Antimicrobial drug suspensions: a blinded comparison of taste of twelve common pediatric drugs including cefixime, cefpodoxime, cefprozil and loracarbef
We conducted a blinded taste test evaluating 12 antimicrobial suspensions by smell, texture, taste, aftertaste and overall acceptance. Drugs received cumulative scores in each category as well as a total score ranking. Overall Lorabid® scored highest but not significantly higher than Keflex®, Suprax...
Gespeichert in:
| Veröffentlicht in: | The Pediatric infectious disease journal 1994-02, Vol.13 (2), p.87-89 |
|---|---|
| Hauptverfasser: | , , |
| Format: | Artikel |
| Sprache: | eng |
| Schlagworte: | |
| Online-Zugang: | Volltext |
| Tags: |
Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
|
| container_end_page | 89 |
|---|---|
| container_issue | 2 |
| container_start_page | 87 |
| container_title | The Pediatric infectious disease journal |
| container_volume | 13 |
| creator | DEMERS, DENISE M CHAN, DEBORA SCHOTIK BASS, JAMES W |
| description | We conducted a blinded taste test evaluating 12 antimicrobial suspensions by smell, texture, taste, aftertaste and overall acceptance. Drugs received cumulative scores in each category as well as a total score ranking. Overall Lorabid® scored highest but not significantly higher than Keflex®, Suprax® and Ceclor®, all of which scored higher than the other test drugs. Cefzil® and Augmentin® scored just below this group of drugs and higher than all other test drugs. Vantin® was inferior to these drugs primarily because of its low score in aftertaste. It was ranked along with V-Cillin-K®, Veetids®, Sulfatrim® and Pediazole®, the lowest scoring group of drugs other than Dynapen® which scored lower than all other test drugs. No difference overall was detected between the two penicillin VK suspensions evaluated, V-Cillin-K® and Veetids®. |
| doi_str_mv | 10.1097/00006454-199402000-00001 |
| format | Article |
| fullrecord | <record><control><sourceid>proquest_cross</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_76509330</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><sourcerecordid>76509330</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c2441-dca277252c71a22526c28ff9567559880dda719fe231ecc883ef029e26e9b2563</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNp1ksuOFSEQhonRjMfRRzBhYVxNK5emG9xNJo5jMokbXXdoKGZQGlro9jg-iY8r5-JxJZui6v-qIPwghCl5Q4nq35K6ula0DVWqJaxmza5EH6ENFZw1RMn-MdoQqWjDu04-Rc9K-VoJ3lJyhs4kVUSIboN-X8bFT97kNHodsM3rHS5rmSEWn2J5hzUeg48WLDZpmnX2JUWcHF50WWC_2UL4ATt1qsoM1usle7MfVbCPJqzWxztswPmffoKL3W5ONv1LcvrlA9bR4pCyNjqP4J6jJ06HAi-O8Rx9uX7_-eqmuf304ePV5W1jWNvSxhrN-p4JZnqqWY2dYdI5JbpeCCUlsVb3VDlgnIIxUnJwhClgHaiRiY6fo9eHufUW31coyzD5YiAEHSGtZeg7QRTnpILyANa3KiWDG-bsJ50fBkqGnSnDX1OGkyn7Eq2tL49nrOME9tR4dKHqr466LkYHl3U0vpwwrhRTVFasPWDbFBbI5VtYt5CHe9BhuR_-9yX4H3DCppA</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>76509330</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Antimicrobial drug suspensions: a blinded comparison of taste of twelve common pediatric drugs including cefixime, cefpodoxime, cefprozil and loracarbef</title><source>MEDLINE</source><source>Journals@Ovid Complete</source><creator>DEMERS, DENISE M ; CHAN, DEBORA SCHOTIK ; BASS, JAMES W</creator><creatorcontrib>DEMERS, DENISE M ; CHAN, DEBORA SCHOTIK ; BASS, JAMES W</creatorcontrib><description>We conducted a blinded taste test evaluating 12 antimicrobial suspensions by smell, texture, taste, aftertaste and overall acceptance. Drugs received cumulative scores in each category as well as a total score ranking. Overall Lorabid® scored highest but not significantly higher than Keflex®, Suprax® and Ceclor®, all of which scored higher than the other test drugs. Cefzil® and Augmentin® scored just below this group of drugs and higher than all other test drugs. Vantin® was inferior to these drugs primarily because of its low score in aftertaste. It was ranked along with V-Cillin-K®, Veetids®, Sulfatrim® and Pediazole®, the lowest scoring group of drugs other than Dynapen® which scored lower than all other test drugs. No difference overall was detected between the two penicillin VK suspensions evaluated, V-Cillin-K® and Veetids®.</description><identifier>ISSN: 0891-3668</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1532-0987</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1097/00006454-199402000-00001</identifier><identifier>PMID: 8190556</identifier><identifier>CODEN: PIDJEV</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>Baltimore, MD: Williams & Wilkins</publisher><subject>Analysis of Variance ; Anti-Bacterial Agents ; Anti-Infective Agents ; Antibacterial agents ; Antibiotics. Antiinfectious agents. Antiparasitic agents ; Biological and medical sciences ; Cefixime ; Cefotaxime - analogs & derivatives ; Cefpodoxime ; Cefprozil ; Ceftizoxime - analogs & derivatives ; Cephalosporins ; Child ; Child, Preschool ; Drug Combinations ; Humans ; Infant ; Medical sciences ; Pharmacology. Drug treatments ; Single-Blind Method ; Smell ; Suspensions ; Taste</subject><ispartof>The Pediatric infectious disease journal, 1994-02, Vol.13 (2), p.87-89</ispartof><rights>Williams & Wilkins 1994. All Rights Reserved.</rights><rights>1994 INIST-CNRS</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><link.rule.ids>314,780,784,27924,27925</link.rule.ids><backlink>$$Uhttp://pascal-francis.inist.fr/vibad/index.php?action=getRecordDetail&idt=3992918$$DView record in Pascal Francis$$Hfree_for_read</backlink><backlink>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/8190556$$D View this record in MEDLINE/PubMed$$Hfree_for_read</backlink></links><search><creatorcontrib>DEMERS, DENISE M</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>CHAN, DEBORA SCHOTIK</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>BASS, JAMES W</creatorcontrib><title>Antimicrobial drug suspensions: a blinded comparison of taste of twelve common pediatric drugs including cefixime, cefpodoxime, cefprozil and loracarbef</title><title>The Pediatric infectious disease journal</title><addtitle>Pediatr Infect Dis J</addtitle><description>We conducted a blinded taste test evaluating 12 antimicrobial suspensions by smell, texture, taste, aftertaste and overall acceptance. Drugs received cumulative scores in each category as well as a total score ranking. Overall Lorabid® scored highest but not significantly higher than Keflex®, Suprax® and Ceclor®, all of which scored higher than the other test drugs. Cefzil® and Augmentin® scored just below this group of drugs and higher than all other test drugs. Vantin® was inferior to these drugs primarily because of its low score in aftertaste. It was ranked along with V-Cillin-K®, Veetids®, Sulfatrim® and Pediazole®, the lowest scoring group of drugs other than Dynapen® which scored lower than all other test drugs. No difference overall was detected between the two penicillin VK suspensions evaluated, V-Cillin-K® and Veetids®.</description><subject>Analysis of Variance</subject><subject>Anti-Bacterial Agents</subject><subject>Anti-Infective Agents</subject><subject>Antibacterial agents</subject><subject>Antibiotics. Antiinfectious agents. Antiparasitic agents</subject><subject>Biological and medical sciences</subject><subject>Cefixime</subject><subject>Cefotaxime - analogs & derivatives</subject><subject>Cefpodoxime</subject><subject>Cefprozil</subject><subject>Ceftizoxime - analogs & derivatives</subject><subject>Cephalosporins</subject><subject>Child</subject><subject>Child, Preschool</subject><subject>Drug Combinations</subject><subject>Humans</subject><subject>Infant</subject><subject>Medical sciences</subject><subject>Pharmacology. Drug treatments</subject><subject>Single-Blind Method</subject><subject>Smell</subject><subject>Suspensions</subject><subject>Taste</subject><issn>0891-3668</issn><issn>1532-0987</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>1994</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>EIF</sourceid><recordid>eNp1ksuOFSEQhonRjMfRRzBhYVxNK5emG9xNJo5jMokbXXdoKGZQGlro9jg-iY8r5-JxJZui6v-qIPwghCl5Q4nq35K6ula0DVWqJaxmza5EH6ENFZw1RMn-MdoQqWjDu04-Rc9K-VoJ3lJyhs4kVUSIboN-X8bFT97kNHodsM3rHS5rmSEWn2J5hzUeg48WLDZpmnX2JUWcHF50WWC_2UL4ATt1qsoM1usle7MfVbCPJqzWxztswPmffoKL3W5ONv1LcvrlA9bR4pCyNjqP4J6jJ06HAi-O8Rx9uX7_-eqmuf304ePV5W1jWNvSxhrN-p4JZnqqWY2dYdI5JbpeCCUlsVb3VDlgnIIxUnJwhClgHaiRiY6fo9eHufUW31coyzD5YiAEHSGtZeg7QRTnpILyANa3KiWDG-bsJ50fBkqGnSnDX1OGkyn7Eq2tL49nrOME9tR4dKHqr466LkYHl3U0vpwwrhRTVFasPWDbFBbI5VtYt5CHe9BhuR_-9yX4H3DCppA</recordid><startdate>199402</startdate><enddate>199402</enddate><creator>DEMERS, DENISE M</creator><creator>CHAN, DEBORA SCHOTIK</creator><creator>BASS, JAMES W</creator><general>Williams & Wilkins</general><general>Lippincott</general><scope>IQODW</scope><scope>CGR</scope><scope>CUY</scope><scope>CVF</scope><scope>ECM</scope><scope>EIF</scope><scope>NPM</scope><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>7X8</scope></search><sort><creationdate>199402</creationdate><title>Antimicrobial drug suspensions: a blinded comparison of taste of twelve common pediatric drugs including cefixime, cefpodoxime, cefprozil and loracarbef</title><author>DEMERS, DENISE M ; CHAN, DEBORA SCHOTIK ; BASS, JAMES W</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c2441-dca277252c71a22526c28ff9567559880dda719fe231ecc883ef029e26e9b2563</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>1994</creationdate><topic>Analysis of Variance</topic><topic>Anti-Bacterial Agents</topic><topic>Anti-Infective Agents</topic><topic>Antibacterial agents</topic><topic>Antibiotics. Antiinfectious agents. Antiparasitic agents</topic><topic>Biological and medical sciences</topic><topic>Cefixime</topic><topic>Cefotaxime - analogs & derivatives</topic><topic>Cefpodoxime</topic><topic>Cefprozil</topic><topic>Ceftizoxime - analogs & derivatives</topic><topic>Cephalosporins</topic><topic>Child</topic><topic>Child, Preschool</topic><topic>Drug Combinations</topic><topic>Humans</topic><topic>Infant</topic><topic>Medical sciences</topic><topic>Pharmacology. Drug treatments</topic><topic>Single-Blind Method</topic><topic>Smell</topic><topic>Suspensions</topic><topic>Taste</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>DEMERS, DENISE M</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>CHAN, DEBORA SCHOTIK</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>BASS, JAMES W</creatorcontrib><collection>Pascal-Francis</collection><collection>Medline</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE (Ovid)</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>PubMed</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>MEDLINE - Academic</collection><jtitle>The Pediatric infectious disease journal</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>DEMERS, DENISE M</au><au>CHAN, DEBORA SCHOTIK</au><au>BASS, JAMES W</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Antimicrobial drug suspensions: a blinded comparison of taste of twelve common pediatric drugs including cefixime, cefpodoxime, cefprozil and loracarbef</atitle><jtitle>The Pediatric infectious disease journal</jtitle><addtitle>Pediatr Infect Dis J</addtitle><date>1994-02</date><risdate>1994</risdate><volume>13</volume><issue>2</issue><spage>87</spage><epage>89</epage><pages>87-89</pages><issn>0891-3668</issn><eissn>1532-0987</eissn><coden>PIDJEV</coden><abstract>We conducted a blinded taste test evaluating 12 antimicrobial suspensions by smell, texture, taste, aftertaste and overall acceptance. Drugs received cumulative scores in each category as well as a total score ranking. Overall Lorabid® scored highest but not significantly higher than Keflex®, Suprax® and Ceclor®, all of which scored higher than the other test drugs. Cefzil® and Augmentin® scored just below this group of drugs and higher than all other test drugs. Vantin® was inferior to these drugs primarily because of its low score in aftertaste. It was ranked along with V-Cillin-K®, Veetids®, Sulfatrim® and Pediazole®, the lowest scoring group of drugs other than Dynapen® which scored lower than all other test drugs. No difference overall was detected between the two penicillin VK suspensions evaluated, V-Cillin-K® and Veetids®.</abstract><cop>Baltimore, MD</cop><cop>Philadelphia, PA</cop><cop>Hagerstown, MD</cop><pub>Williams & Wilkins</pub><pmid>8190556</pmid><doi>10.1097/00006454-199402000-00001</doi><tpages>3</tpages></addata></record> |
| fulltext | fulltext |
| identifier | ISSN: 0891-3668 |
| ispartof | The Pediatric infectious disease journal, 1994-02, Vol.13 (2), p.87-89 |
| issn | 0891-3668 1532-0987 |
| language | eng |
| recordid | cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_76509330 |
| source | MEDLINE; Journals@Ovid Complete |
| subjects | Analysis of Variance Anti-Bacterial Agents Anti-Infective Agents Antibacterial agents Antibiotics. Antiinfectious agents. Antiparasitic agents Biological and medical sciences Cefixime Cefotaxime - analogs & derivatives Cefpodoxime Cefprozil Ceftizoxime - analogs & derivatives Cephalosporins Child Child, Preschool Drug Combinations Humans Infant Medical sciences Pharmacology. Drug treatments Single-Blind Method Smell Suspensions Taste |
| title | Antimicrobial drug suspensions: a blinded comparison of taste of twelve common pediatric drugs including cefixime, cefpodoxime, cefprozil and loracarbef |
| url | https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2024-12-28T21%3A41%3A58IST&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=Antimicrobial%20drug%20suspensions:%20a%20blinded%20comparison%20of%20taste%20of%20twelve%20common%20pediatric%20drugs%20including%20cefixime,%20cefpodoxime,%20cefprozil%20and%20loracarbef&rft.jtitle=The%20Pediatric%20infectious%20disease%20journal&rft.au=DEMERS,%20DENISE%20M&rft.date=1994-02&rft.volume=13&rft.issue=2&rft.spage=87&rft.epage=89&rft.pages=87-89&rft.issn=0891-3668&rft.eissn=1532-0987&rft.coden=PIDJEV&rft_id=info:doi/10.1097/00006454-199402000-00001&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_cross%3E76509330%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=76509330&rft_id=info:pmid/8190556&rfr_iscdi=true |