ArticleScandinavian journal of primary health care2022
Preventive effect of methenamine in women with recurrent urinary tract infections - a case-control study.
Article in Scandinavian journal of primary health care, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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
6 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 12 citations in OpenAlex.
- Use of Methenamine for Urinary Tract Infection Prophylaxis: Systematic Review of Recent Evidence.International urogynecology journal · 2024Pooled it
- Trial
- Methenamine hippurate for the management and prophylaxis of recurrent urinary tract infections: a scoping review protocol.BMJ open · 2025Article
- Urinary tract infections in women in Catalonia, Spain: a population-based observational cohort study in primary care.Frontiers in pharmacology · 2025Article
- Effect of methenamine hippurate shortage on antibiotic prescribing for urinary tract infections in Norway-an interrupted time series analysis.The Journal of antimicrobial chemotherapy · 2024Article
- A Multifaceted Intervention and Its Effects on Antibiotic Usage in Norwegian Nursing Homes.Antibiotics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundUrinary tract infection (UTI) is the most common bacterial infection in women. In Norwegian general practice, methenamine has been prescribed for many years as long-term prevention and accounted for 20% of the total antibiotic prescribing in 2015, as measured in defined daily dosages (DDDs). The efficacy of methenamine is unknown. If shown to be effective, this drug may become an important preventive against UTI.
objectiveTo examine whether methenamine is preventive against recurrent UTI in women.
designData for all antibiotics used for UTIs dispensed from all pharmacies from 2005 to 2015 were collected from the Norwegian prescription database (NorPD). SUBJECTS: Women aged ≥ 40 years with recurrent UTI, defined as ≥3 courses of UTI antibiotic/year, were included.
main outcome measuresPatients using methenamine (cases) and those not using methenamine (controls) were compared. The numbers of UTI prescriptions during the 2 years before and after inclusion were analysed.
conclusionsMethenamine seems to be effective against recurrent UTI over the time span studied. The effect seems to be greater in patients with the highest number of recurrent UTIs. Key pointsMethenamine has been used for many years for prevention of recurrent UTI, but no studies have demonstrated a significant preventive effect of long time use.This study shows that methenamine seems to be effective for prevention in patients having recurrent UTI over 2 years or more.The effect seems to be larger in patients with a high number of UTIs over 2 years.
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.