ArticleClinical drug investigation2006
Efficacy and tolerability of moxifloxacin in patients with respiratory tract infections treated in general practice: Results of a post-marketing surveillance study.
Article in Clinical drug investigation, 2006. 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, 3 citations in OpenAlex.
- Gender analysis of moxifloxacin clinical trials.Journal of women's health (2002) · 2014Review
- Safety profile of the respiratory fluoroquinolone moxifloxacin: comparison with other fluoroquinolones and other antibacterial classes.Drug safety · 2009Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveThis study aimed to assess the efficacy, safety and tolerability of oral moxifloxacin in patients with respiratory tract infections (RTIs) treated by attending physicians in routine clinical practice in China.
methodsThis was an open-label, prospective, uncontrolled, post-marketing surveillance study that was undertaken between November 2002 and July 2003. Altogether, 855 patients with RTIs were treated with moxifloxacin. Data were collected by 257 physicians throughout China. Symptoms of RTI (fever, cough, purulent sputum, dyspnoea, thoracic pain, nasal obstruction, nasal secretion and headache), together with auscultatory findings, were assessed at baseline and at follow-up visits, and classified as 'absent', 'mild' or 'severe' by the attending physician.
resultsMoxifloxacin produced significant improvements in 70.7% of patients after only 3 days of treatment. In 91.7% of patients, symptoms were improved after 5 days of treatment; 76.1% of patients recovered after 7 days and 84.7% recovered after 10 days of treatment. The mean +/- SD time until recovery was 5.1 +/- 2.6 days. Assessment of treatment efficacy by the physicians was 'good' or 'very good' for 89.2% of patients. In 87.3% of cases, physicians rated patients' acceptance of therapy with moxifloxacin as 'good' or 'very good'. The tolerability of moxifloxacin therapy was rated as 'good' or 'very good' for 88.8% of patients. Very few adverse events (4.1% of patients) were reported with moxifloxacin; most of them involved mild CNS disorders and gastrointestinal disturbances.
conclusionsMoxifloxacin was shown to be an effective and well tolerated treatment for this group of patients with RTIs and was highly rated by both physicians and patients because of rapid symptom improvement and good tolerability.
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.