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.