this plan. MethodsParticipants recruited from the emergency department and allergy clinic participated in a questionnaire to validate pictograms depicting key counseling points of an anaphylactic reaction. Children 10years of age and caregivers of children <10years with acute anaphylaxis or who carried epinephrine auto-injector for confirmed allergy were eligible. Guessability, translucency, and recall were assessed for 11 pictogram designs. Pictograms identified as correct or partially correct by at least 85% of participants were considered valid. Three independent reviewers assessed these outcome measures. ResultsOf the 115 total participants, 73 (63%) were female, 76 (66%) were parents/guardians, and 39 (34%) were children aged 10-17. Overall, 10 pictograms (91%) reached 85% for correct guessability, translucency, and recall. Four pictograms were redesigned to reach the preset validation target. One pictogram depicting symptom management (5-min wait time after first epinephrine treatment) reached 82% translucency after redesign. However, it reached 98% and 100% of correct guessability and recall, respectively. ConclusionsWe prospectively designed and validated a set of pictograms to be included in an AAP. The incorporation of validated pictograms into an AAP may potentially increase comprehension of the triggers, signs and symptoms, and management of an anaphylactic reaction.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.5
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available