MedElevator Войти в исследования
← Поиск публикаций

DOI 10.1017/s0022215107001600

Медицинская библиотека · The Journal of laryngology and otology · 2008

Long-term effectiveness of antiseptic cream for recurrent epistaxis in childhood: five-year follow up of a randomised, controlled trial.

Robertson S, Kubba H

СтатьяРандомизированное исследованиеПеревод в очереди

Аннотация

OBJECTIVES

To determine the long-term outcome for children treated for recurrent epistaxis, and to compare the efficacy of antiseptic cream treatment and nasal cautery.

STUDY DESIGN AND

PARTICIPANTS

Retrospective analytical cohort study of 88 children treated for recurrent epistaxis in 2001.

METHODS

Five-year data on chlorhexidine-neomycin cream usage, nasal cautery, current epistaxis frequency and emergency room attendance was collected by telephone interview and case record review.

RESULTS

During their first clinic visit, 51 per cent of the children had been treated with cautery and cream and 35 per cent with cream alone; 14 per cent had received no treatment. Five years later, 65 per cent of these children were still having ongoing epistaxis. Those who had undergone cautery and received cream had the highest ongoing bleeding rate (77 per cent).

CONCLUSION

The majority of children treated at our clinic for recurrent epistaxis had ongoing bleeding five years later. Despite the proven short-term efficacy of chlorhexidine-neomycin cream, few patients receive further courses of cream or are referred back to the clinic.

Для цитирования: Robertson S, Kubba H. Long-term effectiveness of antiseptic cream for recurrent epistaxis in childhood: five-year follow up of a randomised, controlled trial.. The Journal of laryngology and otology. 2008. DOI: 10.1017/s0022215107001600.

Предметные рубрики MeSH

Подготовка и перевод публикации
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…

История · было → стало

Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.

Тип публикации указан по данным источника. Уровень доказательности автоматически не присваивается.