The Value of Antibiotics in Minor Respiratory Illness in Chldren: A Controlled Trial

Gordon, M.; Lovell, Sarah; Dugdale, A. E.

doi:10.5694/j.1326-5377.1974.tb47709.x

Cited by 37 publications

(7 citation statements)

References 3 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Three of these four trials reported that antibiotic treatment had no effect on either relief of symptoms or subsequent complications in children (table 2). 23 24 26 …”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Systematic review of the treatment of upper respiratory tract infection

Fahey

Stocks

Thomas

1998

Archives of Disease in Childhood

114

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Objectives-To assess the risks and benefits of antibiotic treatment in children with symptoms of upper respiratory tract infection (URTI). Design-Quantitative systematic review of randomised trials that compare antibiotic treatment with placebo. Data sources-Twelve trials retrieved from a systematic search (electronic databases, contact with authors, contact with drug manufacturers, reference lists); no restriction on language. Main outcome measures-The proportion of children in whom the clinical outcome was worse or unchanged; the proportion of children who suVered complications or progression of illness; the proportion of children who had side eVects. Results-1699 children were randomised in six trials that contributed to the meta-analysis. Six trials were not used in the meta-analysis because of diVerent outcomes or incomplete data. Clinical outcome was not improved by antibiotic treatment (relative risk 1.01, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.90 to 1.13), neither was the proportion of children suVering from complications or progression of illness (relative risk 0.71, 95% CI 0.45 to 1.12). Complications from URTI in the five trials that reported this outcome was low (range 2-15%). Antibiotic treatment was not associated with an increase in side eVects compared with placebo (relative risk 0.8, 95% CI 0.54 to 1.21). Conclusions-In view of the lack of eYcacy and low complication rates, antibiotic treatment of children with URTI is not supported by current evidence from randomised trials. (Arch Dis Child 1998;79:225-230)

show abstract

“…Three of these four trials reported that antibiotic treatment had no effect on either relief of symptoms or subsequent complications in children (table 2). 23 24 26 …”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Systematic review of the treatment of upper respiratory tract infection

Fahey

Stocks

Thomas

1998

Archives of Disease in Childhood

114

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Clinical studies of antibiotic effectiveness have been carried out in other nearby' countries-for example, Thailand and Australia. 15,16 These studies of children with upper (or mild) respiratory infections showed no therapeutic value for ampicillin, erythromycin, penicillin, or tetracycline.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Randomised, controlled trial of effectiveness of ampicillin in mild acute respiratory infections in Indonesian children

1991

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The recommended treatment for mild acute respiratory infections (ARI) in children is supportive care only, but many physicians, especially in developing countries, continue to prescribe antibiotic treatment because they believe it prevents progression to more severe ARI. To find out whether ampicillin treatment conferred any benefit over supportive care alone, a randomised, controlled trial was carried out among 889 children (under 5 years) with mild ARI in Indonesia. 447 were randomly allocated ampicillin (25-30 mg/kg body weight three times daily for 5 days) plus supportive care (continued breastfeeding, clearing of the nose, and paracetamol to control fever); 442 were allocated supportive care only. The treatment groups were almost identical after randomisation in terms of age, sex, level of parental education, history of measles immunisation, and fever. After 1 week the percentages cured were nearly identical (204 [46%] ampicillin; 209 [47%] control), as were the percentages of cases progressing to moderate ARI (56 [13%] vs 53 [12%]). The effect of treatment was not modified by age, sex, measles immunisation status, or the educational level of the parents. At the 2-week follow-up, the percentages cured were 62% (277) in the ampicillin group and 58% (256) in the control group; 14% of both groups had progressed to moderate ARI; and 24% (107) and 28% (123), respectively, still had mild ARI. None of the differences in outcome between the ampicillin and control groups was statistically significant. Thus, ampicillin plus supportive care offers no benefit over supportive care alone for treatment of mild ARI in young Indonesian children.

show abstract

“…For the ordinary run of upper respiratory tract illnesses antibiotics neither shorten the course of the illness nor prevent bacterial complications4 5 and it seems probable that their widespread use does not, contrary to popular belief, lessen the number of return consultations in general practice. 6 In this issue (p 556) Stott and West describe a study of patients seen in general practice with cough and purulent sputum but no abnormal signs in the chest (a group especially hard to assign to known pathogens).…”

Section: Antibiotics For Respiratory Illness?mentioning

confidence: 99%

Antibiotics for respiratory illness?

Tomlinson¹

1976

BMJ

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The Value of Antibiotics in Minor Respiratory Illness in Chldren: A Controlled Trial

Cited by 37 publications

References 3 publications

Systematic review of the treatment of upper respiratory tract infection

Systematic review of the treatment of upper respiratory tract infection

Randomised, controlled trial of effectiveness of ampicillin in mild acute respiratory infections in Indonesian children

Antibiotics for respiratory illness?

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About