接受结核病预防治疗的儿童对左氧氟沙星分散片和非分散片制剂的接受度

D. Wademan, H. R. Draper, S. Purchase, M. Palmer, A. Hesseling, L. E. van der Laan, A. Garcia-Prats
{"title":"接受结核病预防治疗的儿童对左氧氟沙星分散片和非分散片制剂的接受度","authors":"D. Wademan, H. R. Draper, S. Purchase, M. Palmer, A. Hesseling, L. E. van der Laan, A. Garcia-Prats","doi":"10.5588/ijtldopen.23.0462","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"BACKGROUNDWe evaluated the palatability and acceptability of a 100 mg dispersible and a non-dispersible 250 mg levofloxacin (LVX) tablet formulation in children.METHODSPerform was a randomised,\n open-label, cross-over trial of the relative bioavailability of LVX dispersible vs. crushed non-dispersible tablets in children aged <6 years routinely receiving TB preventive treatment. Children and caregivers completed Likert- and ranking-type measures on the acceptability of both formulations.\n We used summary, comparative and ranking statistics to characterise formulation acceptability.RESULTSA total of 25 children were enrolled (median age: 2.6 years, IQR 1.6–4.0). Caregivers reported frequent challenges with preventive\n therapy in routine care prior to study entry, including taste of tablets (n = 14, 56%), vomiting/spitting out medicines (n = 11, 44%), and children refusing medicines (n = 10, 40%). Caregivers reported that the dispersible formulation was easier for their child to take\n than the non-dispersible formulation (P = 0.0253). Mean ranks for caregiver’s formulation preferences (dispersible tablets: 1.48, SD ±0.71; non-dispersible tablets: 2.12, SD ±0.67; routinely available formulations: 2.40 SD ±0.82) differed significantly (Friedman’s\n F 11.120; P < 0.0038); post-hoc testing showed dispersible tablets were preferred over non-dispersible (P = 0.018) and routinely available LVX formulations (P < 0.001).CONCLUSIONSThe dispersible LVX 100\n mg tablet formulation was preferred and should be prioritised for integration into routine care.","PeriodicalId":516613,"journal":{"name":"IJTLD OPEN","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-02-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Acceptability of levofloxacin dispersible and non-dispersible tablet formulations in children receiving TB preventive treatment\",\"authors\":\"D. Wademan, H. R. Draper, S. Purchase, M. Palmer, A. Hesseling, L. E. van der Laan, A. Garcia-Prats\",\"doi\":\"10.5588/ijtldopen.23.0462\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"BACKGROUNDWe evaluated the palatability and acceptability of a 100 mg dispersible and a non-dispersible 250 mg levofloxacin (LVX) tablet formulation in children.METHODSPerform was a randomised,\\n open-label, cross-over trial of the relative bioavailability of LVX dispersible vs. crushed non-dispersible tablets in children aged <6 years routinely receiving TB preventive treatment. Children and caregivers completed Likert- and ranking-type measures on the acceptability of both formulations.\\n We used summary, comparative and ranking statistics to characterise formulation acceptability.RESULTSA total of 25 children were enrolled (median age: 2.6 years, IQR 1.6–4.0). Caregivers reported frequent challenges with preventive\\n therapy in routine care prior to study entry, including taste of tablets (n = 14, 56%), vomiting/spitting out medicines (n = 11, 44%), and children refusing medicines (n = 10, 40%). Caregivers reported that the dispersible formulation was easier for their child to take\\n than the non-dispersible formulation (P = 0.0253). Mean ranks for caregiver’s formulation preferences (dispersible tablets: 1.48, SD ±0.71; non-dispersible tablets: 2.12, SD ±0.67; routinely available formulations: 2.40 SD ±0.82) differed significantly (Friedman’s\\n F 11.120; P < 0.0038); post-hoc testing showed dispersible tablets were preferred over non-dispersible (P = 0.018) and routinely available LVX formulations (P < 0.001).CONCLUSIONSThe dispersible LVX 100\\n mg tablet formulation was preferred and should be prioritised for integration into routine care.\",\"PeriodicalId\":516613,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"IJTLD OPEN\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-02-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"IJTLD OPEN\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.5588/ijtldopen.23.0462\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"IJTLD OPEN","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.5588/ijtldopen.23.0462","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

背景我们评估了100 mg左氧氟沙星分散片和250 mg左氧氟沙星(LVX)非分散片在儿童中的适口性和可接受性。方法这是一项随机、开放标签、交叉试验,研究了LVX分散片与压碎的非分散片在接受结核病预防治疗的6岁以下儿童中的相对生物利用度。儿童和看护人就两种制剂的可接受性完成了李克特和等级测量。结果共有 25 名儿童(中位年龄:2.6 岁,IQR 1.6-4.0)参加了研究。护理人员表示,在研究开始前的日常护理中,预防性治疗经常遇到困难,包括药片的味道(14 人,56%)、呕吐/吐药(11 人,44%)和儿童拒药(10 人,40%)。护理人员表示,分散制剂比非分散制剂更容易让孩子服用(P = 0.0253)。护理人员对药物剂型偏好的平均值(分散片:1.48,标度±0.05;非分散片:1.48,标度±0.05:1.48,SD ±0.71;非分散片:2.12,SD ±0.67;常规配方:结论:分散型 LVX 100 毫克片剂是首选,应优先纳入常规护理。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Acceptability of levofloxacin dispersible and non-dispersible tablet formulations in children receiving TB preventive treatment
BACKGROUNDWe evaluated the palatability and acceptability of a 100 mg dispersible and a non-dispersible 250 mg levofloxacin (LVX) tablet formulation in children.METHODSPerform was a randomised, open-label, cross-over trial of the relative bioavailability of LVX dispersible vs. crushed non-dispersible tablets in children aged <6 years routinely receiving TB preventive treatment. Children and caregivers completed Likert- and ranking-type measures on the acceptability of both formulations. We used summary, comparative and ranking statistics to characterise formulation acceptability.RESULTSA total of 25 children were enrolled (median age: 2.6 years, IQR 1.6–4.0). Caregivers reported frequent challenges with preventive therapy in routine care prior to study entry, including taste of tablets (n = 14, 56%), vomiting/spitting out medicines (n = 11, 44%), and children refusing medicines (n = 10, 40%). Caregivers reported that the dispersible formulation was easier for their child to take than the non-dispersible formulation (P = 0.0253). Mean ranks for caregiver’s formulation preferences (dispersible tablets: 1.48, SD ±0.71; non-dispersible tablets: 2.12, SD ±0.67; routinely available formulations: 2.40 SD ±0.82) differed significantly (Friedman’s F 11.120; P < 0.0038); post-hoc testing showed dispersible tablets were preferred over non-dispersible (P = 0.018) and routinely available LVX formulations (P < 0.001).CONCLUSIONSThe dispersible LVX 100 mg tablet formulation was preferred and should be prioritised for integration into routine care.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信