ArticleChildren (Basel, Switzerland)2025
Paediatric Utilisation of Ophthalmic Antibiotics in the Ear in Aotearoa/New Zealand.
Article in Children (Basel, Switzerland), 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
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.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
BACKGROUND/
objectivesSome ophthalmic antibiotics are publicly subsidised in New Zealand (NZ) for off-label use in the ear, however, this utilisation has not previously been described. This study compared the utilisation of ophthalmic chloramphenicol and ciprofloxacin in the eye and ear, among NZ children.
methodsThis study involved clinical record review, and included 11,617 prescriptions of ophthalmic chloramphenicol and ciprofloxacin in 2022, for children aged five years or under in Auckland, NZ. Prescriptions of chloramphenicol and ciprofloxacin for eye and ear use were compared by: patient age, gender, ethnicity and socioeconomic deprivation, indication, community or hospital prescribing and number of repeat prescriptions. Statistical analysis was performed using Chi-squared test and multinomial regression.
resultsMost ophthalmic ciprofloxacin was used in the ear (84%). In contrast, almost all chloramphenicol was used in the eye (96%). Post-operative use following tympanostomy tube insertion accounted for half of all hospital-prescribed ophthalmic ciprofloxacin used in the ear. Utilisation of chloramphenicol and ciprofloxacin in the eye and ear was similar, with more prescriptions for children aged one year and males, and most children received only one prescription. Māori and Pacific children generally received fewer prescriptions. Pacific children were more likely than Māori children to receive hospital-prescribed ophthalmic ciprofloxacin for use in the ear (adjusted OR 6.7,
conclusionsThese findings highlight the utilisation of ophthalmic ciprofloxacin in the ear in NZ children. These findings will inform decision-making in the public funding of medications, policy development in equitable medication access, and more collaborative efforts to improve antimicrobial use.
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.