Rice-ORS versus Glucose-ORS in Management of Severe Cholera Due to Vibrio cholerae O139 Bengal: A Randomized, Controlled Clinical Trial
This study examined the comparative efficacies of rice-based oral rehydration solution (R-ORS) and glucose-based oral rehydration solution (G-ORS) in the management of severe cholera due to Vibrio cholerae O139 Bengal that causes epidemic cholera in many developing countries. Stool culture-proved ad...
Gespeichert in:
Veröffentlicht in: | Journal of health, population and nutrition population and nutrition, 2003-12, Vol.21 (4), p.325-331 |
---|---|
Hauptverfasser: | , , , , , |
Format: | Artikel |
Sprache: | eng |
Schlagworte: | |
Online-Zugang: | Volltext |
Tags: |
Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
|
container_end_page | 331 |
---|---|
container_issue | 4 |
container_start_page | 325 |
container_title | Journal of health, population and nutrition |
container_volume | 21 |
creator | Hossain, M. Shahadat Salam, Mohammad A. Rabbani, Golam H. Kabir, Iqbal Biswas, Rabi Mahalanabis, Dilip |
description | This study examined the comparative efficacies of rice-based oral rehydration solution (R-ORS) and glucose-based oral rehydration solution (G-ORS) in the management of severe cholera due to Vibrio cholerae O139 Bengal that causes epidemic cholera in many developing countries. Stool culture-proved adult male patients with severe cholera due to V. cholerae O139 Bengal were randomly assigned in a 1:1 ratio to receive either R-ORS or G-ORS after their initial rehydration with intravenous (i.v.) fluid and subsequently four hours of observation. They also received the usual hospital diet and tetracycline capsules (500 mg 6 hourly for three days) immediately after their enrollment in the study. The primary outcomes for observation were stool output during the first 24 hours after intervention and treatment failure as measured by the incidence of re-institution of i.v. fluid after initiation of trial therapy and duration of diarrhoea. Of 113 patients finally included in the study, 57 received R-ORS and 56 G-ORS. The admission characteristics of the two treatment groups were comparable. No significant differences in the first 24 hours of median (inter-quartile range) stool output [179 (67-206) g/kg in R-ORS group vs 193 (80-237) g/kg in G-ORS group; p=0.52], incidences of unscheduled i.v. fluid requirement [21 % (12/57) in R-ORS group vs 25% (14/56) in G-ORS group; p=0.78], and median (inter-quartile range) duration of diarrhoea [32 (24-48) hours in R-ORS group vs 32 (24-56) hours in G-ORS group; p=0.64] were observed. It is concluded that rice-based ORS is effective but not superior to standard glucose-based ORS in the management of adult males with severe cholera due to V. cholerae O139 Bengal. |
format | Article |
fullrecord | <record><control><sourceid>gale_proqu</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_71569728</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><galeid>A212107213</galeid><jstor_id>23499340</jstor_id><sourcerecordid>A212107213</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-g388t-31625843a9fa09d85a656165be7c22c3149ecc9c729f728c82b798645b3d0233</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNptkl1rFDEUhgex2LX6E5SgUCg4ko_5SLxbx9oWKgu7i7dDJnNmN0smqUlG1D_g3zZlqrgiuQi8ed5z8p7kUbaguKY5YaR8nC1IhascC1GfZk9DOGBMBeb0SXZKSsx4yetF9nOtFeSr9QZ9BR-mgK7MpFyYJW3RJ2nlDkawEbkBbSBRgJq9M-Al-jABig591p3XDqlZBbQiTKD3YHfSvENLtJa2d6P-Af0b1DgbvTMGetQYbbWSBm29luZZdjJIE-D5w36WbT9ebpvr_HZ1ddMsb_Md4zzmjFS05AWTYpBY9LyUVVmRquygVpQqRgoBSglVUzHUlCtOu1rwqig71mPK2Fl2Ppe98-7LBCG2ow4KjJEW3BTampSVSMYEvvoHPLjJ23S1lqYxCpZGm6DXM5SSQqvt4KKX6r5iu6SEkvQU5L7n2_9QafUwauUsDDrpR4aLI0NiInyLOzmF0N5s1sfs-V_sHqSJ--DMFLWz4Rh8-RBo6kbo2zuvR-m_t7-_QgJezMAhROf_nFNWpLQFZr8A8-Wz9w</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>202993606</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Rice-ORS versus Glucose-ORS in Management of Severe Cholera Due to Vibrio cholerae O139 Bengal: A Randomized, Controlled Clinical Trial</title><source>Applied Social Sciences Index & Abstracts (ASSIA)</source><source>JSTOR Archive Collection A-Z Listing</source><source>MEDLINE</source><source>Elektronische Zeitschriftenbibliothek - Frei zugängliche E-Journals</source><creator>Hossain, M. Shahadat ; Salam, Mohammad A. ; Rabbani, Golam H. ; Kabir, Iqbal ; Biswas, Rabi ; Mahalanabis, Dilip</creator><creatorcontrib>Hossain, M. Shahadat ; Salam, Mohammad A. ; Rabbani, Golam H. ; Kabir, Iqbal ; Biswas, Rabi ; Mahalanabis, Dilip</creatorcontrib><description>This study examined the comparative efficacies of rice-based oral rehydration solution (R-ORS) and glucose-based oral rehydration solution (G-ORS) in the management of severe cholera due to Vibrio cholerae O139 Bengal that causes epidemic cholera in many developing countries. Stool culture-proved adult male patients with severe cholera due to V. cholerae O139 Bengal were randomly assigned in a 1:1 ratio to receive either R-ORS or G-ORS after their initial rehydration with intravenous (i.v.) fluid and subsequently four hours of observation. They also received the usual hospital diet and tetracycline capsules (500 mg 6 hourly for three days) immediately after their enrollment in the study. The primary outcomes for observation were stool output during the first 24 hours after intervention and treatment failure as measured by the incidence of re-institution of i.v. fluid after initiation of trial therapy and duration of diarrhoea. Of 113 patients finally included in the study, 57 received R-ORS and 56 G-ORS. The admission characteristics of the two treatment groups were comparable. No significant differences in the first 24 hours of median (inter-quartile range) stool output [179 (67-206) g/kg in R-ORS group vs 193 (80-237) g/kg in G-ORS group; p=0.52], incidences of unscheduled i.v. fluid requirement [21 % (12/57) in R-ORS group vs 25% (14/56) in G-ORS group; p=0.78], and median (inter-quartile range) duration of diarrhoea [32 (24-48) hours in R-ORS group vs 32 (24-56) hours in G-ORS group; p=0.64] were observed. It is concluded that rice-based ORS is effective but not superior to standard glucose-based ORS in the management of adult males with severe cholera due to V. cholerae O139 Bengal.</description><identifier>ISSN: 1606-0997</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 2072-1315</identifier><identifier>PMID: 15038587</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>Bangladesh: ICDDR,B: Centre for Health and Population Research</publisher><subject>Adolescent ; Adult ; Anti-Bacterial Agents - therapeutic use ; Body weight ; Cholera ; Cholera - etiology ; Cholera - pathology ; Cholera - therapy ; Cholera toxin ; Clinical trials ; Dehydration ; Dehydration (Physiology) ; Developing countries ; Diarrhea ; Epidemics ; Feces - microbiology ; Fluid Therapy - classification ; Fluid Therapy - methods ; Glucose - administration & dosage ; Humans ; LDCs ; Male ; Medical treatment failures ; Middle Aged ; Operating rooms ; Oral rehydration ; Oryza ; Random allocation ; Rice ; Tetracycline - therapeutic use ; Therapy ; Treatment Outcome ; Vibrio cholerae ; Vibrio cholerae O139 - isolation & purification ; Vibrio cholerae O139 - pathogenicity</subject><ispartof>Journal of health, population and nutrition, 2003-12, Vol.21 (4), p.325-331</ispartof><rights>Copyright © 2003 ICDDR, B: Centre for Health and Population Research</rights><rights>COPYRIGHT 2003 BioMed Central Ltd.</rights><rights>Copyright Intenational Centre for Diarrhoeal Disease Research, Bangladesh Dec 2003</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><oa>free_for_read</oa><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><linktopdf>$$Uhttps://www.jstor.org/stable/pdf/23499340$$EPDF$$P50$$Gjstor$$H</linktopdf><linktohtml>$$Uhttps://www.jstor.org/stable/23499340$$EHTML$$P50$$Gjstor$$H</linktohtml><link.rule.ids>315,782,786,805,12855,31008,58026,58259</link.rule.ids><backlink>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/15038587$$D View this record in MEDLINE/PubMed$$Hfree_for_read</backlink></links><search><creatorcontrib>Hossain, M. Shahadat</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Salam, Mohammad A.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Rabbani, Golam H.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Kabir, Iqbal</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Biswas, Rabi</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Mahalanabis, Dilip</creatorcontrib><title>Rice-ORS versus Glucose-ORS in Management of Severe Cholera Due to Vibrio cholerae O139 Bengal: A Randomized, Controlled Clinical Trial</title><title>Journal of health, population and nutrition</title><addtitle>J Health Popul Nutr</addtitle><description>This study examined the comparative efficacies of rice-based oral rehydration solution (R-ORS) and glucose-based oral rehydration solution (G-ORS) in the management of severe cholera due to Vibrio cholerae O139 Bengal that causes epidemic cholera in many developing countries. Stool culture-proved adult male patients with severe cholera due to V. cholerae O139 Bengal were randomly assigned in a 1:1 ratio to receive either R-ORS or G-ORS after their initial rehydration with intravenous (i.v.) fluid and subsequently four hours of observation. They also received the usual hospital diet and tetracycline capsules (500 mg 6 hourly for three days) immediately after their enrollment in the study. The primary outcomes for observation were stool output during the first 24 hours after intervention and treatment failure as measured by the incidence of re-institution of i.v. fluid after initiation of trial therapy and duration of diarrhoea. Of 113 patients finally included in the study, 57 received R-ORS and 56 G-ORS. The admission characteristics of the two treatment groups were comparable. No significant differences in the first 24 hours of median (inter-quartile range) stool output [179 (67-206) g/kg in R-ORS group vs 193 (80-237) g/kg in G-ORS group; p=0.52], incidences of unscheduled i.v. fluid requirement [21 % (12/57) in R-ORS group vs 25% (14/56) in G-ORS group; p=0.78], and median (inter-quartile range) duration of diarrhoea [32 (24-48) hours in R-ORS group vs 32 (24-56) hours in G-ORS group; p=0.64] were observed. It is concluded that rice-based ORS is effective but not superior to standard glucose-based ORS in the management of adult males with severe cholera due to V. cholerae O139 Bengal.</description><subject>Adolescent</subject><subject>Adult</subject><subject>Anti-Bacterial Agents - therapeutic use</subject><subject>Body weight</subject><subject>Cholera</subject><subject>Cholera - etiology</subject><subject>Cholera - pathology</subject><subject>Cholera - therapy</subject><subject>Cholera toxin</subject><subject>Clinical trials</subject><subject>Dehydration</subject><subject>Dehydration (Physiology)</subject><subject>Developing countries</subject><subject>Diarrhea</subject><subject>Epidemics</subject><subject>Feces - microbiology</subject><subject>Fluid Therapy - classification</subject><subject>Fluid Therapy - methods</subject><subject>Glucose - administration & dosage</subject><subject>Humans</subject><subject>LDCs</subject><subject>Male</subject><subject>Medical treatment failures</subject><subject>Middle Aged</subject><subject>Operating rooms</subject><subject>Oral rehydration</subject><subject>Oryza</subject><subject>Random allocation</subject><subject>Rice</subject><subject>Tetracycline - therapeutic use</subject><subject>Therapy</subject><subject>Treatment Outcome</subject><subject>Vibrio cholerae</subject><subject>Vibrio cholerae O139 - isolation & purification</subject><subject>Vibrio cholerae O139 - pathogenicity</subject><issn>1606-0997</issn><issn>2072-1315</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2003</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>EIF</sourceid><sourceid>7QJ</sourceid><sourceid>8G5</sourceid><sourceid>ABUWG</sourceid><sourceid>AFKRA</sourceid><sourceid>AZQEC</sourceid><sourceid>BENPR</sourceid><sourceid>CCPQU</sourceid><sourceid>DWQXO</sourceid><sourceid>GNUQQ</sourceid><sourceid>GUQSH</sourceid><sourceid>M2O</sourceid><recordid>eNptkl1rFDEUhgex2LX6E5SgUCg4ko_5SLxbx9oWKgu7i7dDJnNmN0smqUlG1D_g3zZlqrgiuQi8ed5z8p7kUbaguKY5YaR8nC1IhascC1GfZk9DOGBMBeb0SXZKSsx4yetF9nOtFeSr9QZ9BR-mgK7MpFyYJW3RJ2nlDkawEbkBbSBRgJq9M-Al-jABig591p3XDqlZBbQiTKD3YHfSvENLtJa2d6P-Af0b1DgbvTMGetQYbbWSBm29luZZdjJIE-D5w36WbT9ebpvr_HZ1ddMsb_Md4zzmjFS05AWTYpBY9LyUVVmRquygVpQqRgoBSglVUzHUlCtOu1rwqig71mPK2Fl2Ppe98-7LBCG2ow4KjJEW3BTampSVSMYEvvoHPLjJ23S1lqYxCpZGm6DXM5SSQqvt4KKX6r5iu6SEkvQU5L7n2_9QafUwauUsDDrpR4aLI0NiInyLOzmF0N5s1sfs-V_sHqSJ--DMFLWz4Rh8-RBo6kbo2zuvR-m_t7-_QgJezMAhROf_nFNWpLQFZr8A8-Wz9w</recordid><startdate>20031201</startdate><enddate>20031201</enddate><creator>Hossain, M. Shahadat</creator><creator>Salam, Mohammad A.</creator><creator>Rabbani, Golam H.</creator><creator>Kabir, Iqbal</creator><creator>Biswas, Rabi</creator><creator>Mahalanabis, Dilip</creator><general>ICDDR,B: Centre for Health and Population Research</general><general>BioMed Central Ltd</general><general>BioMed Central</general><scope>CGR</scope><scope>CUY</scope><scope>CVF</scope><scope>ECM</scope><scope>EIF</scope><scope>NPM</scope><scope>ISR</scope><scope>0-V</scope><scope>3V.</scope><scope>7QJ</scope><scope>7QL</scope><scope>7RQ</scope><scope>7RV</scope><scope>7U9</scope><scope>7X7</scope><scope>7XB</scope><scope>88E</scope><scope>88I</scope><scope>88J</scope><scope>8C1</scope><scope>8FI</scope><scope>8FJ</scope><scope>8FK</scope><scope>8G5</scope><scope>ABUWG</scope><scope>AFKRA</scope><scope>ALSLI</scope><scope>AZQEC</scope><scope>BENPR</scope><scope>C1K</scope><scope>CCPQU</scope><scope>DWQXO</scope><scope>FYUFA</scope><scope>GHDGH</scope><scope>GNUQQ</scope><scope>GUQSH</scope><scope>H94</scope><scope>HEHIP</scope><scope>K9.</scope><scope>KB0</scope><scope>M0S</scope><scope>M1P</scope><scope>M2O</scope><scope>M2R</scope><scope>M2S</scope><scope>M7N</scope><scope>MBDVC</scope><scope>NAPCQ</scope><scope>PIMPY</scope><scope>PQEST</scope><scope>PQQKQ</scope><scope>PQUKI</scope><scope>Q9U</scope><scope>7X8</scope></search><sort><creationdate>20031201</creationdate><title>Rice-ORS versus Glucose-ORS in Management of Severe Cholera Due to Vibrio cholerae O139 Bengal: A Randomized, Controlled Clinical Trial</title><author>Hossain, M. Shahadat ; Salam, Mohammad A. ; Rabbani, Golam H. ; Kabir, Iqbal ; Biswas, Rabi ; Mahalanabis, Dilip</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-g388t-31625843a9fa09d85a656165be7c22c3149ecc9c729f728c82b798645b3d0233</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2003</creationdate><topic>Adolescent</topic><topic>Adult</topic><topic>Anti-Bacterial Agents - therapeutic use</topic><topic>Body weight</topic><topic>Cholera</topic><topic>Cholera - etiology</topic><topic>Cholera - pathology</topic><topic>Cholera - therapy</topic><topic>Cholera toxin</topic><topic>Clinical trials</topic><topic>Dehydration</topic><topic>Dehydration (Physiology)</topic><topic>Developing countries</topic><topic>Diarrhea</topic><topic>Epidemics</topic><topic>Feces - microbiology</topic><topic>Fluid Therapy - classification</topic><topic>Fluid Therapy - methods</topic><topic>Glucose - administration & dosage</topic><topic>Humans</topic><topic>LDCs</topic><topic>Male</topic><topic>Medical treatment failures</topic><topic>Middle Aged</topic><topic>Operating rooms</topic><topic>Oral rehydration</topic><topic>Oryza</topic><topic>Random allocation</topic><topic>Rice</topic><topic>Tetracycline - therapeutic use</topic><topic>Therapy</topic><topic>Treatment Outcome</topic><topic>Vibrio cholerae</topic><topic>Vibrio cholerae O139 - isolation & purification</topic><topic>Vibrio cholerae O139 - pathogenicity</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Hossain, M. Shahadat</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Salam, Mohammad A.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Rabbani, Golam H.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Kabir, Iqbal</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Biswas, Rabi</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Mahalanabis, Dilip</creatorcontrib><collection>Medline</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE (Ovid)</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>PubMed</collection><collection>Gale In Context: Science</collection><collection>ProQuest Social Sciences Premium Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Corporate)</collection><collection>Applied Social Sciences Index & Abstracts (ASSIA)</collection><collection>Bacteriology Abstracts (Microbiology B)</collection><collection>Career & Technical Education Database</collection><collection>Nursing & Allied Health Database</collection><collection>Virology and AIDS Abstracts</collection><collection>Health & Medical Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (purchase pre-March 2016)</collection><collection>Medical Database (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>Science Database (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>Social Science Database (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>Public Health Database</collection><collection>Hospital Premium Collection</collection><collection>Hospital Premium Collection (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Alumni) (purchase pre-March 2016)</collection><collection>Research Library (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central UK/Ireland</collection><collection>Social Science Premium Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Essentials</collection><collection>ProQuest Central</collection><collection>Environmental Sciences and Pollution Management</collection><collection>ProQuest One Community College</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Korea</collection><collection>Health Research Premium Collection</collection><collection>Health Research Premium Collection (Alumni)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Student</collection><collection>Research Library Prep</collection><collection>AIDS and Cancer Research Abstracts</collection><collection>Sociology Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Health & Medical Complete (Alumni)</collection><collection>Nursing & Allied Health Database (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>Health & Medical Collection (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>Medical Database</collection><collection>Research Library</collection><collection>Social Science Database</collection><collection>Sociology Database</collection><collection>Algology Mycology and Protozoology Abstracts (Microbiology C)</collection><collection>Research Library (Corporate)</collection><collection>Nursing & Allied Health Premium</collection><collection>Access via ProQuest (Open Access)</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic Eastern Edition (DO NOT USE)</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic UKI Edition</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Basic</collection><collection>MEDLINE - Academic</collection><jtitle>Journal of health, population and nutrition</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Hossain, M. Shahadat</au><au>Salam, Mohammad A.</au><au>Rabbani, Golam H.</au><au>Kabir, Iqbal</au><au>Biswas, Rabi</au><au>Mahalanabis, Dilip</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Rice-ORS versus Glucose-ORS in Management of Severe Cholera Due to Vibrio cholerae O139 Bengal: A Randomized, Controlled Clinical Trial</atitle><jtitle>Journal of health, population and nutrition</jtitle><addtitle>J Health Popul Nutr</addtitle><date>2003-12-01</date><risdate>2003</risdate><volume>21</volume><issue>4</issue><spage>325</spage><epage>331</epage><pages>325-331</pages><issn>1606-0997</issn><eissn>2072-1315</eissn><abstract>This study examined the comparative efficacies of rice-based oral rehydration solution (R-ORS) and glucose-based oral rehydration solution (G-ORS) in the management of severe cholera due to Vibrio cholerae O139 Bengal that causes epidemic cholera in many developing countries. Stool culture-proved adult male patients with severe cholera due to V. cholerae O139 Bengal were randomly assigned in a 1:1 ratio to receive either R-ORS or G-ORS after their initial rehydration with intravenous (i.v.) fluid and subsequently four hours of observation. They also received the usual hospital diet and tetracycline capsules (500 mg 6 hourly for three days) immediately after their enrollment in the study. The primary outcomes for observation were stool output during the first 24 hours after intervention and treatment failure as measured by the incidence of re-institution of i.v. fluid after initiation of trial therapy and duration of diarrhoea. Of 113 patients finally included in the study, 57 received R-ORS and 56 G-ORS. The admission characteristics of the two treatment groups were comparable. No significant differences in the first 24 hours of median (inter-quartile range) stool output [179 (67-206) g/kg in R-ORS group vs 193 (80-237) g/kg in G-ORS group; p=0.52], incidences of unscheduled i.v. fluid requirement [21 % (12/57) in R-ORS group vs 25% (14/56) in G-ORS group; p=0.78], and median (inter-quartile range) duration of diarrhoea [32 (24-48) hours in R-ORS group vs 32 (24-56) hours in G-ORS group; p=0.64] were observed. It is concluded that rice-based ORS is effective but not superior to standard glucose-based ORS in the management of adult males with severe cholera due to V. cholerae O139 Bengal.</abstract><cop>Bangladesh</cop><pub>ICDDR,B: Centre for Health and Population Research</pub><pmid>15038587</pmid><tpages>7</tpages><oa>free_for_read</oa></addata></record> |
fulltext | fulltext |
identifier | ISSN: 1606-0997 |
ispartof | Journal of health, population and nutrition, 2003-12, Vol.21 (4), p.325-331 |
issn | 1606-0997 2072-1315 |
language | eng |
recordid | cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_71569728 |
source | Applied Social Sciences Index & Abstracts (ASSIA); JSTOR Archive Collection A-Z Listing; MEDLINE; Elektronische Zeitschriftenbibliothek - Frei zugängliche E-Journals |
subjects | Adolescent Adult Anti-Bacterial Agents - therapeutic use Body weight Cholera Cholera - etiology Cholera - pathology Cholera - therapy Cholera toxin Clinical trials Dehydration Dehydration (Physiology) Developing countries Diarrhea Epidemics Feces - microbiology Fluid Therapy - classification Fluid Therapy - methods Glucose - administration & dosage Humans LDCs Male Medical treatment failures Middle Aged Operating rooms Oral rehydration Oryza Random allocation Rice Tetracycline - therapeutic use Therapy Treatment Outcome Vibrio cholerae Vibrio cholerae O139 - isolation & purification Vibrio cholerae O139 - pathogenicity |
title | Rice-ORS versus Glucose-ORS in Management of Severe Cholera Due to Vibrio cholerae O139 Bengal: A Randomized, Controlled Clinical Trial |
url | https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2024-11-30T21%3A50%3A15IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-gale_proqu&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Rice-ORS%20versus%20Glucose-ORS%20in%20Management%20of%20Severe%20Cholera%20Due%20to%20Vibrio%20cholerae%20O139%20Bengal:%20A%20Randomized,%20Controlled%20Clinical%20Trial&rft.jtitle=Journal%20of%20health,%20population%20and%20nutrition&rft.au=Hossain,%20M.%20Shahadat&rft.date=2003-12-01&rft.volume=21&rft.issue=4&rft.spage=325&rft.epage=331&rft.pages=325-331&rft.issn=1606-0997&rft.eissn=2072-1315&rft_id=info:doi/&rft_dat=%3Cgale_proqu%3EA212107213%3C/gale_proqu%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=202993606&rft_id=info:pmid/15038587&rft_galeid=A212107213&rft_jstor_id=23499340&rfr_iscdi=true |