Journal Mobile Options
Table of Contents
Vol. 143, No. 4, 2007
Issue release date: July 2007
Int Arch Allergy Immunol 2007;143:290–295

Perceived Food Allergy in Children in 10 European Nations

A Randomised Telephone Survey

Steinke M. · Fiocchi A. · Kirchlechner V. · Ballmer-Weber B. · Brockow K. · Hischenhuber C. · Dutta M. · Ring J. · Urbanek R. · Terracciano L. · Wezel R.
aInstitut für Angewandte Verbraucherforschung e.V., Cologne, and bDivision of Environmental Dermatology and Allergy GSF/TUM, Department of Dermatology and Allergy Biederstein, Technical University of Munich, Munich, Germany; cMelloni Paediatria, University of Milan Medical School at the Macedonio Melloni Hospital, Milano, Italy; dDepartment of Pediatrics and Juvenile Medicine, Medical University of Vienna, Vienna, Austria; eAllergy Unit, Department of Dermatology, University Hospital Zurich, Zurich, and eNestlé, Nestec Quality Management, Vevey, Switzerland

Individual Users: Register with Karger Login Information

Please create your User ID & Password

Contact Information

I have read the Karger Terms and Conditions and agree.

To view the fulltext, please log in

To view the pdf, please log in


Background: Food allergy is targeted as a public health priority by the European Union Commission. Parental perception of food allergy in their offspring is a proxy measure of the potential demand for allergy medicine services in the paediatric population. Methods: A representative sample of the general population was contacted by a randomised telephone survey in Austria, Belgium, Denmark, Finland, Germany, Greece, Italy, Poland, Slovenia and Switzerland. A standardised questionnaire was administered regarding parentally perceived food allergy reports, symptoms, foods and medical service use by their live-in children. Results: 40,246 adults were polled, yielding data on 8,825 children. Parentally perceived food allergy prevalence was 4.7% (90% CI 4.2–5.2%). The most affected age group was 2- to 3-year olds (7.2%). Single-country incidence ranged between 1.7% (Austria) to 11.7% (Finland). Milk (38.5%), fruits (29.5%), eggs (19.0%) and vegetables (13.5%) were most often implicated, although with significant age-linked variations. Medical treatment was needed by 75.7% of affected children because of a food reaction. This translates into a proxy measure for food allergy prevalence of 3.75%. Skin symptoms were widespread (71.5%), followed by gastrointestinal (27.6%) and respiratory (18.5%) symptoms. Discussion: We provide the first point prevalence of parentally perceived food allergy in the general paediatric population across the European Union. Parental reports confirm the public health significance of adverse reactions to some foods in specified age groups. Our data may inform intervention planning, cost of illness assessments and quality-of-life-enhancing public health measures.

Copyright / Drug Dosage

Copyright: All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be translated into other languages, reproduced or utilized in any form or by any means, electronic or mechanical, including photocopying, recording, microcopying, or by any information storage and retrieval system, without permission in writing from the publisher or, in the case of photocopying, direct payment of a specified fee to the Copyright Clearance Center.
Drug Dosage: The authors and the publisher have exerted every effort to ensure that drug selection and dosage set forth in this text are in accord with current recommendations and practice at the time of publication. However, in view of ongoing research, changes in goverment regulations, and the constant flow of information relating to drug therapy and drug reactions, the reader is urged to check the package insert for each drug for any changes in indications and dosage and for added warnings and precautions. This is particularly important when the recommended agent is a new and/or infrequently employed drug.
Disclaimer: The statements, opinions and data contained in this publication are solely those of the individual authors and contributors and not of the publishers and the editor(s). The appearance of advertisements or/and product references in the publication is not a warranty, endorsement, or approval of the products or services advertised or of their effectiveness, quality or safety. The publisher and the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to persons or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content or advertisements.


  1. Madsen CH: Prevalence of food allergy: an overview. Proc Nutr Soc 2005;64:413–417.
  2. Chapman JA, Bernstein IL, Lee RE, Oppenheimer J, Nicklas RA, Portnoy JM, et al: Food allergy: a practice parameter. Ann Allergy Asthma Immunol 2006;96:S1–S68.

    External Resources

  3. Bousquet J, Ansotegui IJ, van Ree R, Burney PG, Zuberbier T, van Cauwenberge P: European Union meets the challenge of the growing importance of allergy and asthma in Europe. Allergy 2004;59:1–4.
  4. Sicherer SH, Munoz-Furlong A, Sampson HA: Prevalence of seafood allergy in the United States determined by a random telephone survey. J Allergy Clin Immunol 2004;114:159–165.
  5. Eggesbø M, Halvorsen R, Tambs K, Botten G: Prevalence of parentally perceived adverse reactions to food in young children. Pediatr Allergy Immunol 1999;10:122–132.
  6. Hourihane JO: Prevalence and severity of food allergy – need for control. Allergy 1998;53(suppl 48):84–88.

    External Resources

  7. Panzer RJ, Black ER, Griner PF: Interpretation of diagnostic tests and strategies for their use in quantitative decision making; in Panzer RJ, Black ER (eds): Diagnostic Strategies for Common Medical Problems. Philadelphia, American College of Physicians, 1991, pp 17–28.
  8. Kanny G, Moneret-Vautrin D-A, Flabbee J, Beaudouin E, Morisset M, Thevenin F: Population study of food allergy in France. Allergy 2001;108:133–140.
  9. Osterballe M, Hansen TK, Mortz CG, Bindslev-Jensen C: The clinical relevance of sensitization to pollen-related fruits and vegetables in unselected pollen-sensitized adults. Allergy 2005;60:218–225.
  10. Zuberbier T, Edenharter G, Worm M, Ehlers I, Reimann S, Hantke T, Roehr CC, et al: Prevalence of adverse reactions to food in Germany – a population study. Allergy 2004;59:338–345.
  11. Schäfer T, Bohler E, Ruhdorfer S, Weigl L, Wessner D, Heinrich J, et al: Epidemiology of food allergy/food intolerance in adults: associations with other manifestations of atopy. Allergy 2001;56:1172–1179.
  12. Sampson HA: Epidemiology of food allergy. Pediatr Allergy Immunol 1996;7:42–50.
  13. Zeiger RS, Heller S: The development and prediction of atopy in high-risk children: follow-up at age seven years in a prospective randomized study of combined maternal and infant food allergen avoidance. J Allergy Clin Immunol 1995;95:1179–1190.
  14. Roehr CC, Edenharter G, Reimann S, Ehlers I, Worm M, Zuberbier T, et al: Food allergy and non-allergic food hypersensitivity in children and adolescents. Clin Exp Allergy 2004;34:1534–1541.
  15. Venter C, Pereira B, Grundy J, Clayton CB, Roberts G, Higgins B, et al: Incidence of parentally reported and clinically diagnosed food hypersensitivity in the first year of life. J Allergy Clin Immunol 2006;117:1118–1124.
  16. Fiocchi A, Bouygue GR, Terracciano L, Sarratud T, Martelli A: The march of allergic children – excluding allergy in paediatric practice. Allergy Asthma Proc 2006;27:306–311.
  17. Martelli A, Bouygue GR, Fiocchi A, Restani P, Sarratud T, Terracciano L: Oral food challenges in children in Italy. Allergy 2005;60:907–911.
  18. Kaila M, Vanto T, Valovirta E, Koivikko A, Juntunen-Backman K: Diagnosis of food allergy in Finland: survey of pediatric practices. Pediatr Allergy Immunol 2000;11:246–249.
  19. Eaton L: Committee calls for substantial investment in allergy services. BMJ 2004;329:1063.
  20. Host A: Cow’s milk protein allergy and intolerance in infancy. Pediatr Allergy Immunol 1994;5:5–36.
  21. Lucas JS, Grimshaw KE, Collins K, Warner JO, Hourihane JO: Kiwi fruit is a significant allergen and is associated with differing patterns of reactivity in children and adults. Clin Exp Allergy 2004;34:1115–1121.

Pay-per-View Options
Direct payment This item at the regular price: USD 38.00
Payment from account With a Karger Pay-per-View account (down payment USD 150) you profit from a special rate for this and other single items.
This item at the discounted price: USD 26.50