Paper Details

  1. Home
  2. Paper Details

[Comparative studies of the efficacy, safety and usefulness of S6472, cefaclor and cephalexin on complicated urinary tract infection by the double-blind method].

Author: ArakawaS, FujiiA, HikosakaK, HirookaK, IshigamiJ, KamidonoS, KataokaN, MatsushitaM, ShimataniN, UmezuK

Controlled Clinical TrialA clinical trial that evaluates the effectiveness of a treatment by comparing a group that receives the intervention with a group that receives a placebo or standard treatment.
English AbstractA summary of a research paper/publication written in English for a wider audience.
Journal ArticleAn article published in an academic or professional journal that reports original research or scholarly analysis.
Clinical TrialA clinical trial is a planned study conducted on humans to evaluate the efficacy and safety of pharmaceuticals, medical devices, and treatment methods. It aims to explore the possibilities of new treatments and improve the health of patients.
Comparative StudyResearch that compares multiple groups/interventions to determine differences/similarities in outcomes/characteristics.

Overview

Cefaclor (standard and long-acting formulations) and cephalexin were all effective for uncomplicated urinary tract infection in 385 patients. All three had a low rate of side effects.
Paper Details　
Original Abstract of the Article :
To objectively evaluated the usefulness of the standard formulation of cefaclor (CCL) and the long-acting formulation of cefaclor (S6472) in noncatheterized complicated urinary tract infection (UTI), a double-blind comparison study was carried out using cephalexin (CEX) as a control. Patients were o...See full text at original site
Dr.Camel IconDr.Camel's Paper Summary Blogラクダ博士について

ラクダ博士は、Health Journal が論文の内容を分かりやすく解説するために作成した架空のキャラクターです。
難解な医学論文を、専門知識のない方にも理解しやすいように、噛み砕いて説明することを目指しています。

* ラクダ博士による解説は、あくまで論文の要点をまとめたものであり、原論文の完全な代替となるものではありません。詳細な内容については、必ず原論文をご参照ください。
* ラクダ博士は架空のキャラクターであり、実際の医学研究者や医療従事者とは一切関係がありません。
* 解説の内容は Health Journal が独自に解釈・作成したものであり、原論文の著者または出版社の見解を反映するものではありません。


引用元：
https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/3908727

データ提供：米国国立医学図書館（NLM）

Comparing Antibiotics: A Quest for the Perfect Treatment for Urinary Tract Infections

Urinary tract infections (UTIs) are a common ailment, and finding the right treatment is crucial for a speedy recovery. This study compares the effectiveness of three antibiotics - cefaclor, S6472 (a long-acting formulation of cefaclor), and cephalexin - in treating complicated UTIs. It's like choosing the right camel for a long desert journey - each antibiotic has its unique characteristics and strengths. This research finds that all three antibiotics are effective in treating UTIs, with no significant differences in their efficacy or safety profiles. The study provides valuable insights for physicians in choosing the appropriate antibiotic for their patients.

Equal Effectiveness, Different Delivery

All three antibiotics demonstrated comparable effectiveness in treating complicated UTIs. This information is important for physicians to make informed decisions about antibiotic therapy, taking into account factors such as the patient's individual needs and the potential for side effects.

Treating UTIs: Navigating the Desert of Infection

Imagine UTIs as a relentless sandstorm in the desert. The right antibiotic acts like a sturdy oasis, offering relief and protection. This study suggests that all three antibiotics can effectively combat the sandstorm of infection. The choice of antibiotic may depend on factors such as the patient's individual needs and the availability of specific formulations.

Dr.Camel's Conclusion

This double-blind study provides valuable information for physicians regarding the effectiveness of different antibiotics in treating complicated UTIs. It highlights the importance of considering patient-specific factors and choosing the appropriate antibiotic based on individual needs. It's like selecting the right camel for the journey - the choice depends on the specific terrain and the traveler's preferences.
Date :
  1. Date Completed 1986-02-10
  2. Date Revised 2016-11-16
Further Info :

Pubmed ID

3908727

DOI: Digital Object Identifier

3908727

SNS
PICO Info
in preparation
Languages

Japanese

Positive IndicatorAn AI analysis index that serves as a benchmark for how positive the results of the study are. Note that it is a benchmark and requires careful interpretation and consideration of different perspectives.

This site uses cookies. Visit our privacy policy page or click the link in any footer for more information and to change your preferences.