↓ Skip to main content

Treatment duration of febrile urinary tract infection: a pragmatic randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled non-inferiority trial in men and women

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Medicine, April 2017
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 5% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (92nd percentile)
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (69th percentile)

Mentioned by

news
3 news outlets
twitter
21 X users
facebook
1 Facebook page

Citations

dimensions_citation
62 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
146 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Treatment duration of febrile urinary tract infection: a pragmatic randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled non-inferiority trial in men and women
Published in
BMC Medicine, April 2017
DOI 10.1186/s12916-017-0835-3
Pubmed ID
Authors

Cees van Nieuwkoop, Willize E. van der Starre, Janneke E. Stalenhoef, Anna M. van Aartrijk, Tanny J. K. van der Reijden, Albert M. Vollaard, Nathalie M. Delfos, Jan W. van ’t Wout, Jeanet W. Blom, Ida C. Spelt, Eliane M. S. Leyten, Ted Koster, Hans C. Ablij, Martha T. van der Beek, Mirjam J. Knol, Jaap T. van Dissel

Abstract

In adults with febrile urinary tract infection (fUTI), data on optimal treatment duration in patients other than non-pregnant women without comorbidities are lacking. A randomized placebo-controlled, double-blind, non-inferiority trial among 35 primary care centers and 7 emergency departments of regional hospitals in the Netherlands. Women and men aged ≥ 18 years with a diagnosis of fUTI were randomly assigned to receive antibiotic treatment for 7 or 14 days (the second week being ciprofloxacin 500 mg or placebo orally twice daily). Patients indicated to receive antimicrobial treatment for at least 14 days were excluded from randomization. The primary endpoint was the clinical cure rate through the 10- to 18-day post-treatment visit with preset subgroup analysis including sex. Secondary endpoints were bacteriologic cure rate at 10-18 days post-treatment and clinical cure at 70-84 days post-treatment. Of 357 patients included, 200 were eligible for randomization; 97 patients were randomly assigned to 7 days and 103 patients to 14 days of treatment. Overall, short-term clinical cure occurred in 85 (90%) patients treated for 7 days and in 94 (95%) of those treated for 14 days (difference -4.5%; 90% CI, -10.7 to 1.7; P non-inferiority = 0.072, non-inferiority not confirmed). In women, clinical cure was 94% and 93% in those treated for 7 and 14 days, respectively (difference 0.9; 90% CI, -6.9 to 8.7, P non-inferiority = 0.011, non-inferiority confirmed) and, in men, this was 86% versus 98% (difference -11.2; 90% CI -20.6 to -1.8, P superiority = 0.025, inferiority confirmed). The bacteriologic cure rate was 93% versus 97% (difference -4.3%; 90% CI, -9.7 to 1.2, P non-inferiority = 0.041) and the long-term clinical cure rate was 92% versus 91% (difference 1.6%; 90% CI, -5.3 to 8.4; P non-inferiority = 0.005) for 7 days versus 14 days of treatment, respectively. In the subgroups of men and women, long-term clinical cure rates met the criteria for non-inferiority, indicating there was no difference in the need for antibiotic retreatment for UTI during 70-84 days follow-up post-treatment. Women with fUTI can be treated successfully with antibiotics for 7 days. In men, 7 days of antibiotic treatment for fUTI is inferior to 14 days during short-term follow-up but it is non-inferior when looking at longer follow-up. The study was registered at ClinicalTrials.gov [ NCT00809913 ; December 16, 2008] and trialregister.nl [ NTR1583 ; December 19, 2008].

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 21 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 146 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 146 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Other 24 16%
Student > Bachelor 18 12%
Student > Master 14 10%
Researcher 11 8%
Student > Ph. D. Student 10 7%
Other 28 19%
Unknown 41 28%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 64 44%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 11 8%
Nursing and Health Professions 8 5%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 5 3%
Immunology and Microbiology 3 2%
Other 7 5%
Unknown 48 33%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 32. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 19 December 2022.
All research outputs
#1,165,169
of 24,396,012 outputs
Outputs from BMC Medicine
#814
of 3,759 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#23,806
of 312,844 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Medicine
#20
of 63 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 24,396,012 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 95th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 3,759 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 45.1. This one has done well, scoring higher than 78% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 312,844 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 92% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 63 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 69% of its contemporaries.