Homeopathy for Allergic Rhinitis: A Systematic Review.

OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to evaluate the efficacy and effectiveness of homeopathic intervention in the treatment of seasonal or perennial allergic rhinitis (AR). METHOD: Randomized controlled trials evaluating all forms of homeopathic treatment for AR were included in a systematic review (SR) of studies published up to and including December 2015. Two authors independently screened potential studies, extracted data, and assessed risk of bias. Primary outcomes included symptom improvement and total quality-of-life score. Treatment effect size was quantified as mean difference (continuous data), or by risk ratio (RR) and odds ratio (dichotomous data), with 95% confidence intervals (CI). Meta-analysis was performed after assessing heterogeneity and risk of bias. RESULTS: Eleven studies were eligible for SR. All trials were placebo-controlled except one. Six trials used the treatment approach known as isopathy, but they were unsuitable for meta-analysis due to problems of heterogeneity and data extraction. The overall standard of methods and reporting was poor: 8/11 trials were assessed as "high risk of bias"; only one trial, on isopathy for seasonal AR, possessed reliable evidence. Three trials of variable quality (all using Galphimia glauca for seasonal AR) were included in the meta-analysis: nasal symptom relief at 2 and 4 weeks (RR = 1.48 [95% CI 1.24-1.77] and 1.27 [95% CI 1.10-1.46], respectively) favored homeopathy compared with placebo; ocular symptom relief at 2 and 4 weeks also favored homeopathy (RR = 1.55 [95% CI 1.33-1.80] and 1.37 [95% CI 1.21-1.56], respectively). The single trial with reliable evidence had a small positive treatment effect without statistical significance. A homeopathic and a conventional nasal spray produced equivalent improvements in nasal and ocular symptoms. CONCLUSIONS: The low or uncertain overall quality of the evidence warrants caution in drawing firm conclusions about intervention effects. Use of either Galphimia glauca or a homeopathic nasal spray may have small beneficial effects on the nasal and ocular symptoms of AR. The efficacy of isopathic treatment of AR is unclear.

Global prevalence of antibiotic resistance in paediatric urinary tract infections caused by Escherichia coli and association with routine use of antibiotics in primary care: systematic review and meta-analysis.

OBJECTIVES: To systematically review studies investigating the prevalence of antibiotic resistance in urinary tract infections caused by Escherichia coli in children and, when appropriate, to meta-analyse the relation between previous antibiotics prescribed in primary care and resistance. DESIGN AND DATA ANALYSIS: Systematic review and meta-analysis. Pooled percentage prevalence of resistance to the most commonly used antibiotics in children in primary care, stratified by the OECD (Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development) status of the study country. Random effects meta-analysis was used to quantify the association between previous exposure to antibiotics in primary care and resistance. DATA SOURCES: Observational and experimental studies identified through Medline, Embase, Cochrane, and ISI Web of Knowledge databases, searched for articles published up to October 2015. ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA FOR SELECTING STUDIES: Studies were eligible if they investigated and reported resistance in community acquired urinary tract infection in children and young people aged 0-17. Electronic searches with MeSH terms and text words identified 3115 papers. Two independent reviewers assessed study quality and performed data extraction. RESULTS: 58 observational studies investigated 77,783 E coli isolates in urine. In studies from OECD countries, the pooled prevalence of resistance was 53.4% (95% confidence interval 46.0% to 60.8%) for ampicillin, 23.6% (13.9% to 32.3%) for trimethoprim, 8.2% (7.9% to 9.6%) for co-amoxiclav, and 2.1% (0.8 to 4.4%) for ciprofloxacin; nitrofurantoin was the lowest at 1.3% (0.8% to 1.7%). Resistance in studies in countries outside the OECD was significantly higher: 79.8% (73.0% to 87.7%) for ampicillin, 60.3% (40.9% to 79.0%) for co-amoxiclav, 26.8% (11.1% to 43.0%) for ciprofloxacin, and 17.0% (9.8% to 24.2%) for nitrofurantoin. There was evidence that bacterial isolates from the urinary tract from individual children who had received previous prescriptions for antibiotics in primary care were more likely to be resistant to antibiotics, and this increased risk could persist for up to six months (odds ratio 13.23, 95% confidence interval 7.84 to 22.31). CONCLUSIONS: Prevalence of resistance to commonly prescribed antibiotics in primary care in children with urinary tract infections caused by E coli is high, particularly in countries outside the OECD, where one possible explanation is the availability of antibiotics over the counter. This could render some antibiotics ineffective as first line treatments for urinary tract infection. Routine use of antibiotics in primary care contributes to antimicrobial resistance in children, which can persist for up to six months after treatment.

Homeopathy for allergic rhinitis: protocol for a systematic review.

BACKGROUND: Allergic rhinitis is a global health problem that is often treated with homeopathy. The objective of this review will be to evaluate the effectiveness of homeopathic treatment of allergic rhinitis. METHODS/DESIGN: The authors will conduct a systematic review. We will search Medline, CENTRAL, CINAHL, EMBASE, AMED, CAM-Quest, Google Scholar and reference lists of identified studies up to December 2013.The review will include randomized controlled trials that evaluate homeopathic treatment of allergic rhinitis. Studies with participants of all ages, with acute or chronic comorbidities will be included. Patients with immunodeficiency will not be included. The diagnosis will be based on the published guidelines of diagnosis and classification. Studies of all homeopathy modalities (clinical, complex and classical homeopathy, and isopathy) will be included. We will include trials with both active controls (conventional therapy, standard care) and placebo controls.The primary outcomes are: an improvement of global symptoms recorded in validated daily or weekly diaries and any scores from validated visual analogue scales; the total Quality of Life Score (such as the Juniper RQLQ);individual symptoms scores which include any appropriate measures of nasal obstruction, runny nose, sneezing, itching, and eye symptoms; and number of days requiring medication. Secondary outcomes selected will include serum immunoglobin E (IgE) levels, individual ocular symptoms, adverse events, and the use of rescue medication.Treatment effects will be measured by calculating the mean difference and the standardized mean difference with 95% confidence interval (CI) for continuous data. Risk ratio or, if feasible, odds ratio will be calculated with 95% CI for dichotomous data. After assessing clinical and statistical heterogeneity, meta-analysis will be performed, if appropriate. The individual participant will be the unit of analysis. Descriptive information on missing data will be included about participants missing due to drop out, whether there was intention to treat or per protocol analysis and missing statistics. A number of subgroups, homeopathic potency, age groups, and types of allergic rhinitis (seasonal or perennial) will be analyzed. Sensitivity analysis will be performed to explore the impact of risk of bias on overall treatment effect. SYSTEMATIC REVIEW REGISTRATION: PROSPERO CRD42013006741.

Effect of antibiotic prescribing in primary care on meticillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus carriage in community-resident adults: a controlled observational study.

The objectives of this study were to investigate the relationship between primary care antibiotics prescribed within 2 months and 12 months and the carriage of meticillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA) in nasal flora from a large representative sample of community-resident adults. S. aureus isolates were obtained from nasal samples submitted by UK resident adults aged ≥ 16 years registered with 12 general practices in the former Avon and Gloucestershire health authority areas. Individual-level antibiotic exposure data during the 12 months prior to providing the samples were collected from the primary care electronic records. MRSA status was determined by measuring resistance to cefoxitin. In total, 6937 adults were invited to take part, of whom 5917 returned a nasal sample. S. aureus was identified in 946 samples and a total of 761 participants consented to primary care record review and had complete data for the analyses. There was no evidence of an association between any antibiotic in the previous 2 months and MRSA isolation, with an adjusted odds ratio (aOR) of 1.33 [95% confidence interval (CI) 0.12-15; P=0.8]. There was a suggestion of an association between any antibiotic use in the previous 12 months and MRSA, with an aOR of 2.45 (95% CI 0.95-6.3; P=0.06). In conclusion, there is a suggestion that antibiotics prescribed within 12 months is associated with the carriage of MRSA, but not within 2 months, although the 2-month analysis had fewer data subjects and was therefore underpowered to detect this association. A larger study would be able to clarify these associations further.

Paracetamol plus ibuprofen for the treatment of fever in children (PITCH): randomised controlled trial.

OBJECTIVE: To investigate whether paracetamol (acetaminophen) plus ibuprofen are superior to either drug alone for increasing time without fever and the relief of fever associated discomfort in febrile children managed at home. DESIGN: Individually randomised, blinded, three arm trial. SETTING: Primary care and households in England. PARTICIPANTS: Children aged between 6 months and 6 years with axillary temperatures of at least 37.8 degrees C and up to 41.0 degrees C. INTERVENTION: Advice on physical measures to reduce temperature and the provision of, and advice to give, paracetamol plus ibuprofen, paracetamol alone, or ibuprofen alone. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Primary outcomes were the time without fever (<37.2 degrees C) in the first four hours after the first dose was given and the proportion of children reported as being normal on the discomfort scale at 48 hours. Secondary outcomes were time to first occurrence of normal temperature (fever clearance), time without fever over 24 hours, fever associated symptoms, and adverse effects. RESULTS: On an intention to treat basis, paracetamol plus ibuprofen were superior to paracetamol for less time with fever in the first four hours (adjusted difference 55 minutes, 95% confidence interval 33 to 77; P<0.001) and may have been as good as ibuprofen (16 minutes, -7 to 39; P=0.2). For less time with fever over 24 hours, paracetamol plus ibuprofen were superior to paracetamol (4.4 hours, 2.4 to 6.3; P<0.001) and to ibuprofen (2.5 hours, 0.6 to 4.4; P=0.008). Combined therapy cleared fever 23 minutes (2 to 45; P=0.025) faster than paracetamol alone but no faster than ibuprofen alone (-3 minutes, 18 to -24; P=0.8). No benefit was found for discomfort or other symptoms, although power was low for these outcomes. Adverse effects did not differ between groups. CONCLUSION: Parents, nurses, pharmacists, and doctors wanting to use medicines to supplement physical measures to maximise the time that children spend without fever should use ibuprofen first and consider the relative benefits and risks of using paracetamol plus ibuprofen over 24 hours. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Current Controlled Trials ISRCTN26362730.