Retrospective Study Comparing Allergy Release Technique® to Standard Management for Pediatric Peanut and Cow's Milk Allergies
Received Date: Feb 08, 2019 / Accepted Date: Feb 13, 2019 / Published Date: Feb 20, 2019
Objectives: To compare standard allergy management (SM) to a new integrative treatment for food allergies, Allergy Release Technique® (ART), for effects on skin prick testing wheal diameter (SPT), IgE levels (allergen specific (SIgE) and total IgE (TIgE)), quality of life (QoL), anxiety, calcium intake, and allergen ingestion. ART includes multiple components, including skin conductance assessments at acupuncture points, exposure to radio frequency pulses, food desensitization, cognitive behavioral techniques, and post-treatment exposure to food allergens. Three hundred and seventy-seven children have participated in ART over the past 12 years.
Methods: Allergies had been documented in 2007-2015 (time 1) for both ART and SM groups (N=10 each), matched for age (7-17 years), gender, and food allergy (peanut or cow’s milk). At study enrolment (time 2, 2016-2017), ART group had had weekly treatments (M treatment length=6.3 months). The SM group had been followed by a board-certified allergist for at least one year. An average of 4.56 years elapsed between time 1 and time 2 for both groups. At time 1 and 2, SPT, SIgE and TIgE were assessed; time 2 also included food challenges, food ingestion diaries, QoL and anxiety questionnaires.
Results: Wilcoxon signed-rank statistics revealed no significant differences between groups on any measures at time 1. At time 2, compared to the SM group, the ART group had lower SPT and self-reported impact of food allergy on QoL, higher allergen ingestion, and a greater decrease in SPT from time 1 to time 2 (p values <0.05; effect sizes, r=0.52-0.86).
Conclusion: ART is an integrative treatment resulting in smaller SPT, higher level of allergen ingestion, and lower impact of food allergies on QoL compared to SM. Results should be replicated using larger samples, a prospective design, disaggregating ART components, and comparing ART to oral immunotherapy.
Keywords: Food allergies; Electro-acupuncture; Anxiety; Cognitivebehavioral therapy; Electromagnetic stimulation; desensitization
Eight percent of children in the U.S. have food allergies, with often severe physical and psychosocial costs. Physical reactions range from nasal congestion and urticaria to life-threatening systemic anaphylaxis, and health consequences may include poorer nutrition (e.g. inadequate calcium intake in milk allergy patients) . Psychosocial consequences often involve higher anxiety; stressful peer and family relationships; and lower quality of life, self-efficacy, and self-confidence [2-6].
Standard management for allergies typically involves (1) assessment of allergen specific IgE antibody levels (SIgE) and skin prick tests (SPT), (2) strict avoidance of offending foods, and (3) prescription of and education in the use of epinephrine auto-injectors and antihistamines. If SIgE decreases over time, food challenges are administered to test children’s allergen tolerance.
Avoidance requires high levels of vigilance because 90% of food allergens are routinely found in the American diet, including cow’s milk, eggs, peanuts, fish, shellfish, soybeans, wheat, and tree nuts, making accidental ingestions commonplace. Thus, standard management does not constitute a cure, nor does it sufficiently reduce associated morbidities. More effective therapies are needed.
Although as many as 20% of families with food allergies turn to complementary and alternative therapies, including acupuncture, homeopathy, chiropractic, acupressure, massage, the Nambudripad Allergy Elimination Technique(Ko, Lee, Munoz-Furlong, Li, & Sicherer, 2006) and natural food diets , there is no evidence that these approaches help children tolerate the food to which they are allergic.
Electro-acupuncture (applying weak electric current using electrodes placed at specific acupuncture points) and the Emotional Freedom Technique (EFT) involving tapping at acupuncture points have also not been tested for effectiveness with food allergies. However, along with transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) they have been found to improve mental health symptoms, including depression, anxiety, and PTSD [8-15].
One study indicated that electro-dermal responses differed in participants with and without environmental sensitivities after chemical/environmental exposures , so it is worth investigating if electro-dermal measures might help in allergy assessment or treatment. Finally, cognitive behavioral therapy (CBT) incorporating psycho-education, coping, and problem solving skills has been shown to reduce anxiety and food allergy burden in mothers, but has not been investigated as a treatment to reduce allergic reactions [17-19].
Therapies that have effectively decreased food allergies involve oral immunotherapy (OIT), in which minute amounts of specific allergens are incorporated into a vehicle (e.g., apple sauce) and increasing doses are consumed on a daily basis, along with an extended maintenance phase that concludes with repeated food challenges(Wood, 2016) .
Across multiple studies, OIT has resulted in decreased responses to SPT within several months of treatment and a decrease in SIgE over time after an initial increase(Vickery et al., 2013; Burks et al., 2012; Gorelik et al., 2015; Jones et al., 2009; Vickery et al., 2014) [21-25]. The participant withdrawal rate from OIT trials ranges from 10% to 36% , (Wood, 2016) partly because some patients experience allergic reactions while participating.
The objectives of the current retrospective study were to compare the efficacy of standard allergy management (SM) to a new treatment for food allergies, A.R.T. Allergy Release Technique® (ART) in 20 children ages 7-17 who had either cow’s milk (dairy) or peanut allergies. ART integrates multiple components, including skin conductance assessments at acupuncture points, exposure to radio frequency pulses, food desensitization, cognitive behavioral techniques, and continued post-treatment exposure to food allergens.
ART was compared to SM for effects on allergen ingestion, daily calcium intake, SPT allergen wheal diameter (in mm), SIgE and total IgE levels (TIgE), anxiety and quality of life at two time points: time 1, before ART was administered and time 2, after ART had been administered to one half of the sample. ART and SM groups were matched for age, gender, and food allergy diagnosis. Stressors in the child’s life during the year previous to study enrolment were also assessed in order to control for confounding variables.
Recruitment and inclusion criteria
The study was approved by the Boston Children’s Hospital (BCH) Institutional Review Board. One hundred twenty children with peanut allergies, 27 children with milk allergies, 117 children with both milk and peanut allergies, and 113 children with other food allergies have participated in ART over the past 12 years, with a 7% withdrawal rate. The first step in recruitment was to invite families to participate via email, letters, or phone, whose ART treatment began after January 2012 and was completed at least 1 year and no more than 4 years, prior to study enrolment.
Interested families contacted the study coordinators. Participants were approached in reverse chronological order, working backwards from when they had finished treatment. Other inclusion criteria were having milk and/or peanut allergies documented by a board certified allergist between 2007-2015, at least one year prior to study enrolment (time 1).
In order to obtain the 10 ART families, 12 families were contacted, but two refused, one due to fear of the blood draw and the other due to prior negative hospital experiences.
The ten participants in the SM group were patients in the BCH Allergy Program. They were recruited with the following criteria:
(1) had documented milk and/or peanut allergies at time 1, (2) were under the care of a board certified allergist for at least the previous 12 months, (3) had expressed an interest in food allergy studies, and (4) had not received ART. SM participants were selected to match ART participants on the basis of gender, age and type of allergy. Of the 15 SM families who were identified as meeting matching criteria and contacted by email or phone, 11 consented to participate, and one of these did not complete all of the study requirements and was excluded from data analyses.
There were 10 children (7 males, 3 females) in each group, 6 with milk allergies and 4 with peanut allergies. The age range was 7-17 years, M=11.80 years, SD=3.12 years. Allergies had been documented at time 1 by a positive allergen SPT (wheal ≥ 3 mm larger than that elicited by the negative control) and/or a positive allergen specific IgE level (>0.35 kUA/L).
There were no significant differences as tested by Wilcoxon signedrank and Chi-square tests between ART and SM groups in the number of children with a documented history of anaphylaxis (N=3 for ART and N=4 for SM); the number of foods to which participants were allergic (mean=5 foods; SD=3.31; Mdn=3.5 foods); or in history (ongoing and occurrences during past 12 months) of asthma, atopic dermatitis, or allergic rhinitis.
In the milk allergy group, 5/6 SM children and 3/6 ART children also had peanut allergies; 1/4 children in each of the SM and ART peanut groups also had milk allergies. The ART group had had ½ hour weekly sessions of ART lasting an average of 6.3 months, SD=3.6 months, range=3.5 to 16.1 months.
Procedure and measures
Written informed consent for parents and assent for children were obtained from all participants. Current study allergy assessment (time 2) for both SM and ART groups occurred between April to December 2016, with no significant differences between groups in the average amount of time elapsed between time 1 and 2 assessments (for SPT assessments:
M=4.12 years; Mdn=4.14 years; Wilcoxon signed-rank test for group differences, Z=0.79, p=0.43 (N=9 ART and 7 SM participants); for IgE assessments: M=4.89 years; Mdn=4.96 years; Wilcoxon signed-rank test for group differences, Z=1.22, p=0.22, (N=7 ART participants and 9 SM participants).
For time 1, medical records were used to access SPT and IgE levels for both groups. For time 2, children in the ART group came to the BCH Division of Allergy and Immunology, for a visit that included SPT, in vitro IgE assessments measuring SIgE to milk and peanut using ImmunoCAP (Thermo Fisher Scientific, Waltham, Mass) TIgE, and a food challenge in which they ingested 6 to 8 grams of milk or peanuts.
All ART children were given the food challenge because food diaries indicated they were ingesting allergens on a weekly basis, although only one ART child with a milk allergy met the Standardized Clinical Assessment and Management Plan (SCAMP) first iteration food challenge criteria: (for milk allergy: SIgE ≤ 2 kU/L and SPT wheal diameter ≤ 8 mm and for peanut allergy: SIgE ≤ 0.7 kU/L and SPT wheal diameter ≤ 5 mm) .
One child in the ART group refused the blood draw, so IgE levels could not be assessed. For the SM group, eight children had SPT or IgE assessments done at BCH within six months of study enrolment and their medical records were used to access time 2 data; the other two participants came to BCH for SPT and IgE levels at time 2. None of the SM children was ingesting allergens according to food diaries, nor did they meet SCAMP food challenge criteria so they did not undergo food challenges at time 2.
Parents and children also completed several widely used, reliable and valid questionnaires either at their time 2 visit or at home, returning them by mail, which included:
• The Food Allergy Quality of Life Questionnaire (FAQLQ), assessing food related quality of life; versions for parents (17 items, 0 to 6 point scale), children ages 8-12 (24 items, 0 to 6 point scale), and adolescents ages 13-17 (23 items, 0 to 6 point scale) [27,28].
• The Child and Adolescent Survey of Experiences (CASE), assessing environmental stressors; versions for parents and children each 38 items, 0-3 point scale 
• The Spence Children’s Anxiety Scale (Spence), assessing anxiety; versions for children (SCAS: 45 items, 0 to 3 point scale)  and parents (SPAS: 39 items; 0 to 3 scale) . Both groups also completed a demographics form, a 3 day food diary and an allergen ingestion checklist.
ART was developed and delivered by author AT, a certified health and nutrition coach, and the treatment is detailed in Supplement 1.
The treatment has several components, primarily:
(1) Desensitization to minute amounts of food containing allergens, starting with tiny amounts touched to the face and lips for 4-6 weeks, followed by ingestion of poppy seed sized pieces gradually increased over a two to six month period up to standard daily size servings that are maintained over time
(2) Teaching CBT skills to manage anxiety (developed in collaboration with author LB), including repeating positive coping statements such as “I can be strong” and “I want to eat this food” and rewarding food exposures [32,33].
(3) Each week, using a galvanometer device (Bioscan system, International Health Technologies) with accompanying software (Bioscan MSA 141) to measure the electrical resistance between one of two acupuncture points on the fingers of one hand (in Chinese acupuncture, points Nervous system NE-1b* and Allergy (upper toxicity), AL-1b*) and an electrode held in the other hand (skin conductance) when allergens are placed on a metal plate on the galvanometer or highlighted in the software library.
If low electrical resistance and impedance (or greater capacitance) is found as indicated by measurements above 55 on a 0-100 gauge, radio frequency pulses of approximately 556.8 ± 0.1 kHz are administered for 1 to 3 minutes through a device that is worn around the neck; and (4) tapping up and down the patient’s spine after allergen or electromagnetic exposures, using the side of the practitioner’s hand while patients take deep, slow inhalations and exhalations.
Hypotheses were that at time 2, children in ART, as compared to children in SM, would (a) be able to ingest higher amounts of the allergen-containing food without having an objective allergic reaction during food challenges and as reported in weekly food diaries, (b) have lower SIgE levels and SPT wheal diameter and a greater decrease in SIgE levels and SPT from time 1 to time 2, (c) have lower self-reported impact of food allergy on quality of life, and (d) ingest a higher percentage of the daily requirements for calcium if they had milk allergies. The number of positive and negative stressful events over the past year was also compared for the two groups.
Data analyses were conducted by staffs that were blinded to participant group. Differences between ART and SM groups in major outcomes were tested using Wilcoxon signed-rank non-parametric tests, and results are displayed in Tables 1-4, which include group medians, Wilcoxon signed-rank test results (Z) and effect sizes (r values).
|Measure||ART group||SM group||Wilcoxon signed rank test|
|Median; N||Median; N||Z||p-value||r (effect size)|
|Time 1: SPT, mm||15.00; 9||11.00; 9||-0.58||0.56||0.14|
|Time 2: SPT, mm||7.00; 10||20.00; 7||-2.99||0.003||0.73|
|Time 1: SPT, mm||14.00; 4||14.50; 4||-0.29||0.77||0.10|
|Time 2: SPT, mm||9.00; 4||16.00; 3||-2.14||0.03||0.81|
|Time 1: SPT, mm||15.00; 5||11.00; 5||-0.85||0.40||0.27|
|Time 2: SPT, mm||5.50; 6||22.50; 4||-2.35||0.02||0.74|
Table 1: Medians, Wilcoxon signed rank test values and effect sizes for skin prick testing (SPT) allergen wheal diameter.
|Measure||ART group||SM group||Wilcoxon signed rank test|
|Median; N||Median; N||Z||p- value||r (effect size)|
|Time 1: SIgEa||6.48; 8||20.30; 10||-1.33||0.18||0.31|
|Time 2: SIgE||3.34; 9||9.91; 9||-1.02||0.31||0.24|
|Time 1: TIgEb||791.00; 5||308.50; 8||-0.59||0.56||0.16|
|Time 2: TIgE||668.00; 9||310.00; 9||-1.37||0.17||0.32|
|Time 1: SIgE||4.27; 3||10.44; 4||-0.71||0.48||0.27|
|Time 2: SIgE||2.87; 4||9.91; 3||0||1.00||0|
|Time 1: TIgE||1250; 1||269; 3||-1.34||0.18||0.67|
|Time 2: TIgE||793.50; 4||310.00; 3||-1.41||0.16||0.53|
|Time 1: SIgE||8.68; 5||23.25; 6||-0.91||0.36||0.27|
|Time 2: SIgE||3.34; 5||9.88; 6||-0.73||0.47||0.22|
|Time 1: TIgE||647.50; 4||964.00; 5||-0.49||0.62||0.16|
|Time 2: TIgE||668.00; 5||569.00; 6||-0.55||0.58||0.17|
Table 2: Medians, Wilcoxon signed rank test values and effect sizes for IgE levels. aSIgE=Allergen specific IgE levels; bTIgE=Total IgE levels; cZ= 0 for Time 2 Specific IgE peanut groups because the mean ranks for ART and SM are identical: 4 and 4, even though the medians for the two groups are different.
|Measure||ART group||SM group||Wilcoxon signed rank test|
|Median; N||Median; N||Z||p- value||r (effect size)|
|Food challenge- (g ingested)||7.00; 10||Test not done|
|Allergen ingested weekly (g)||30.43; 10||0.00; 10||-3.96||0.001||0.86|
|Food challenge- (g ingested)||6.50; 4||Test not done|
|Allergen ingested weekly (g)||14.76; 4||0.00; 4||-2.46||0.01||0.55|
|Food challenge- (g ingested)||7.00; 6||Test not done|
|Allergen ingested weekly (g)||62.55; 6||0.00; 6||-2.99||0.003||0.67|
|Calcium % daily valuea||50.00; 6||30.00; 6||-2.33||0.02||0.52|
Table 3: Medians, Wilcoxon signed rank test values and effect sizes for allergen intake. aThis is based on food and drink intake only; does not include supplements.
|Measure||ART group (N=10)||SM group (N=10)||Wilcoxon signed rank test|
|Median||Median||Z||p-value||r (effect size)|
|CASE positive events-childrenc||12.00||11.00||-0.11||0.91||0.02|
|CASE positive events-parents||14.00||11.00||-0.69||0.49||0.15|
|CASE negative events-children||4.50||5.00||-0.80||0.43||0.18|
|CASE negative events-parents||3.00||2.00||-0.23||0.82||0.05|
Table 4: Medians and Wilcoxon signed rank test values for food related quality of life (FAQL), Spence anxiety scale, Child and adolescent survey of experiences (CASE). aThe FAQL (Food Allergy Quality of Life Questionnaire) score is the mean of all items on the scale (possible range=0 to 6). Mean total scores on child and adolescent versions were pooled to derive the FAQL-children’s score; bSpence (Spence Anxiety Scale), children’s version: SCAS: 45 items, 0 to 3 point scale and parents’ version: SPAS: 39 items, 0 to 3 point scale; score reflects the sum of the ratings on all items; cCASE (Child and Adolescent Survey of Experiences): mean of 38 items, 0 to 3 point rating scale for how positive/negative each experience was.
SPT differences between groups
Table 1 shows no differences in SPT wheal diameter at time 1, but significantly lower SPT at time 2 (Z=2.99, r=0.73, p<0.05) and a greater decrease in SPT from time 1 to time 2 (Z=3.34, r=.84, p=0.001), for the ART group as compared to the SM group. These results were also significant when ART vs . SM group differences were analyzed independently for children with milk and peanut allergies.
SIgE and TIgE differences between groups
Table 2 shows no significant differences between the two groups in SIgE at time 1 or 2, or in SIgE changes over time. Although TIgE differences were not hypothesized, there were no differences between groups for TIgE at time 1 or 2.
Food ingestion differences between groups
Table 3 indicates that based on weekly food diaries, participants in the ART group had significantly higher levels of allergen ingestion compared to SM participants (Mdn=30.43 g for ART and 0.00 g for SM, Z=3.96, r=0.86, p<0.001). Children with milk allergies in the ART group consumed a significantly higher percentage of daily required calcium than the SM group (Mdn=50% for ART and 30% for SM, Z=-2.33, r=0.52, p=0.02).
Further, the entire ART group was able to complete successful food challenges at BCH, consuming on average 6.80 g of the allergen, whereas none of the SM children qualified to participate in food challenges.
Quality of life differences between groups
Table 4 indicates that ART parents and children with both types of allergies reported significantly lower impact of food allergies on their quality of life as rated on the FAQLQ compared to SM parents and children (for parents: Z=3.07, r=0.69, p=0.002; for children: Z=2.65, r=0.59, p=0.008). The two groups did not significantly differ in general anxiety scores on the Spence or in the average intensity of stressors over the past year.
This retrospective study introduces a new treatment for children’s allergies, ART, and compares SPT, SIgE, TIgE, general anxiety, food related quality of life, daily calcium intake and weekly allergen ingestion, in 10 children who participated in ART to 10 children in a standard management group. Groups were matched for age, gender and food allergy (either milk or peanuts). They did not differ in positive and negative life stressors, number of food allergies, or history of anaphylaxis, allergic rhinitis, atopic dermatitis, and asthma.
The groups were compared at two time points: time 1, before ART was administered and time 2, after ART was administered to ½ of the children. At time 2, the children who participated in ART, compared to SM, had significantly reduced their SPT wheal diameter, were able to complete a food challenge, and were able to eat foods they were formerly allergic to on a weekly basis. Children’s daily intake of calcium was higher for children with milk allergies in the ART group compared to the SM group. There was no treatment effect for SIgE or TIgE.
Children and parents in the ART group also reported significantly lower impact of food allergies on quality of life at time 2, although there were no differences for general anxiety. Being able to eat previously avoided foods may have helped families feel more confident and less limited in participating in food-related social activities, e.g., eating in restaurants, but did not impact non-food related life anxieties.
While BCH and BU study authors do not endorse food allergen desensitization without medical supervision and follow-up, this study was conducted to better understand the efficacy of ART, a multifaceted treatment that includes skin conductance assessments, exposure to radio frequency pulses, food desensitization, continued post-treatment exposure to food allergens, and CBT.
Findings from this retrospective study raise important questions about whether methods used in the ART treatment, such as CBT or exposure to electromagnetic stimulation, could be implemented to enhance the effectiveness of OIT conducted in medical settings. Although OIT and ART both enable children to safely ingest foods they reacted to pre-treatment, a review of the literature suggests that ART may have lower treatment burden compared to most OIT treatments, including (a) a shorter length of treatment  (b) lower anxiety during and post-treatment  and (c) no requirement for accompanying injections, sometimes a part of OIT treatment .
However, additional investigation is necessary to confirm these advantages and to understand the immunologic mechanisms, including which of the ART components are driving the effects. Future research should disaggregate the components of ART to see which ones are necessary and effective and systematically compare ART to OIT.
Because this is a small sample, all results need to be replicated with larger samples. Other limitations of the study include the fact that this was not a randomized prospective study so some families who opted to participate in ART might differ in motivation or other variables that might affect allergy progression. We also have no data on allergic reactions for the two groups during the 4 years that elapsed between time 1 and time 2.
It will be critical to study the safety of this treatment, given the potential for allergic reactions during allergen desensitization and importance of prompt medical treatment/guidance. Because none of the participants in the SM group met criteria for food challenges at time 2, responses to food challenges could not be compared for the two groups, and neither group had participated in previous food challenges so changes in food tolerance over time could not be studied. Finally, ART was delivered by an experienced provider who may have developed special rapport with participants, perhaps affecting outcomes. Despite these limitations, ART is a new integrative treatment worthy of further study.
Children with peanut and cow’s milk allergies who had participated in a new integrative treatment for food allergies, ART, had significantly smaller SPT, higher level of allergen ingestion, and lower impact of food allergies on quality of life compared to children who had been in standard allergy management. The efficacy and effectiveness of ART should continue to be investigated using larger samples, a prospective design, disaggregating individual ART components, and comparing ART to OIT.
We would like to express our gratitude to the children and parents who participated in the study and to the philanthropic individuals who contributed towards the funding of the study.
- Mailhot G, Perrone V, Alos N, Dubois J, Delvin E, et al. (2016) Cow’s milk allergy and bone mineral density in prepubertal children. Pediatrics 137: e20151742.
- Akeson N, Worth A, Sheikh A (2007) The psychosocial impact of anaphylaxis on young people and their parents. Clin Exp Allergy 37: 1213-1220.
- Bollinger ME, Dahlquist LM, Mudd K, Sonntag C, Dillinger L, et al. (2006) The impact of food allergy on the daily activities of children and their families. Ann Allergy Asthma Immunol 96: 415-421.
- Cummings AJ, Knibb RC, King RM, Lucas JS (2010) The psychosocial impact of food allergy and food hypersensitivity in children, adolescents and their families: A review. Allergy 65: 933-945.
- Cummings AJ, Knibb RC, Erlewyn-Lajeunesse M, King RM, Roberts G, et al. (2010) Management of nut allergy influences quality of life and anxiety in children and their mothers. Pediatr Allergy Immunol 21: 586-594.
- Mandell D, Curtis R, Gold M, Hardie S (2005) Anaphylaxis: How do you live with it? Health Soc Work 30: 325-335.
- Ko J, Lee JI, Munoz-Furlong A, Li XM, Sicherer SH (2006) Use of complementary and alternative medicine by food-allergic patients. Ann Allergy Asthma Immunol 97: 365-369.
- Boggio PS, Rigonatti SP, Ribeiro RB, Myczkowski ML, Nitsche MA, et al. (2008) A randomized, double-blind clinical trial on the efficacy of cortical direct current stimulation for the treatment of major depression. Int J Neuropsychopharmacol 11: 249-254.
- Fregni F, Boggio PS, Nitsche MA, Marcolin MA, Rigonatti SP, et al. (2006) Treatment of major depression with transcranial direct current stimulation. Bipolar Disord 8: 203-204.
- Guo T, Guo Z, Zhang W, Ma W, Yang X, et al. (2016) Electroacupuncture and cognitive behavioural therapy for sub-syndromal depression among undergraduates: A controlled clinical trial. Acupunct Med 34: 356-363.
- Luo H, Meng F, Jia Y, Zhao X (1998) Clinical research on the therapeutic effect of the electro-acupuncture treatment in patients with depression. Psychiatry Clin Neurosci 52 Suppl: S338-S340.
- Wells S, Polglase K, Andrews HB, Carrington P, Baker AH (2003) Evaluation of a meridian-based intervention, Emotional Freedom Techniques (EFT), for reducing specific phobias of small animals. J Clin Psychol 59: 943-966.
- Church D, Brooks AJ (2014) CAM and energy psychology techniques remediate PTSD symptoms in veterans and spouses. Explore (NY) 10: 24-33.
- Church D, De Asis MA, Brooks AJ (2012) Brief group intervention using emotional freedom techniques for depression in college students: A randomized controlled trial. Depress Res Treat 2012: 257172.
- Feinstein D (2012) Acupoint stimulation in treating psychological disorders: Evidence of efficacy. Rev General Psychol 16: 364-380.
- Joffres MR, Sampalli T, Fox RA (2005) Physiologic and symptomatic responses to low-level substances in individuals with and without chemical sensitivities: A randomized controlled blinded pilot booth study. Environ Health Perspect 113: 1178-1183.
- Knibb RC (2015) Effectiveness of cognitive behaviour therapy for mothers of children with food allergy: A case series. Healthcare (Basel) 3: 1194-1211.
- Boyle RJ, Umasunthar T, Smith JG, Hanna H, Procktor A, et al. (2017) A brief psychological intervention for mothers of children with food allergy can change risk perception and reduce anxiety: Outcomes of a randomized controlled trial. Clin Exp Allergy 47: 1309-1317.
- Baptist AP, Dever SI, Greenhawt MJ, Polmear-Swendris N, McMorris MS, et al. (2012) A self-regulation intervention can improve quality of life for families with food allergy. J Allergy Clin Immunol 130: 263-265.
- Wood RA (2016) Food allergen immunotherapy: Current status and prospects for the future. J Allergy Clin Immunol 137: 973-982.
- Jones SM, Pons L, Roberts JL, Scurlock AM, Perry TT et al. (2009) Clinical efficacy and immune regulation with peanut oral immunotherapy. J Allergy Clin Immunol 124: 292-300, 300-97.
- Vickery BP, Scurlock AM, Kulis M, Steele PH, Kamilaris J, et al. (2014) Sustained unresponsiveness to peanut in subjects who have completed peanut oral immunotherapy. J Allergy Clin Immunol 133: 468-475.
- Gorelik M, Narisety SD, Guerrerio AL, Chichester KL, Keet CA, et al. (2015) Suppression of the immunologic response to peanut during immunotherapy is often transient. J Allergy Clin Immunol 135: 1283-1292.
- Vickery BP, Lin J, Kulis M, Fu Z, Steele PH, et al. (2013) Peanut oral immunotherapy modifies IgE and IgG4 responses to major peanut allergens. J Allergy Clin Immunol 131: 123-128.
- Burks AW, Jones SM, Wood RA, Fleischer DM, Sicherer SH, et al. (2012) Oral immunotherapy for treatment of egg allergy in children. N Engl J Med 367: 233-243.
- Simberloff T, Parambi R, Bartnikas LM, Broyles AD, Hamel V, et al. (2017) Implementation of a standardized clinical assessment and management plan (SCAMP) for food challenges. J Allergy Clin Immunol Pract 5: 335-344.
- Dunn Galvin A, de Blok Flokstra BMJ, Burks AW, Dubois AE, Hourihane JO (2008) Food allergy QoL questionnaire for children aged 0-12 years: Content, construct and cross-cultural validity. Clin Exp Allergy 38: 977-986.
- Flokstra-de Blok BM, DunnGalvin A, Vlieg-Boerstra BJ, Oude Elberink JN, Duiverman EJ, et al. (2008) Development and validation of the self-administered food allergy quality of life questionnaire for adolescents. J Allergy Clin Immunol 122: 139-144; 144e1-144e2.
- Allen JL, Rapee RM, Sandberg S (2012) Assessment of maternally reported life events in children and adolescents: A comparison of interview and checklist methods. J Psychopathol Behav Assess 34: 204-215.
- Spence SH (1998) A measure of anxiety symptoms among children. Behav Res Ther 36: 545-566.
- Nauta MH, Scholing A, Rapee RM, Abbott M, Spence SH, et al. (2004) A parent-report measure of children’s anxiety: Psychometric properties and comparison with child-report in a clinic and normal sample. Behav Res Ther 42: 813-839.
- Brody LR (2012) The bouncing worry ball and mighty mitt: A story, workbook and coloring book to help kids overcome anxiety about allergies. Lulu Press, N.C, USA.
- Hofmann SG, Asnaani A, Vonk IJ, Sawyer AT, Fang A (2012) The efficacy of cognitive behavioral therapy: A review of meta-analyses. Cognit Ther Res 36: 427-440.
- LeBovidge JS, Haskell S, Olney EK, Hoyte, L, Rachid R, et al. (2014) The psychological impact of oral immunotherapy for children with food allergy: Perceived benefits and treatment burden. Clin Prac Pediatr Psychol 2: 13-26.
Citation: Brody LR, Thieringer AR, Wang TL, Le-Bovidge JS, Elverson RDW, et al. (2019) Retrospective Study Comparing Allergy Release Technique® to Standard Management for Pediatric Peanut and Cow’s Milk Allergies. Altern Integr Med 8: 1000276.
Copyright: © 2019 Brody LR, et al. This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited.
Select your language of interest to view the total content in your interested language
Share This Article
- Total views: 466
- [From(publication date): 0-0 - Oct 18, 2019]
- Breakdown by view type
- HTML page views: 419
- PDF downloads: 47