Summary of findings 3. Short (3‐7 days) long‐course (10‐14 days) antibiotics for treating lower urinary tract infection in children.
Short (3‐7 days) versus long‐course (10‐14 days) antibiotics for treating lower urinary tract infection in children | ||||||
Patient or population: children with lower urinary tract infection Settings: paediatric department (1); not stated (3) Intervention: short‐course (3‐7 days) Comparison: long‐course (10‐14 days) | ||||||
Outcomes | Illustrative comparative risks* (95% CI) | Relative effect (95% CI) | No of Participants (studies) | Quality of the evidence (GRADE) | Comments | |
Assumed risk | Corresponding risk | |||||
Long‐course (10‐14 days) | Short‐course (3‐7 days) | |||||
Persistent bacteriuria | Study population | RR 1.1 (0.68 to 1.77) | 265 (3 studies) | ⊕⊝⊝⊝ very low1,2 | ||
186 per 1000 | 205 per 1000 (126 to 329) | |||||
Medium risk population | ||||||
185 per 1000 | 204 per 1000 (126 to 327) | |||||
Recurrence | Study population | RR 1.14 (0.7 to 1.86) | 363 (4 studies) | ⊕⊝⊝⊝ very low3,4 | ||
127 per 1000 | 145 per 1000 (89 to 236) | |||||
Medium risk population | ||||||
100 per 1000 | 114 per 1000 (70 to 186) | |||||
Re‐infection | Study population | RR 0.88 (0.44 to 1.74) | 211 (2 studies) | ⊕⊝⊝⊝ very low4,5 | ||
147 per 1000 | 129 per 1000 (65 to 256) | |||||
Medium risk population | ||||||
154 per 1000 | 136 per 1000 (68 to 268) | |||||
*The basis for the assumed risk (e.g. the median control group risk across studies) is provided in footnotes. The corresponding risk (and its 95% confidence interval) is based on the assumed risk in the comparison group and the relative effect of the intervention (and its 95% CI). CI: Confidence interval; RR: Risk ratio | ||||||
GRADE Working Group grades of evidence High quality: Further research is very unlikely to change our confidence in the estimate of effect. Moderate quality: Further research is likely to have an important impact on our confidence in the estimate of effect and may change the estimate. Low quality: Further research is very likely to have an important impact on our confidence in the estimate of effect and is likely to change the estimate. Very low quality: We are very uncertain about the estimate. |
1 No study reported blinding. One study was quasi‐RCT using alternation; the other two studies did not report randomisation method. One study reported allocation concealment and two studies reported ITT analyses. 2 Number of patients across groups was reasonably small (265) and CIs are wide and cross 1 3 No explanation was provided 4 CI crosses 1 5 Randomisation method and blinding were not reported in either study. Allocation concealment and ITT analysis was adequate in one of the two studies.