Supplementary Material for: Optimizing the Use of a Skin Prick Test Device on Children

<b><i>Background:</i></b> Studies comparing skin prick test (SPT) devices have revealed varying results in performance and there is little known about their use on children. <b><i>Methods:</i></b> We performed 2 complementary studies to test the sensitivity, reproducibility and acceptability of commercially available SPT devices (Stallerpoint, Antony, France) using different application techniques. In the first part, histamine/saline was put on as a drop by use of a vial (V), and in the second part it was transferred from a well with the aid of the test device (W). The techniques were as follows: apply vertical pressure (Stallerpoint-VP or Stallerpoint-WP), apply vertical pressure with 90° clockwise rotation (Stallerpoint-VC or Stallerpoint-WC) and apply vertical pressure with 90° clockwise and counter-clockwise rotations (Stallerpoint-VCC or Stallerpoint-WCC). For comparison, ALK Lancet was used with a technique of ‘drop and apply vertical pressure'. <b><i>Results:</i></b> In the first part, sensitivities of the Stallerpoint-VC (96.6%), Stallerpoint-VCC (95.5%) and ALK Lancet (93.2%) techniques were superior (p < 0.001) to the other Stallerpoint-VP and Stallerpoint-WP techniques (76.1 and 46.6%). Intrapatient coefficient of variation (CV) values were 15.0, 18.9, 15.4, 22.4 and 48.5%, respectively. Interpatient CV ranged between 22.8 and 55.1%. In the second part, the Stallerpoint-WC (98.8%), WCC (97.5%) and ALK Lancet (98.8%) techniques yielded high sensitivities, whereas the sensitivity of Stallerpoint-WP (28.7%) was very low. There were false-positive reactions in the Stallerpoint-VCC and WCC techniques. <b><i>Conclusion:</i></b> In children, the SPT technique was found to be as important as the testing device. Stallerpoint-VC and WC techniques are reliable, tolerable and comparable with the ALK Lancet technique.