-
Medicina (Kaunas, Lithuania) Jun 2020: Lactation ketoacidosis is a rare cause of high anion gap metabolic acidosis affecting breastfeeding mothers. We aim to review and analyze all cases of lactation...
: Lactation ketoacidosis is a rare cause of high anion gap metabolic acidosis affecting breastfeeding mothers. We aim to review and analyze all cases of lactation ketoacidosis reported. : A systematic search of PubMed/MEDLINE and Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature (CINAHL), identifying relevant case reports published from 1 January 1970 to 31 December 2019. We extracted the following data: the first author, country, year of publication, age of the mother, age of the child, weight/body mass index (BMI) of the mother, precipitating factors, presenting symptoms, biochemical results, treatment, breastfeeding, and time from presentation to the resolution of ketoacidosis. : Sixteen case reports and 1 case series reporting 18 cases of lactation ketoacidosis were found. Presenting symptoms were nausea (72%, 13/18), vomiting (67%, 12/18), malaise (56%, 10/18), abdominal pain (44%, 8/18), dyspnea (33%, 6/18), headache (22%, 4/18), and palpitation (11%, 2/18). Dieting and physical exercise to lose weight were reported in 76% (14/18). The treatments included IV dextrose, sodium bicarbonate, insulin, rehydration, monitoring and replacement of electrolytes, and resumption of a balanced diet. The prognoses were good, with no mortalities. lactation ketoacidosis should be suspected in unwell breastfeeding women with high anion gap metabolic acidosis, after excluding other causes.
Topics: Acidosis; Adult; Breast Feeding; Female; Humans; Hypoglycemic Agents; Insulin; Ketosis; Lactation; Mothers
PubMed: 32560535
DOI: 10.3390/medicina56060299 -
Journal of Neurology Oct 2020Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) has become a global pandemic, affecting millions of people. However, clinical research on its neurological manifestations is thus far... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
BACKGROUND
Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) has become a global pandemic, affecting millions of people. However, clinical research on its neurological manifestations is thus far limited. In this study, we aimed to systematically collect and investigate the clinical manifestations and evidence of neurological involvement in COVID-19.
METHODS
Three medical (Medline, Embase, and Scopus) and two preprints (BioRxiv and MedRxiv) databases were systematically searched for all published articles on neurological involvement in COVID-19 since the outbreak. All included studies were systematically reviewed, and selected clinical data were collected for meta-analysis via random-effects.
RESULTS
A total of 41 articles were eligible and included in this review, showing a wide spectrum of neurological manifestations in COVID-19. The meta-analysis for unspecific neurological symptoms revealed that the most common manifestations were fatigue (33.2% [23.1-43.3]), anorexia (30.0% [23.2-36.9]), dyspnea/shortness of breath (26.9% [19.2-34.6]), and malaise (26.7% [13.3-40.1]). The common specific neurological symptoms included olfactory (35.7-85.6%) and gustatory (33.3-88.8%) disorders, especially in mild cases. Guillain-Barré syndrome and acute inflammation of the brain, spinal cord, and meninges were repeatedly reported after COVID-19. Laboratory, electrophysiological, radiological, and pathological evidence supported neurologic involvement of COVID-19.
CONCLUSIONS
Neurological manifestations are various and prevalent in COVID-19. Emerging clinical evidence suggests neurological involvement is an important aspect of the disease. The underlying mechanisms can include both direct invasion and maladaptive inflammatory responses. More studies should be conducted to explore the role of neurological manifestations in COVID-19 progression and to verify their underlying mechanisms.
Topics: Betacoronavirus; COVID-19; Coronavirus Infections; Humans; Nervous System Diseases; Pandemics; Pneumonia, Viral; Prevalence; SARS-CoV-2
PubMed: 32529575
DOI: 10.1007/s00415-020-09974-2 -
Journal of Clinical Medicine May 2020This review aimed at determining the prevalence and incidence of Myalgic Encephalomyelitis/Chronic Fatigue Syndrome (ME/CFS) in Europe. We conducted a primary search in... (Review)
Review
Systematic Review of the Epidemiological Burden of Myalgic Encephalomyelitis/Chronic Fatigue Syndrome Across Europe: Current Evidence and EUROMENE Research Recommendations for Epidemiology.
This review aimed at determining the prevalence and incidence of Myalgic Encephalomyelitis/Chronic Fatigue Syndrome (ME/CFS) in Europe. We conducted a primary search in Scopus, PubMed and Web of Science for publications between 1994 and 15 June 2019 (PROSPERO: CRD42017078688). Additionally, we performed a backward-(reference lists) and forward-(citations) search of the works included in this review. Grey literature was addressed by contacting all members of the European Network on ME/CFS (EUROMENE). Independent reviewers searched, screened and selected studies, extracted data and evaluated the methodological and reporting quality. For prevalence, two studies in adults and one study in adolescents were included. Prevalence ranged from 0.1% to 2.2%. Two studies also included incidence estimates. In conclusion, studies on the prevalence and incidence of ME/CFS in Europe were scarce. Our findings point to the pressing need for well-designed and statistically powered epidemiological studies. To overcome the shortcomings of the current state-of-the-art, EUROMENE recommends that future research is better conducted in the community, reviewing the clinical history of potential cases, obtaining additional objective information (when needed) and using adequate ME/CFS case definitions; namely, the Centers for Disease Control & Prevention-1994, Canadian Consensus Criteria, or Institute of Medicine criteria.
PubMed: 32455633
DOI: 10.3390/jcm9051557 -
Journal of the American Dental... Nov 2019An expert panel convened by the American Dental Association Council on Scientific Affairs and the Center for Evidence-Based Dentistry conducted a systematic review and...
Evidence-based clinical practice guideline on antibiotic use for the urgent management of pulpal- and periapical-related dental pain and intraoral swelling: A report from the American Dental Association.
BACKGROUND
An expert panel convened by the American Dental Association Council on Scientific Affairs and the Center for Evidence-Based Dentistry conducted a systematic review and formulated clinical recommendations for the urgent management of symptomatic irreversible pulpitis with or without symptomatic apical periodontitis, pulp necrosis and symptomatic apical periodontitis, or pulp necrosis and localized acute apical abscess using antibiotics, either alone or as adjuncts to definitive, conservative dental treatment (DCDT) in immunocompetent adults.
TYPES OF STUDIES REVIEWED
The authors conducted a search of the literature in MEDLINE, Embase, the Cochrane Library, and the Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature to retrieve evidence on benefits and harms associated with antibiotic use. The authors used the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation approach to assess the certainty in the evidence and the Evidence-to-Decision framework.
RESULTS
The panel formulated 5 clinical recommendations and 2 good practice statements, each specific to the target conditions, for settings in which DCDT is and is not immediately available. With likely negligible benefits and potentially large harms, the panel recommended against using antibiotics in most clinical scenarios, irrespective of DCDT availability. They recommended antibiotics in patients with systemic involvement (for example, malaise or fever) due to the dental conditions or when the risk of experiencing progression to systemic involvement is high.
CONCLUSION AND PRACTICAL IMPLICATIONS
Evidence suggests that antibiotics for the target conditions may provide negligible benefits and probably contribute to large harms. The expert panel suggests that antibiotics for target conditions be used only when systemic involvement is present and that immediate DCDT should be prioritized in all cases.
Topics: Adult; American Dental Association; Anti-Bacterial Agents; Evidence-Based Dentistry; Humans; Periapical Abscess; Toothache
PubMed: 31668170
DOI: 10.1016/j.adaj.2019.08.020 -
BioMed Research International 2019The syndrome of drug reaction with eosinophilia and systemic symptoms (DRESS) is a rare, yet potentially fatal hypersensitivity reaction, most commonly associated with...
BACKGROUND
The syndrome of drug reaction with eosinophilia and systemic symptoms (DRESS) is a rare, yet potentially fatal hypersensitivity reaction, most commonly associated with anticonvulsants, sulfonamides, and allopurinol. The reaction commonly manifests as a febrile skin eruption with lymphadenopathy and malaise between two and eight weeks following drug exposure. Internal organ involvement occurs in close to 90 percent of patients, and multiple organs may be involved in approximately half of those affected (most commonly the liver, kidney, and lung). Its long latency period and its variable clinical pattern of presentation have earned it the moniker of "the great mimicker," with delays in diagnosis leading to higher morbidity and mortality. Although less commonly affected in DRESS syndrome, lung involvement is associated with more severe clinical course and potentially worse outcome. Pulmonary symptoms may precede development of the other more common symptoms and signs of the syndrome, or they might develop later in the course of the disease. Lung involvement in DRESS presents with a plethora of manifestations from mild cough or dyspnea with nonspecific interstitial changes on chest imaging to acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) with life-threatening hypoxic respiratory failure.
METHODS
We performed a systematic review of literature from the PubMed database and selected cases of definite DRESS syndrome as defined by the European Registry of Severe Cutaneous Adverse Reactions (RegiSCAR) with a score of 6 or more who also had pulmonary involvement. Demographic data, pattern of lung involvement, culprit medication, latency period, laboratory findings, therapy, and outcome were described and compared with the literature.
RESULTS
The most common pulmonary radiographic findings in DRESS were interstitial infiltrates in 50% of cases, followed by acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) 31%. Symptoms of cough and shortness of breath (SOB) were present in 72% of patients at the time of presentation. SOB was the more common presenting symptom (81%) compared to cough (19%). In 95% of cases, another visceral organ was involved (most commonly liver or kidneys). 45% of cases were initially misdiagnosed as pneumonia and were treated with empiric antimicrobials. In a multivariate regression, a latency of 30 days or less and an age of 60 or less were associated with development of ARDS. Gender and eosinophil count were not associated with severity of pulmonary manifestations. All patients recovered, and in the vast majority of cases (95%), parenteral steroids were used for treatment in addition to supportive care and symptomatic management.
CONCLUSION
Albeit rare, DRESS is a potentially life-threatening syndrome which may present with a myriad of pulmonary signs and symptoms. Pulmonary manifestations are less common but are typically seen in more severe cases. Pulmonary manifestations may be a presenting sign of DRESS, and timely recognition is important in order to stop offending medication and decrease morbidity and mortality.
Topics: Drug Hypersensitivity Syndrome; Eosinophilia; Humans; Lung; Pneumonia; Respiratory Distress Syndrome
PubMed: 31662996
DOI: 10.1155/2019/7863815 -
The Cochrane Database of Systematic... Apr 2019Tuberculosis causes more deaths than any other infectious disease globally. Bacillus Calmette-Guérin (BCG) is the only available vaccine, but protection is incomplete...
BACKGROUND
Tuberculosis causes more deaths than any other infectious disease globally. Bacillus Calmette-Guérin (BCG) is the only available vaccine, but protection is incomplete and variable. The modified Vaccinia Ankara virus expressing antigen 85A (MVA85A) is a viral vector vaccine produced to prevent tuberculosis.
OBJECTIVES
To assess and summarize the effects of the MVA85A vaccine boosting BCG in humans.
SEARCH METHODS
We searched the Cochrane Infectious Diseases Group Specialized Register; Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL); MEDLINE (PubMed); Embase (Ovid); and four other databases. We searched the WHO ICTRP and ClinicalTrials.gov. All searches were run up to 10 May 2018.
SELECTION CRITERIA
We evaluated randomized controlled trials of MVA85A vaccine given with BCG in people regardless of age or HIV status.
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS
Two review authors independently assessed the eligibility and risk of bias of trials, and extracted and analyzed data. The primary outcome was active tuberculosis disease. We summarized dichotomous outcomes using risk ratios (RR) and risk differences (RD), with 95% confidence intervals (CI). Where appropriate, we combined data in meta-analyses. Where meta-analysis was inappropriate, we summarized results narratively.
MAIN RESULTS
The search identified six studies relating to four Phase 2 randomized controlled trials enrolling 3838 participants. Funding was by government bodies, charities, and philanthropic donors. Five studies included infants, one of them infants born to HIV-positive mothers. One study included adults living with HIV. All trials included authors from Oxford University who led the laboratory development of the vaccine. Participants received intradermal MVA85A after BCG in some studies, and before selective deferred BCG in HIV-exposed infants.The largest trial in 2797 African children was well conducted with low risk of bias for most parameters. Risk of bias was uncertain for selective reporting because there were no precise case definition endpoints for active tuberculosis published prior to the trial analysis.MVA85A added to BCG compared to BCG alone probably has no effect on the risk of developing microbiologically confirmed tuberculosis (RR 0.97, 95% CI 0.58 to 1.62; 3439 participants, 2 trials; moderate-certainty evidence), or the risk of starting on tuberculosis treatment (RR 1.10, 95% CI 0.92 to 1.33; 3687 participants, 3 trials; moderate-certainty evidence). MVA85A probably has no effect on the risk of developing latent tuberculosis (RR 1.01, 95% CI 0.85 to 1.21; 3831 participants, 4 trials; moderate-certainty evidence). Vaccinating people with MVA85A in addition to BCG did not cause life-threatening serious adverse effects (RD 0.00, 95% CI -0.00 to 0.00; 3692 participants, 3 trials; high-certainty evidence). Vaccination with MVA85A is probably associated with an increased risk of local skin adverse effects (3187 participants, 3 trials; moderate-certainty evidence), but not systemic adverse effect related to vaccination (144 participants, 1 trial; low-certainty evidence). This safety profile is consistent with Phase 1 studies which outlined a transient, superficial reaction local to the injection site and mild short-lived symptoms such as malaise and fever.
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS
MVA85A delivered by intradermal injection in addition to BCG is safe but not effective in reducing the risk of developing tuberculosis.
Topics: BCG Vaccine; HIV Seropositivity; Humans; Primary Prevention; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Tuberculosis; Tuberculosis Vaccines; Vaccines, DNA
PubMed: 31038197
DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD012915.pub2 -
BMC Complementary and Alternative... Mar 2019Influenza is a common viral infection worldwide. Maoto (ma-huang-tang) was developed in ancient China and is used to alleviate flu symptoms. Currently, no meta-analyses... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
BACKGROUND
Influenza is a common viral infection worldwide. Maoto (ma-huang-tang) was developed in ancient China and is used to alleviate flu symptoms. Currently, no meta-analyses have evaluated the efficacy and safety of maoto for alleviating flu symptoms.
METHODS
In the present study, we searched MEDLINE/PubMed, the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), EMBASE, a Japanese database (Ichushi), two Chinese databases (China National Knowledge Infrastructure and VIP), and two Korean databases (Korean Medical database and Korean Association of Medical Journal Editors) for studies published in or before October 2017. Clinical studies that compared maoto plus neuraminidase inhibitors (NAIs) vs. NAIs alone, or maoto alone vs. NAIs alone, were included in the present analysis. The primary outcome measure (efficacy) was the length of time from the start of medication to resolution of influenza symptoms (fever, headache, malaise, myalgia, and chills) and virus isolation. The secondary outcome measures (safety) were as follows: (1) side effects and adverse reactions, such as nausea, abnormal behaviour, or discontinuation of symptomatic treatment; (2) morbidity (complications caused by influenza infection) or mortality; and (3) hospitalisation for any reason.
RESULTS
Twelve relevant studies were identified, including two randomised controlled trials (RCTs, N = 60) and ten non-randomised studies (NRSs, N = 1110). We found that maoto plus NAIs was superior to NAIs alone in terms of the duration of fever in one RCT (P < 0.05, median difference = - 6 h) and four NRSs (P = 0.003, weighted mean difference = - 5.34 h). The duration of symptoms or virus isolation did not differ between maoto and NAIs. No severe side effects or adverse reactions were reported related to maoto or NAIs.
CONCLUSIONS
Although we could not reach a definitive conclusion because of the small sample sizes and high risk of bias in the analysed studies, maoto may lower the duration of fever when it is used alone or in combination with NAIs and may be a well-tolerated treatment. More RCTs are needed to determine the efficacy and safety of maoto.
Topics: Antiviral Agents; Drugs, Chinese Herbal; Humans; Influenza, Human; Medicine, Kampo
PubMed: 30885188
DOI: 10.1186/s12906-019-2474-z -
International Archives of... Jan 2019Myiasis is a disease caused by fly larvae that grow in the tissues of animals and humans. It can cause a variety of local symptoms, like erythema or pain, depending... (Review)
Review
Myiasis is a disease caused by fly larvae that grow in the tissues of animals and humans. It can cause a variety of local symptoms, like erythema or pain, depending on its location, and generalized symptomatology, such as fever and malaise. Myiasis can generate severe complications, for instance sepsis, or directly impact vital tissues. Its management varies depending on the location, and on the preferences of the doctor that faces this challenge. Myiasis usually occurs in tropical countries, and, in many places, it is not a rare condition. The cases are rarely reported, and there are no published management protocols. To review the literature regarding the most common agents, the predisposing factors and the treatment alternatives for otic myiasis, a rare form of human myiasis caused by the infestation of fly larvae in the ear cavities. We present a systematic review of the literature. The search in five databases (Medline, Embase, Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, LILACS and RedALyC) led to 63 published cases from 24 countries, in the 5 continents. The ages of the patients ranged from newborn to 65 years old. The most common agents belong to the or families. Chronic otitis media, previous otic surgical procedures, mental deficit, alcohol or drug abuse, sleeping outdoors, prostration, and malnutrition were predisposing factors. The treatment alternatives are herein discussed. The results highlight the need for monitoring, follow-up and standardization of medical approaches.
PubMed: 30647793
DOI: 10.1055/s-0037-1617427 -
The Cochrane Database of Systematic... Sep 2018Dental pain can have a detrimental effect on quality of life. Symptomatic apical periodontitis and acute apical abscess are common causes of dental pain and arise from... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
BACKGROUND
Dental pain can have a detrimental effect on quality of life. Symptomatic apical periodontitis and acute apical abscess are common causes of dental pain and arise from an inflamed or necrotic dental pulp, or infection of the pulpless root canal system. Clinical guidelines recommend that the first-line treatment for teeth with these conditions should be removal of the source of inflammation or infection by local, operative measures, and that systemic antibiotics are currently only recommended for situations where there is evidence of spreading infection (cellulitis, lymph node involvement, diffuse swelling) or systemic involvement (fever, malaise). Despite this, there is evidence that dentists frequently prescribe antibiotics in the absence of these signs. There is concern that this could contribute to the development of antibiotic-resistant bacterial colonies within both the individual and the community. This review is an update of the original version that was published in 2014.
OBJECTIVES
To evaluate the effects of systemic antibiotics provided with or without surgical intervention (such as extraction, incision and drainage of a swelling, or endodontic treatment), with or without analgesics, for symptomatic apical periodontitis and acute apical abscess in adults.
SEARCH METHODS
Cochrane Oral Health's Information Specialist searched the following databases: Cochrane Oral Health's Trials Register (to 26 February 2018), the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL; 2018, Issue 1) in the Cochrane Library (searched 26 February 2018), MEDLINE Ovid (1946 to 26 February 2018), Embase Ovid (1980 to 26 February 2018), and CINAHL EBSCO (1937 to 26 February 2018). The US National Institutes of Health Ongoing Trials Register (ClinicalTrials.gov) and the World Health Organization International Clinical Trials Registry Platform were searched for ongoing trials. A grey literature search was conducted using OpenGrey (to 26 February 2018) and ZETOC Conference Proceedings (1993 to 26 February 2018). No restrictions were placed on the language or date of publication when searching the electronic databases.
SELECTION CRITERIA
Randomised controlled trials of systemic antibiotics in adults with a clinical diagnosis of symptomatic apical periodontitis or acute apical abscess, with or without surgical intervention (considered in this situation to be extraction, incision and drainage or endodontic treatment) and with or without analgesics.
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS
Two authors screened the results of the searches against inclusion criteria, extracted data and assessed risk of bias independently and in duplicate. We calculated mean differences (MD) (standardised mean difference (SMD) when different scales were reported) and 95% confidence intervals (CI) for continuous data. A fixed-effect model was used in the meta-analysis as there were fewer than four studies. We contacted study authors to obtain missing information.
MAIN RESULTS
We included two trials in this review, with 62 participants included in the analyses. Both trials were conducted in university dental schools in the USA and compared the effects of oral penicillin V potassium (penicillin VK) versus a matched placebo when provided in conjunction with a surgical intervention (total or partial pulpectomy) and analgesics to adults with acute apical abscess or symptomatic necrotic tooth. The patients included in these trials had no signs of spreading infection or systemic involvement (fever, malaise). We assessed one study as having a high risk of bias and the other study as having unclear risk of bias.The primary outcome variables reported in both studies were participant-reported pain and swelling (one trial also reported participant-reported percussion pain). One study reported the type and number of analgesics taken by participants. One study recorded the incidence of postoperative endodontic flare-ups (people who returned with symptoms that necessitated further treatment). Adverse effects, as reported in one study, were diarrhoea (one participant, placebo group) and fatigue and reduced energy postoperatively (one participant, antibiotic group). Neither study reported quality of life measurements.Objective 1: systemic antibiotics versus placebo with surgical intervention and analgesics for symptomatic apical periodontitis or acute apical abscessTwo studies provided data for the comparison between systemic antibiotics (penicillin VK) and a matched placebo for adults with acute apical abscess or a symptomatic necrotic tooth when provided in conjunction with a surgical intervention. Participants in one study all underwent a total pulpectomy of the affected tooth, while participants in the other study had their tooth treated by either partial or total pulpectomy. Participants in both trials received oral analgesics. There were no statistically significant differences in participant-reported measures of pain or swelling at any of the time points assessed within the review. The MD for pain (short ordinal numerical scale 0 to 3) was -0.03 (95% CI -0.53 to 0.47) at 24 hours; 0.32 (95% CI -0.22 to 0.86) at 48 hours; and 0.08 (95% CI -0.38 to 0.54) at 72 hours. The SMD for swelling was 0.27 (95% CI -0.23 to 0.78) at 24 hours; 0.04 (95% CI -0.47 to 0.55) at 48 hours; and 0.02 (95% CI -0.49 to 0.52) at 72 hours. The body of evidence was assessed as at very low quality.Objective 2: systemic antibiotics without surgical intervention for adults with symptomatic apical periodontitis or acute apical abscessWe found no studies that compared the effects of systemic antibiotics with a matched placebo delivered without a surgical intervention for symptomatic apical periodontitis or acute apical abscess in adults.
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS
There is very low-quality evidence that is insufficient to determine the effects of systemic antibiotics on adults with symptomatic apical periodontitis or acute apical abscess.
Topics: Acute Disease; Adult; Anti-Bacterial Agents; Humans; Penicillin V; Periapical Abscess; Periapical Periodontitis; Pulpectomy; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Toothache
PubMed: 30259968
DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD010136.pub3 -
The Cochrane Database of Systematic... Sep 2017Concerns exist regarding antibiotic prescribing for respiratory tract infections (RTIs) owing to adverse reactions, cost, and antibacterial resistance. One proposed... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
BACKGROUND
Concerns exist regarding antibiotic prescribing for respiratory tract infections (RTIs) owing to adverse reactions, cost, and antibacterial resistance. One proposed strategy to reduce antibiotic prescribing is to provide prescriptions, but to advise delay in antibiotic use with the expectation that symptoms will resolve first. This is an update of a Cochrane Review originally published in 2007, and updated in 2010 and 2013.
OBJECTIVES
To evaluate the effects on clinical outcomes, antibiotic use, antibiotic resistance, and patient satisfaction of advising a delayed prescription of antibiotics in respiratory tract infections.
SEARCH METHODS
For this 2017 update we searched the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) (the Cochrane Library, Issue 4, 2017), which includes the Cochrane Acute Respiratory Infection Group's Specialised Register; Ovid MEDLINE (2013 to 25 May 2017); Ovid Embase (2013 to 2017 Week 21); EBSCO CINAHL Plus (1984 to 25 May 2017); Web of Science (2013 to 25 May 2017); WHO International Clinical Trials Registry Platform (1 September 2017); and ClinicalTrials.gov (1 September 2017).
SELECTION CRITERIA
Randomised controlled trials involving participants of all ages defined as having an RTI, where delayed antibiotics were compared to immediate antibiotics or no antibiotics. We defined a delayed antibiotic as advice to delay the filling of an antibiotic prescription by at least 48 hours. We considered all RTIs regardless of whether antibiotics were recommended or not.
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS
We used standard Cochrane methodological procedures. Three review authors independently extracted and collated data. We assessed the risk of bias of all included trials. We contacted trial authors to obtain missing information.
MAIN RESULTS
For this 2017 update we added one new trial involving 405 participants with uncomplicated acute respiratory infection. Overall, this review included 11 studies with a total of 3555 participants. These 11 studies involved acute respiratory infections including acute otitis media (three studies), streptococcal pharyngitis (three studies), cough (two studies), sore throat (one study), common cold (one study), and a variety of RTIs (one study). Five studies involved only children, two only adults, and four included both adults and children. Six studies were conducted in a primary care setting, three in paediatric clinics, and two in emergency departments.Studies were well reported, and appeared to be of moderate quality. Randomisation was not adequately described in two trials. Four trials blinded the outcomes assessor, and three included blinding of participants and doctors. We conducted meta-analysis for antibiotic use and patient satisfaction.We found no differences among delayed, immediate, and no prescribed antibiotics for clinical outcomes in the three studies that recruited participants with cough. For the outcome of fever with sore throat, three of the five studies favoured immediate antibiotics, and two found no difference. For the outcome of pain related to sore throat, two studies favoured immediate antibiotics, and three found no difference. One study compared delayed antibiotics with no antibiotic for sore throat, and found no difference in clinical outcomes.Three studies included participants with acute otitis media. Of the two studies with an immediate antibiotic arm, one study found no difference for fever, and the other study favoured immediate antibiotics for pain and malaise severity on Day 3. One study including participants with acute otitis media compared delayed antibiotics with no antibiotics and found no difference for pain and fever on Day 3.Two studies recruited participants with common cold. Neither study found differences for clinical outcomes between delayed and immediate antibiotic groups. One study favoured delayed antibiotics over no antibiotics for pain, fever, and cough duration (moderate quality evidence for all clinical outcomes - GRADE assessment).There were either no differences for adverse effects or results favoured delayed antibiotics over immediate antibiotics (low quality evidence - to GRADE assessment) with no significant differences in complication rates. Delayed antibiotics resulted in a significant reduction in antibiotic use compared to immediate antibiotics prescription (odds ratio (OR) 0.04, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.03 to 0.05). However, a delayed antibiotic was more likely to result in reported antibiotic use than no antibiotics (OR 2.55, 95% CI 1.59 to 4.08) (moderate quality evidence - GRADE assessment).Patient satisfaction favoured delayed over no antibiotics (OR 1.49, 95% CI 1.08 to 2.06). There was no significant difference in patient satisfaction between delayed antibiotics and immediate antibiotics (OR 0.65, 95% CI 0.39 to 1.10) (moderate quality evidence - GRADE assessment).None of the included studies evaluated antibiotic resistance.
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS
For many clinical outcomes, there were no differences between prescribing strategies. Symptoms for acute otitis media and sore throat were modestly improved by immediate antibiotics compared with delayed antibiotics. There were no differences in complication rates. Delaying prescribing did not result in significantly different levels of patient satisfaction compared with immediate provision of antibiotics (86% versus 91%) (moderate quality evidence). However, delay was favoured over no antibiotics (87% versus 82%). Delayed antibiotics achieved lower rates of antibiotic use compared to immediate antibiotics (31% versus 93%) (moderate quality evidence). The strategy of no antibiotics further reduced antibiotic use compared to delaying prescription for antibiotics (14% versus 28%). Delayed antibiotics for people with acute respiratory infection reduced antibiotic use compared to immediate antibiotics, but was not shown to be different to no antibiotics in terms of symptom control and disease complications. Where clinicians feel it is safe not to prescribe antibiotics immediately for people with respiratory infections, no antibiotics with advice to return if symptoms do not resolve is likely to result in the least antibiotic use while maintaining similar patient satisfaction and clinical outcomes to delaying prescription of antibiotics. Where clinicians are not confident in using a no antibiotic strategy, a delayed antibiotics strategy may be an acceptable compromise in place of immediate prescribing to significantly reduce unnecessary antibiotic use for RTIs, and thereby reduce antibiotic resistance, while maintaining patient safety and satisfaction levels.Editorial note: As a living systematic review, this review is continually updated, incorporating relevant new evidence as it becomes available. Please refer to the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews for the current status of this review.
Topics: Acute Disease; Adult; Anti-Bacterial Agents; Child; Common Cold; Cough; Drug Administration Schedule; Drug Prescriptions; Fever; Humans; Otitis Media; Pain; Patient Satisfaction; Pharyngitis; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Respiratory Tract Infections; Time Factors
PubMed: 28881007
DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD004417.pub5