Evidence map›Paper›PMID 18782838›Full record

Trial reportBMJ (Clinical research ed.)2008

Paracetamol plus ibuprofen for the treatment of fever in children (PITCH): economic evaluation of a randomised controlled trial.

Sandra Hollinghurst, Niamh Redmond, Céire Costelloe, Alan Montgomery, Margaret Fletcher, Tim J Peters, Alastair D Hay

Open access · hybridAbstract readMulticenter StudyRandomized Controlled Trial
In one paragraph

Trial report in BMJ (Clinical research ed.), 2008. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
8citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
2.3field-weighted citation impact, top 12% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

8 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 39 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Trial
  4. Trial
  5. Trial
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

7 authors at 3 institutions in 2 countries.

Sandra HollinghurstAcademic Unit of Primary Health Care, NIHR National School for Primary Care Research, Department of Community Based Medicine, University of Bristol, UK. s.p.hollinghurst@bristol.ac.uk
Niamh Redmond
Céire Costelloe
Alan Montgomery
Margaret Fletcher
Tim J Peters
Alastair D Hay
Primary Health Care · QAUniversity of Bristol · GBUniversity of the West of England · GB

Funding

Department of Health 03/09/01
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectiveTo estimate the cost to the NHS and to parents and carers of treating febrile preschool children with paracetamol, ibuprofen, or both, and to compare these costs with the benefits of each treatment regimen.

designCost consequences analysis and cost effectiveness analysis conducted as part of a three arm, randomised controlled trial.

participantsChildren between the ages of 6 months and 6 years recruited from primary care and the community with axillary temperatures >or=37.8 degrees C and <or=41 degrees C.

interventionsParacetamol, ibuprofen, or both drugs.

main outcome measuresCosts to the NHS and to parents and carers. Cost consequences analysis at 48 hours and 5 days comparing cost with children's temperature, discomfort, activity, appetite, and sleep; cost effectiveness analysis at 48 hours comparing cost with percentage of children "recovered."

resultsDifficulties in recruiting children to the trial lowered the precision of the estimates of cost and some outcomes. At 48 hours, cost to the NHS was pound11.33 for paracetamol, pound8.49 for ibuprofen, and pound8.16 for both drugs. By day 5 these costs rose to pound19.63, pound18.36, and pound13.92 respectively. For parents and carers, the 48 hour costs were pound23.86 for paracetamol, pound20.60 for ibuprofen, and pound25.07 for both, and the day 5 costs were pound26.35, pound29.90, and pound24.02 respectively. Outcomes measured at 48 hours and 5 days were inconclusive because of lack of power; the cost effectiveness analysis at 48 hours provided little evidence that one treatment choice was significantly more cost effective than another. At 4 hours ibuprofen and the combined treatment were superior to paracetamol in terms of the trial primary outcome of time without fever; at 24 hours the combined treatment performed best on this outcome.

conclusionsThere is no strong evidence of a difference in cost between the treatments, but clinical and cost data together indicate that using both drugs together may be most cost effective over the course of the illness. This treatment option performs best and is no more expensive because of less use of healthcare resources, resulting in lower costs to the NHS and to parents.

Indexed as

AcetaminophenAnalgesics, Non-NarcoticChildChild, PreschoolCost-Benefit AnalysisDrug Therapy, CombinationFeverHumansIbuprofenInfantTreatment OutcomeAcetaminophenAnalgesics, Non-NarcoticIbuprofen

Identifiers

PMID18782838
PMCPMC2658467
OpenAlexW2085507760

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.