Effectiveness of Cefixime for the Treatment of Neisseria gonorrhoeae Infection at 3 Anatomic Sites: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

BACKGROUND: To treat Neisseria gonorrhoeae infection, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention recommends a single oral dose of cefixime as an alternative to injectable ceftriaxone. METHODS: We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis to describe the effectiveness of cefixime in treating N. gonorrhoeae infection at 3 different anatomic sites.We searched PubMed and Embase database to abstract treatment success rates and cefixime dosage/frequency for studies that reported the anatomical site of infection. We included reports published between January 1, 1980, and December 7, 2021. Twenty studies published between 1989 and 2015 were included in our meta-analysis. We calculated pooled treatment success percentages and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) using random-effects models. RESULTS: Of patients who received a 400-mg single dose of cefixime, 824 of 846 (97%; 95% CI, 96%-98%) patients with urogenital infection, 107 of 112 (97%; 95% CI, 84%-100%) patients with rectal infection, and 202 of 242 (89%; 95% CI, 76%-96%) patients with pharyngeal infection were cured. Of patients who received an 800-mg single dose of cefixime, 295 of 301 (98%; 95% CI, 96%-99%) patients with urogenital infection and 21 of 26 (81%; 95% CI, 61%-92%) patients with pharyngeal infection were cured. CONCLUSIONS: Our meta-analysis found that cefixime is highly effective at treating urogenital infections and less effective at treating pharyngeal infections. We recommend more investigation into the effectiveness of cefixime in treating rectal infections and studying multidose therapy for the cefixime treatment of pharyngeal infection.

Impact of COVID-19 on Primary Care Quality Measures in an Academic Integrated Health System.

BACKGROUND: Access to primary care was hindered by the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic. OBJECTIVE: Evaluate changes in health screening rates before and during the pandemic. DESIGN: Retrospective analysis of health maintenance and disease management screening rates among primary care patients before and during the pandemic. PARTICIPANTS: Over 150,000 patients of a large, academic health system. MAIN MEASURES: Six quality measures were analyzed: colon cancer, breast cancer, cervical cancer, diabetes Hgb A1C, diabetes eye, and diabetes nephropathy monitoring. Based on US Preventative Services Task Force screening guidelines, we determined which patients were due for at least one of the quality measures. We tracked completion rates during three time periods: pre-pandemic (January 1-March 3, 2020), stay-at-home (March 4-May 8, 2020), and phased reopening (May 9-July 8, 2020). Differences in quality measure completion rates were evaluated using mixed-effects logistic regression models. KEY RESULTS: Compared to pre-pandemic rates, completion of all health screenings declined during the stay-at-home period: mammograms (OR: 0.34; 95% CI: 0.31-0.37), cervical cancer (OR: 0.83; 95% CI: 0.76-0.91), colorectal cancer (OR: 0.25; 95% CI: 0.23-0.28), diabetes eye (OR: 0.34; 95% CI: 0.29-0.41), diabetes Hgb A1c (OR: 0.41; 95% CI: 0.37-0.46), and diabetes nephropathy (OR: 0.46, 95% CI: 0.41-0.53). During phased reopening, completion of all quality measures increased compared to the stay-at-home period, except for cervical cancer screening (OR: 0.83; 95% CI: 0.76-0.92). There was a persistent reduction in completion of all quality measures, except for diabetic nephropathy monitoring (OR: 0.99; 95% CI: 0.89-1.09), during phased reopening compared to pre-pandemic. CONCLUSIONS: Healthcare screening rates were reduced during the early part of the COVID-19 pandemic and did not fully recover to pre-pandemic rates by July 2020. Future research should aim to clarify the long-term impacts of delayed health screenings. New interventions should be considered for expanding remote preventative health services.