Trimethoprim-polymyxin B sulphate ophthalmic ointment versus chloramphenicol ophthalmic ointment in the treatment of bacterial conjunctivitis—a review of four clinical studies

Five hundred and twenty-eight patients with a clinical diagnosis of bacterial conjunctivitis were enrolled in four randomized, double-blind, parallel studies. Patients were treated with trimethoprim-polymyxin B sulphate (TP) or chloramphenicol ophthalmic ointments, four times a day for seven days in...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:Journal of antimicrobial chemotherapy 1989-02, Vol.23 (2), p.261-266
Hauptverfasser: Booth, K F, Calthrop, J G, Cox, E, Davies, J G, Donnachie, H, Frood, RAW, Gibson, J R, Gordon, J S, Graham, A A
Format: Artikel
Sprache:eng
Schlagworte:
Online-Zugang:Volltext
Tags: Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
container_end_page 266
container_issue 2
container_start_page 261
container_title Journal of antimicrobial chemotherapy
container_volume 23
creator Booth, K F
Calthrop, J G
Cox, E
Davies, J G
Donnachie, H
Frood, RAW
Gibson, J R
Gordon, J S
Graham, A A
description Five hundred and twenty-eight patients with a clinical diagnosis of bacterial conjunctivitis were enrolled in four randomized, double-blind, parallel studies. Patients were treated with trimethoprim-polymyxin B sulphate (TP) or chloramphenicol ophthalmic ointments, four times a day for seven days in three studies, and three times a day for five days in one. Data suitable for evaluation of efficacy and safety were obtained from 448 patients. The results of each study were analysed separately and indicated that both treatments were effective and well tolerated and that there were no statistically significant differences between them. However, in three studies, efficacy trends generally favoured TP ophthalmic ointment and in one study efficacy trends favoured chloramphenicol ophthalmic ointment. A wide range of pathogenic or potentially pathogenic organisms was isolated, with Haemophilus influenzae being the most prevalent.
doi_str_mv 10.1093/jac/23.2.261
format Article
fullrecord <record><control><sourceid>proquest_cross</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_15280760</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><sourcerecordid>15280760</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c246t-43504a2ffc93853d791d14432c9de3433c2ff451831f3623a2ac4f88c7aaf7c13</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNptkU2OEzEQhVsIJMLAjgN4gVjRGdvl_ltCxMwgIrHJSKNsrMKx1Q7udmO7w2Q3h-AiXImT4CijWbF6Ur2vnlT1iuIto0tGO7jco7rksORLXrNnxYKJmpacdux5saBAq7IRFbwsXsW4p5TWVd0uij-bYAedej9lLSfvjsPx3o7kE4mzm3pMmvipTz26wSri7ZgGPSZy0CHOkaje-YDD1OvRKu_-i-aw1GuSgsbzwBvyHVXSwaIjyo_7eVTJHmyy8e_DbyRBH6z-dcKMnwNRzubwjMY076yOr4sXBl3Ubx71ori9-rxZ3ZTrb9dfVh_XpeKiTqWAigrkxqgO2gp2Tcd2TAjgqttpEAAqe6JiLTADNQfkqIRpW9UgmkYxuCjen3On4H_OOiY52Ki0czhqP0fJKt7SpqYZ_HAGVfAxBm3k6ZcYjpJReepF5l4kB8ll7iXj7x5zMeazTMBR2fi00_DcTAMZK8-YjUnfP9kYfsi6gaaSN3dbuVl31-3261au4B800KQH</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>15280760</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Trimethoprim-polymyxin B sulphate ophthalmic ointment versus chloramphenicol ophthalmic ointment in the treatment of bacterial conjunctivitis—a review of four clinical studies</title><source>Oxford University Press Journals Digital Archive Legacy</source><creator>Booth, K F ; Calthrop, J G ; Cox, E ; Davies, J G ; Donnachie, H ; Frood, RAW ; Gibson, J R ; Gordon, J S ; Graham, A A</creator><creatorcontrib>Booth, K F ; Calthrop, J G ; Cox, E ; Davies, J G ; Donnachie, H ; Frood, RAW ; Gibson, J R ; Gordon, J S ; Graham, A A</creatorcontrib><description>Five hundred and twenty-eight patients with a clinical diagnosis of bacterial conjunctivitis were enrolled in four randomized, double-blind, parallel studies. Patients were treated with trimethoprim-polymyxin B sulphate (TP) or chloramphenicol ophthalmic ointments, four times a day for seven days in three studies, and three times a day for five days in one. Data suitable for evaluation of efficacy and safety were obtained from 448 patients. The results of each study were analysed separately and indicated that both treatments were effective and well tolerated and that there were no statistically significant differences between them. However, in three studies, efficacy trends generally favoured TP ophthalmic ointment and in one study efficacy trends favoured chloramphenicol ophthalmic ointment. A wide range of pathogenic or potentially pathogenic organisms was isolated, with Haemophilus influenzae being the most prevalent.</description><identifier>ISSN: 0305-7453</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1460-2091</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1093/jac/23.2.261</identifier><identifier>CODEN: JACHDX</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>Oxford: Oxford University Press</publisher><subject>Antibacterial agents ; Antibiotics. Antiinfectious agents. Antiparasitic agents ; Biological and medical sciences ; Medical sciences ; Pharmacology. Drug treatments</subject><ispartof>Journal of antimicrobial chemotherapy, 1989-02, Vol.23 (2), p.261-266</ispartof><rights>1989 INIST-CNRS</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c246t-43504a2ffc93853d791d14432c9de3433c2ff451831f3623a2ac4f88c7aaf7c13</citedby></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><link.rule.ids>314,776,780,27903,27904</link.rule.ids><backlink>$$Uhttp://pascal-francis.inist.fr/vibad/index.php?action=getRecordDetail&amp;idt=7206573$$DView record in Pascal Francis$$Hfree_for_read</backlink></links><search><creatorcontrib>Booth, K F</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Calthrop, J G</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Cox, E</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Davies, J G</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Donnachie, H</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Frood, RAW</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Gibson, J R</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Gordon, J S</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Graham, A A</creatorcontrib><title>Trimethoprim-polymyxin B sulphate ophthalmic ointment versus chloramphenicol ophthalmic ointment in the treatment of bacterial conjunctivitis—a review of four clinical studies</title><title>Journal of antimicrobial chemotherapy</title><description>Five hundred and twenty-eight patients with a clinical diagnosis of bacterial conjunctivitis were enrolled in four randomized, double-blind, parallel studies. Patients were treated with trimethoprim-polymyxin B sulphate (TP) or chloramphenicol ophthalmic ointments, four times a day for seven days in three studies, and three times a day for five days in one. Data suitable for evaluation of efficacy and safety were obtained from 448 patients. The results of each study were analysed separately and indicated that both treatments were effective and well tolerated and that there were no statistically significant differences between them. However, in three studies, efficacy trends generally favoured TP ophthalmic ointment and in one study efficacy trends favoured chloramphenicol ophthalmic ointment. A wide range of pathogenic or potentially pathogenic organisms was isolated, with Haemophilus influenzae being the most prevalent.</description><subject>Antibacterial agents</subject><subject>Antibiotics. Antiinfectious agents. Antiparasitic agents</subject><subject>Biological and medical sciences</subject><subject>Medical sciences</subject><subject>Pharmacology. Drug treatments</subject><issn>0305-7453</issn><issn>1460-2091</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>1989</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><recordid>eNptkU2OEzEQhVsIJMLAjgN4gVjRGdvl_ltCxMwgIrHJSKNsrMKx1Q7udmO7w2Q3h-AiXImT4CijWbF6Ur2vnlT1iuIto0tGO7jco7rksORLXrNnxYKJmpacdux5saBAq7IRFbwsXsW4p5TWVd0uij-bYAedej9lLSfvjsPx3o7kE4mzm3pMmvipTz26wSri7ZgGPSZy0CHOkaje-YDD1OvRKu_-i-aw1GuSgsbzwBvyHVXSwaIjyo_7eVTJHmyy8e_DbyRBH6z-dcKMnwNRzubwjMY076yOr4sXBl3Ubx71ori9-rxZ3ZTrb9dfVh_XpeKiTqWAigrkxqgO2gp2Tcd2TAjgqttpEAAqe6JiLTADNQfkqIRpW9UgmkYxuCjen3On4H_OOiY52Ki0czhqP0fJKt7SpqYZ_HAGVfAxBm3k6ZcYjpJReepF5l4kB8ll7iXj7x5zMeazTMBR2fi00_DcTAMZK8-YjUnfP9kYfsi6gaaSN3dbuVl31-3261au4B800KQH</recordid><startdate>198902</startdate><enddate>198902</enddate><creator>Booth, K F</creator><creator>Calthrop, J G</creator><creator>Cox, E</creator><creator>Davies, J G</creator><creator>Donnachie, H</creator><creator>Frood, RAW</creator><creator>Gibson, J R</creator><creator>Gordon, J S</creator><creator>Graham, A A</creator><general>Oxford University Press</general><scope>BSCLL</scope><scope>IQODW</scope><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>7QL</scope><scope>C1K</scope></search><sort><creationdate>198902</creationdate><title>Trimethoprim-polymyxin B sulphate ophthalmic ointment versus chloramphenicol ophthalmic ointment in the treatment of bacterial conjunctivitis—a review of four clinical studies</title><author>Booth, K F ; Calthrop, J G ; Cox, E ; Davies, J G ; Donnachie, H ; Frood, RAW ; Gibson, J R ; Gordon, J S ; Graham, A A</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c246t-43504a2ffc93853d791d14432c9de3433c2ff451831f3623a2ac4f88c7aaf7c13</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>1989</creationdate><topic>Antibacterial agents</topic><topic>Antibiotics. Antiinfectious agents. Antiparasitic agents</topic><topic>Biological and medical sciences</topic><topic>Medical sciences</topic><topic>Pharmacology. Drug treatments</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Booth, K F</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Calthrop, J G</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Cox, E</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Davies, J G</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Donnachie, H</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Frood, RAW</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Gibson, J R</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Gordon, J S</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Graham, A A</creatorcontrib><collection>Istex</collection><collection>Pascal-Francis</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>Bacteriology Abstracts (Microbiology B)</collection><collection>Environmental Sciences and Pollution Management</collection><jtitle>Journal of antimicrobial chemotherapy</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Booth, K F</au><au>Calthrop, J G</au><au>Cox, E</au><au>Davies, J G</au><au>Donnachie, H</au><au>Frood, RAW</au><au>Gibson, J R</au><au>Gordon, J S</au><au>Graham, A A</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Trimethoprim-polymyxin B sulphate ophthalmic ointment versus chloramphenicol ophthalmic ointment in the treatment of bacterial conjunctivitis—a review of four clinical studies</atitle><jtitle>Journal of antimicrobial chemotherapy</jtitle><date>1989-02</date><risdate>1989</risdate><volume>23</volume><issue>2</issue><spage>261</spage><epage>266</epage><pages>261-266</pages><issn>0305-7453</issn><eissn>1460-2091</eissn><coden>JACHDX</coden><abstract>Five hundred and twenty-eight patients with a clinical diagnosis of bacterial conjunctivitis were enrolled in four randomized, double-blind, parallel studies. Patients were treated with trimethoprim-polymyxin B sulphate (TP) or chloramphenicol ophthalmic ointments, four times a day for seven days in three studies, and three times a day for five days in one. Data suitable for evaluation of efficacy and safety were obtained from 448 patients. The results of each study were analysed separately and indicated that both treatments were effective and well tolerated and that there were no statistically significant differences between them. However, in three studies, efficacy trends generally favoured TP ophthalmic ointment and in one study efficacy trends favoured chloramphenicol ophthalmic ointment. A wide range of pathogenic or potentially pathogenic organisms was isolated, with Haemophilus influenzae being the most prevalent.</abstract><cop>Oxford</cop><pub>Oxford University Press</pub><doi>10.1093/jac/23.2.261</doi><tpages>6</tpages></addata></record>
fulltext fulltext
identifier ISSN: 0305-7453
ispartof Journal of antimicrobial chemotherapy, 1989-02, Vol.23 (2), p.261-266
issn 0305-7453
1460-2091
language eng
recordid cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_15280760
source Oxford University Press Journals Digital Archive Legacy
subjects Antibacterial agents
Antibiotics. Antiinfectious agents. Antiparasitic agents
Biological and medical sciences
Medical sciences
Pharmacology. Drug treatments
title Trimethoprim-polymyxin B sulphate ophthalmic ointment versus chloramphenicol ophthalmic ointment in the treatment of bacterial conjunctivitis—a review of four clinical studies
url https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-01-27T11%3A30%3A24IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_cross&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Trimethoprim-polymyxin%20B%20sulphate%20ophthalmic%20ointment%20versus%20chloramphenicol%20ophthalmic%20ointment%20in%20the%20treatment%20of%20bacterial%20conjunctivitis%E2%80%94a%20review%20of%20four%20clinical%20studies&rft.jtitle=Journal%20of%20antimicrobial%20chemotherapy&rft.au=Booth,%20K%20F&rft.date=1989-02&rft.volume=23&rft.issue=2&rft.spage=261&rft.epage=266&rft.pages=261-266&rft.issn=0305-7453&rft.eissn=1460-2091&rft.coden=JACHDX&rft_id=info:doi/10.1093/jac/23.2.261&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_cross%3E15280760%3C/proquest_cross%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=15280760&rft_id=info:pmid/&rfr_iscdi=true