ReviewDrugs2003
Short-course antimicrobial therapy of respiratory tract infections.
Review in Drugs, 2003. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
2 citing papers in PubMed, 22 citations in OpenAlex.
- Knowledge, perceptions and practices on antimicrobial resistance in humans and animals in Wakiso district, Uganda: A cross sectional study.PLOS global public health · 2023Article
- Treatment options for acute sinusitis in children.Current allergy and asthma reports · 2004Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
1 author at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Accumulating evidence suggests that short-course (</=5 days, </=3 days for azithromycin) antimicrobial therapy may be at least as effective as and, in some cases, may be more effective than traditional longer (10- to 14-day) therapies. In group A beta-haemolytic streptococcal tonsillopharyngitis, short-course therapy with 6 days of amoxicillin, 4-5 days of a variety of cephalosporins and 5 days of clarithromycin modified-release and telithromycin are all reasonable alternatives to traditional 10-day penicillin therapy. Short-course (i.e. 3-day) azithromycin therapy is not recommended because of suboptimal clinical and bacteriological results compared with penicillin therapy, unless the dosage is doubled from 10 to 20 mg/kg/day for all 3 days. In uncomplicated acute suppurative otitis media, single-dose intramuscular ceftriaxone or 3- to 5-day short-course oral antimicrobial therapy should be effective in the majority (>/=80%) of patients. However, more research is clearly needed in the subpopulations of children <2 years of age and in those with unresponsive/recurrent disease, since short-course therapy may not be successful in the majority of these patients. In sinusitis, most short-course therapy data have involved maxillary disease in adult patients. Regimens have included 3 days of azithromycin or cotrimoxazole (trimethoprim/sulfamethoxazole) or 5 days of cefpodoxime, telithromycin, gatifloxacin, gemifloxacin or amoxicillin/clavulanic acid. Preliminary results are encouraging but more study is clearly needed, especially in the paediatric population. In acute bacterial exacerbations of chronic bronchitis, short-course therapy with a variety of cephalosporins, second-generation fluoroquinolones and advanced generation macrolides/azalides/ketolides are all reasonable alternatives to traditional 7- to 14-day therapies. Cost containment in antimicrobial therapy should involve consideration of short-course therapy in the management of the most common types of respiratory tract infections.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.