{"title":"Should we prescribe oral metronidazole or probiotics for acute gastroenteritis in dogs?","authors":"Emily Moore, W. Gordon-Evans","doi":"10.18849/ve.v7i2.393","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"PICO question \nIn dogs with acute gastroenteritis, is metronidazole faster, slower, or comparable in resolving clinical signs when compared to probiotic administration? \n \nClinical bottom line \nCategory of research question \nTreatment \nThe number and type of study designs reviewed \nFive studies total, all were blinded, randomised controlled trials \nStrength of evidence \nModerate \nOutcomes reported \nThe use of probiotics as a treatment for acute, uncomplicated diarrhoea in dogs may improve clinical signs faster when compared to a placebo, but showed no difference when compared directly to metronidazole. Metronidazole, when compared to a placebo, produced mixed results with one study finding that treatment with metronidazole did significantly reduce the time to resolution of diarrhoea, while another study found the difference with placebo was not significant \nConclusion \nBased on the evidence evaluated, the use of oral metronidazole will not decrease time to resolution of clinical signs in cases of acute, uncomplicated diarrhoea in dogs when compared to probiotic administration and thus should not be a first-line treatment in such cases \n \nHow to apply this evidence in practice \nThe application of evidence into practice should take into account multiple factors, not limited to: individual clinical expertise, patient’s circumstances and owners’ values, country, location or clinic where you work, the individual case in front of you, the availability of therapies and resources. \nKnowledge Summaries are a resource to help reinforce or inform decision making. They do not override the responsibility or judgement of the practitioner to do what is best for the animal in their care. \n \n","PeriodicalId":257905,"journal":{"name":"Veterinary Evidence","volume":"187 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2022-05-18","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Veterinary Evidence","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.18849/ve.v7i2.393","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1
Abstract
PICO question
In dogs with acute gastroenteritis, is metronidazole faster, slower, or comparable in resolving clinical signs when compared to probiotic administration?
Clinical bottom line
Category of research question
Treatment
The number and type of study designs reviewed
Five studies total, all were blinded, randomised controlled trials
Strength of evidence
Moderate
Outcomes reported
The use of probiotics as a treatment for acute, uncomplicated diarrhoea in dogs may improve clinical signs faster when compared to a placebo, but showed no difference when compared directly to metronidazole. Metronidazole, when compared to a placebo, produced mixed results with one study finding that treatment with metronidazole did significantly reduce the time to resolution of diarrhoea, while another study found the difference with placebo was not significant
Conclusion
Based on the evidence evaluated, the use of oral metronidazole will not decrease time to resolution of clinical signs in cases of acute, uncomplicated diarrhoea in dogs when compared to probiotic administration and thus should not be a first-line treatment in such cases
How to apply this evidence in practice
The application of evidence into practice should take into account multiple factors, not limited to: individual clinical expertise, patient’s circumstances and owners’ values, country, location or clinic where you work, the individual case in front of you, the availability of therapies and resources.
Knowledge Summaries are a resource to help reinforce or inform decision making. They do not override the responsibility or judgement of the practitioner to do what is best for the animal in their care.