Project description:BackgroundIn developing countries, diarrhoea causes around 500,000 child deaths annually. Zinc supplementation during acute diarrhoea is currently recommended by the World Health Organization (WHO) and the United Nations Children's Fund (UNICEF).ObjectivesTo evaluate oral zinc supplementation for treating children with acute or persistent diarrhoea.Search methodsWe searched the Cochrane Infectious Diseases Group Specialized Register, CENTRAL (the Cochrane Library 2016, Issue 5), MEDLINE, Embase, LILACS, CINAHL, mRCT, and reference lists up to 30 September 2016. We also contacted researchers.Selection criteriaRandomized controlled trials (RCTs) that compared oral zinc supplementation with placebo in children aged one month to five years with acute or persistent diarrhoea, including dysentery.Data collection and analysisBoth review authors assessed trial eligibility and risk of bias, extracted and analysed data, and drafted the review. The primary outcomes were diarrhoea duration and severity. We summarized dichotomous outcomes using risk ratios (RR) and continuous outcomes using mean differences (MD) with 95% confidence intervals (CI). Where appropriate, we combined data in meta-analyses (using either a fixed-effect or random-effects model) and assessed heterogeneity.We assessed the certainty of the evidence using the GRADE approach.Main resultsThirty-three trials that included 10,841 children met our inclusion criteria. Most included trials were conducted in Asian countries that were at high risk of zinc deficiency. Acute diarrhoeaThere is currently not enough evidence from well-conducted RCTs to be able to say whether zinc supplementation during acute diarrhoea reduces death or number of children hospitalized (very low certainty evidence).In children older than six months of age, zinc supplementation may shorten the average duration of diarrhoea by around half a day (MD -11.46 hours, 95% CI -19.72 to -3.19; 2581 children, 9 trials, low certainty evidence), and probably reduces the number of children whose diarrhoea persists until day seven (RR 0.73, 95% CI 0.61 to 0.88; 3865 children, 6 trials, moderate certainty evidence). In children with signs of malnutrition the effect appears greater, reducing the duration of diarrhoea by around a day (MD -26.39 hours, 95% CI -36.54 to -16.23; 419 children, 5 trials, high certainty evidence).Conversely, in children younger than six months of age, the available evidence suggests zinc supplementation may have no effect on the mean duration of diarrhoea (MD 5.23 hours, 95% CI -4.00 to 14.45; 1334 children, 2 trials, moderate certainty evidence), or the number of children who still have diarrhoea on day seven (RR 1.24, 95% CI 0.99 to 1.54; 1074 children, 1 trial, moderate certainty evidence).None of the included trials reported serious adverse events. However, zinc supplementation increased the risk of vomiting in both age groups (children greater than six months of age: RR 1.57, 95% CI 1.32 to 1.86; 2605 children, 6 trials, moderate certainty evidence; children less than six months of age: RR 1.54, 95% CI 1.05 to 2.24; 1334 children, 2 trials, moderate certainty evidence). Persistent diarrhoeaIn children with persistent diarrhoea, zinc supplementation probably shortens the average duration of diarrhoea by around 16 hours (MD -15.84 hours, 95% CI -25.43 to -6.24; 529 children, 5 trials, moderate certainty evidence).Authors' conclusionsIn areas where the prevalence of zinc deficiency or the prevalence of malnutrition is high, zinc may be of benefit in children aged six months or more. The current evidence does not support the use of zinc supplementation in children less six months of age, in well-nourished children, and in settings where children are at low risk of zinc deficiency.

Project description:Evidence suggests that probiotics reduce rotavirus diarrhoea duration. Although there are several probiotic strains potentially useful, daily practice is often limited by the type and number of products locally available. In general, information about combined products is scarce. In this study we compare the effect of two probiotic products in the treatment of diarrhoea in children less than 2 years of age.A Randomized double-blind controlled clinical trial in children hospitalized for acute rotavirus diarrhoea, in the Paediatric Centre Albina Patino, Cochabamba, Bolivia.Participants were children aged 1 - 23 months, who were randomly assigned to receive one of three treatments: Oral rehydration therapy plus placebo; Oral rehydration solution plus Saccharomyces boulardii; or Oral rehydration solution plus a compound containing Lactobacillus acidophilus, Lactobacillus rhamnosus, Bifidobacterium longum and Saccharomyces boulardii. Sample size was 20 per group and the outcomes were duration of diarrhoea, of fever, of vomiting and of hospitalization.64 cases finished the protocol. On admission, patients' characteristics were similar. Median duration of diarrhoea (p = 0.04) in children who received the single species product (58 hours) was shorter than in controls (84.5 hrs). Comparing children that received the single probiotic product and controls showed shorter duration of fever (18 vs 67 hrs) (p = 0.0042) and the mixed probiotic of vomiting (0 vs 42.5 hrs) (p = 0.041). There was no effect on duration of hospitalization (p = 0.31). When experimental groups were merged, statistical significance of changes increased (total duration of diarrhoea, fever and vomiting P = 0.025, P = 0.025 and P = 0.014, respectively).Both products decreased the duration of diarrhoea compared to oral rehydration solution alone. This decrease was significant only for the single species product which also decreased the duration of fever. With the multiple species product there was no vomiting subsequent to the initiation of treatment. The quantity of probiotic bacteria needed for optimum treatment of gastroenteritis remains to be determined, particularly when multiple species are included in the product.Trial registration: ClinicalTrials.gov ID: NCT00981877Link: https://register.clinicaltrials.gov/prs/app/action/SelectProtocol/sid/S0002653/selectaction/View/ts/2/uid/U0000N04Clinical trials NCT ID: NCT00981877.

Project description:ObjectiveTo evaluate existing evidence for the use of probiotics in preventing antibiotic-associated diarrhoea (AAD) in adults.DesignSystematic review and meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials (RCTs).Data sourcesWe performed a literature search of the electronic databases CINAHL Plus, EMBASE, MEDLINE (Ovid) and Web of Science from database inception to May 2021 as well as hand searching of trial registries and reference lists of related reviews.Study selectionTwo reviewers identified whether RCTs met the following inclusion criteria: adult population to whom antibiotics were administered; a probiotic intervention; a placebo, alternative dose, alternative probiotic strain or no treatment control; and incidence of AAD as the outcome.Data extraction and synthesisTwo reviewers independently collected data and assessed risk of bias using preconstructed data extraction forms. We used a random effects model for all analyses. Subgroup analyses were performed to evaluate species-specific and dose-specific response.ResultsForty-two studies (11,305 participants) were included in this review. The pooled analysis suggests that co-administration of probiotics with antibiotics reduces the risk of AAD in adults by 37% (risk ratio (RR)=0.63 (95% CI 0.54 to 0.73), p<0.00001). The overall quality of the evidence using the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluations (GRADE) criteria was found to be moderate. In subgroup analyses, high dose compared with low dose of the same probiotic demonstrated a positive protective effect (RR 0.54 (95% CI 0.38 to 0.76), p<0.01), and only certain species, mainly of the lactobacillus and bifidobacteria genera, were found to be effective. Studies with a low baseline AAD risk did not show any difference in risk but studies with moderate or high baseline AAD risk demonstrated a significant risk reduction.ConclusionsProbiotics are effective for preventing AAD. Secondary analyses of higher dosages and certain species have shown increased effectiveness. Our results may not be applicable in clinical scenarios of lower baseline AAD risk.

Project description:BackgroundGlobally, nearly half of all deaths among children under the age of 5 years can be attributed to malaria, diarrhoea, and pneumonia. A significant proportion of these deaths occur in sub-Saharan Africa. Despite several programmes implemented in sub-Saharan Africa, the burden of these illnesses remains persistently high. To mobilise resources for such programmes it is necessary to evaluate their costs, costs-effectiveness, and affordability. This study aimed to estimate the provider costs of treating malaria, diarrhoea, and pneumonia among children under the age of 5 years in routine settings at the health facility level in rural Uganda and Mozambique.MethodsService and cost data was collected from health facilities in midwestern Uganda and Inhambane province, Mozambique from private and public health facilities. Financial and economic costs of providing care for childhood illnesses were investigated from the provider perspective by combining a top-down and bottom-up approach to estimate unit costs and annual total costs for different types of visits for these illnesses. All costs were collected in Ugandan shillings and Mozambican meticais. Costs are presented in 2021 US dollars.ResultsIn Uganda, the highest number of outpatient visits were for children with uncomplicated malaria and of inpatient admissions were for respiratory infections, including pneumonia. The highest unit cost for outpatient visits was for pneumonia (and other respiratory infections) and ranged from $0.5 to 2.3, while the highest unit cost for inpatient admissions was for malaria ($19.6). In Mozambique, the highest numbers of outpatient and inpatient admissions visits were for malaria. The highest unit costs were for malaria too, ranging from $2.5 to 4.2 for outpatient visits and $3.8 for inpatient admissions. The greatest contributors to costs in both countries were drugs and diagnostics, followed by staff.ConclusionsThe findings highlighted the intensive resource use in the treatment of malaria and pneumonia for outpatient and inpatient cases, particularly at higher level health facilities. Timely treatment to prevent severe complications associated with these illnesses can also avoid high costs to health providers, and households.Trial registrationClinicalTrials.gov, identifier: NCT01972321.

Dataset Information

Probiotics for treating acute infectious diarrhoea.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets