ArticleCJEM2026
Antibiotic treatment of acute otitis media: has watchful waiting gone with the diagnosis?
Article in CJEM, 2026. 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
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectivesAcute otitis media is a leading cause of antibiotic prescription in children. Watchful waiting is the preferred strategy for mildly ill children ≥ 2-year-old; however, utilization of this varies. This study aims to evaluate adherence to Canadian Pediatric Society position statement for acute otitis media diagnosis and management in a tertiary pediatric emergency department.
methodsWe conducted a health records review of children ≥ 2 years discharged from emergency department with acute otitis media diagnosis between January and December 2021. Measures of non-adherence were defined as follows: Therapeutic (missed opportunity for watchful waiting, prolonged duration of treatment, lack of immediate treatment when warranted, and inappropriate antibiotic choice), and Diagnostic (diagnostic criteria absent). Additionally, we explored the associations between guideline non-adherence and sociodemographic factors.
results396 patients were included. Guideline non-adherence occurred in 62.6% (248/396) encounters. Within therapeutic non-adherence, the most prevalent category was missed opportunity for watchful waiting in 41.9% (166/396) encounters. Watchful waiting was utilized in only 22% (48/214) of eligible mildly ill cases, 78% (166/214) received prescriptions. Prolonged antibiotic duration occurred in 6.6% (26/396) despite lack of complications and 4.3% (17/396) received non-penicillin antibiotics as first-line treatment. Diagnostic criteria were absent in 21.5% (85/396) encounters. Preferred language, rurality, and Material and Social Deprivation Index demonstrated no significant association with non-adherence, however, was limited by small subgroup sample size.
conclusions62.6% (248/396) of acute otitis media encounters demonstrated guideline non-adherence, primarily through inappropriate antibiotic prescribing and absence of diagnostic criteria. Quality improvement initiatives targeting diagnostic accuracy and watchful waiting implementation represent critical opportunities for antibiotic stewardship.
Indexed as
Identifiers
42521891What 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.