Related Experiment Video
Updated: Sep 27, 2025

Basophil Activation Test for Allergy Diagnosis
Published on: May 31, 2021
Review of venom immunotherapy at a regional tertiary paediatric centre
Niall Johnston1,2, Jan Belcher1, Kahn Preece1,2
1Department of Paediatric Allergy and Immunology, John Hunter Children's Hospital, Newcastle, New South Wales, Australia.
Aim:
Bee stings can result in allergic reactions, including anaphylaxis. Venom immunotherapy (VIT) is a definitive cure for bee venom allergy, but controversy surrounds whether accelerated protocols are safe in children. Our primary aim was to assess the safety profile of ultra-rush bee VIT compared with conventional bee VIT at a regional paediatric tertiary centre. We also sought to evaluate the impact of both approaches on time and resource use.
Methods:
Data were collected retrospectively from 14 patients with bee venom allergy who were treated with ultra-rush or conventional bee VIT between 2013 and 2021 at John Hunter Children's Hospital. We compared VIT-associated adverse reactions and use of resources in both these groups.
Results:
Overall, six patients received ultra-rush bee VIT and eight patients received conventional VIT. The ultra-rush group had a lower rate of systemic reaction (16%) compared with the conventional group (25%). One patient from the conventional group required adrenaline. Ultra-rush patients require fewer injections over a shorter time and fewer hospital visits to complete the protocol. Travel distance for families was significantly reduced.
Conclusion:
At our regional paediatric tertiary centre, ultra-rush bee VIT was a safe treatment option for children with bee venom allergy. It has many advantages over a conventional approach, especially for patients living in regional or remote areas.

