The available literature does not appear to include any direct head-to-head clinical trials comparing inpatient anaphylaxis outcomes with epinephrine auto-injectors versus epinephrine compounded or manually prepared from concentrated vials. Current evidence suggests that auto-injectors may reduce preparation time, dosing errors, and administration-related mistakes by eliminating the need for dose calculation and medication preparation, whereas vial-based administration is generally less expen...
A 2022 Wilderness Medical Society convened a panel to review the literature and develop evidence-based clinical practice guidelines on the treatment of anaphylaxis. The guideline discussed epinephrine auto-injectors (EAIs), prefilled syringes, and epinephrine manually drawn from vials or ampules, noting that auto-injectors eliminate the need to draw up medication and may reduce dosing errors, whereas vial- or ampule-based administration is less expensive but may be associated with delays and operator errors during dose calculation and preparation. The guideline concluded that device selection should be based on factors such as cost, training, and safety, but it did not compare outcomes of inpatient anaphylaxis management with auto-injectors versus epinephrine prepared from concentrated vials, nor did it evaluate pharmacy compounding practices. [1]
A 2017 scoping review comparing EAIs with epinephrine drawn into syringes identified substantial knowledge gaps and found that dosing...
READ MORE→
A search of the published medical literature revealed
2 studies investigating the researchable question:
Is there any literature that looked at use of epinephrine pens for inpatient management of anaphylaxis vs compounding epinephrine from concentrated vials?
Level of evidence
C - Multiple studies with limitations or conflicting results
READ MORE→
[1] Gaudio FG, Johnson DE, DiLorenzo K, et al. Wilderness Medical Society Clinical Practice Guidelines on Anaphylaxis. Wilderness Environ Med. 2022;33(1):75-91. doi:10.1016/j.wem.2021.11.009
[2] Chime NO, Riese VG, Scherzer DJ, et al. Epinephrine Auto-Injector Versus Drawn Up Epinephrine for Anaphylaxis Management: A Scoping Review. Pediatr Crit Care Med. 2017;18(8):764-769. doi:10.1097/PCC.0000000000001197
[3] Brown JC. Epinephrine, auto-injectors, and anaphylaxis: Challenges of dose, depth, and device. Ann Allergy Asthma Immunol. 2018;121(1):53-60. doi:10.1016/j.anai.2018.05.001
[4] Sargel CL, Maa T. Epinephrine Auto-Injectors Versus Manually Drawn Up Epinephrine: Is There a Better Option?. Pediatr Crit Care Med. 2017;18(8):807-808. doi:10.1097/PCC.0000000000001211
[5] Golden DBK, Wang J, Waserman S, et al. Anaphylaxis: A 2023 practice parameter update. Ann Allergy Asthma Immunol. 2024;132(2):124-176. doi:10.1016/j.anai.2023.09.015
[6] Weir A, Argáez C. Epinephrine Auto-Injectors for Anaphylaxis: A Review of the Clinical Effectiveness, Cost-Effectiveness, and Guidelines [Internet]. Ottawa (ON): Canadian Agency for Drugs and Technologies in Health; 2020 Apr 24. Available from: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/NBK563019/
[7] Lieberman P, Nicklas RA, Randolph C, et al. Anaphylaxis--a practice parameter update 2015. Ann Allergy Asthma Immunol. 2015;115(5):341-384. doi:10.1016/j.anai.2015.07.019
[8] Grissinger M. EPINEPHrine for Anaphylaxis: Autoinjector or 1-mg Vial or Ampoule?. P T. 2017;42(12):724-725.
[9] Ebisawa M, Muraro A, Worm M, et al. Optimizing Adrenaline Administration in Anaphylaxis: Clinical Practice Considerations and Safety Insights. Clin Transl Allergy. 2025;15(8):e70085. doi:10.1002/clt2.70085