Table.

GRADE evaluation of interventions for cellulitis and erysipelas

Important outcomes	Cure rates, relapse rates, adverse effects
Number of studies (participants)	Outcome	Comparison	Type of evidence	Quality	Consistency	Directness	Effect size	GRADE	Comment
What are the effects of treatments for cellulitis and erysipelas?
1 (58)	Cure rates	Ceftriaxone v flucloxacillin	4	–3	0	0	0	Very low	Quality points deducted for sparse data, no intention-to-treat analysis, and poor follow-up
1 (81)	Symptom severity	Intravenous flucloxacillin plus intravenous benzylpenicillin v intravenous flucloxacillin	4	–2	0	0	0	Low	Quality points deducted for sparse data and no intention-to-treat analysis.
1 (112)	Clinical cure	Intravenous benzylpenicillin v intramuscular bipenicillin	4	–2	0	0	0	Low	Quality points deducted for sparse data and incomplete reporting of results
1 (132)	Clinical cure	Cefazolin plus oral probenecid v ceftriazone	4	–1	0	0	0	Moderate	Quality point deducted for sparse data
1 (69)	Clinical cure	Penicillin v roxithromycin	4	–1	0	0	0	Moderate	Quality point deducted for sparse data
3 subgroup analysis (237)	Clinical cure	Oral azithromycin v oral erythromycin/oral cloxacillin/cefalexin	4	–1	0	0	0	Moderate	Quality point deducted for subgroup analysis of RCT
1 subgroup analysis (34)	Clinical cure	Cefdinir v cefalexin	4	–2	0	0	0	Low	Quality points deducted for sparse data and subgroup analysis of RCT
1 subgroup analysis (11)	Clinical cure	Oral amoxicillin–clavulanate potassium v oral fleroxacin	4	–2	0	0	0	Low	Quality points deducted for sparse data and subgroup analysis of RCT
1 subgroup analysis (39)	Clinical cure	Fleroxacin v ceftazidime	4	–2	0	0	0	Low	Quality points deducted for sparse data and subgroup analysis of RCT
1 subgroup analysis (20)	Clinical cure	Ampicillin/sulbactam v cefazolin	4	–2	0	0	0	Low	Quality points deducted for sparse data and subgroup analysis of RCT
1 (73)	Clinical efficacy	Oral v intravenous penicillin	4	–3	0	0	0	Very low	Quality points deducted for sparse data, incomplete reporting of results, quasi-randomisation, and uncertainty about methods of measuring outcomes
1 (87)	Clinical cure rates	Different durations of antibiotics v each other	4	–1	0	0	0	Moderate	Quality point deducted for sparse data
What are the effects of treatments to prevent recurrence of cellulitis and erysipelas?
2 (72)	Recurrence rates	Antibiotics v no treatment	4	–1	0	–1	0	Low	Quality point deducted for sparse data. Directness point deducted for inclusion of predisposing conditions

Type of evidence: 4 = RCT; 2 = Observational; 1 = Non-analytical/expert opinion. Consistency: similarity of results across studies Directness: generalisability of population or outcomes Effect size: based on relative risk or odds ratio