Evidence-Based Evaluation and Selection of Essential Medicine for Township Health Centre in China: 8.acute Gastroenteritis

WANG Ying-qiang,LI Hong-hao,LI You-ping,LI Cui-cui,YANG Zong-xia,YANG Xiao-yan,SHEN Jian-tong,LI Xiao,WANG Li,LI Xiang-lian

DOI: https://doi.org/10.3969/j.issn.1672-2531.2012.08.009

2012-01-01

Abstract:Objective To evaluate and select essential medicine for acute gastroenteritis using evidence-based approaches based on the burden of disease for township health centers located in eastern,central and western regions of China.Methods By means of the approaches,criteria,and workflow set up in the second article of this series,we referred to the recommendations of evidence-based or authority guidelines from inside and outside China,collected relevant evidence from domestic clinical studies,and recommended essential medicine based on evidence-based evaluation.Data were analyzed by Review Manager(RevMan) 5.1 and GRADE profiler 3.6 to evaluate quality of evidence.Results (1) Five guidelines were included,two of which were evidence-based.(2) Recommended medicines included eight antidiarrheals(of four classes) and three antemetics.(3) According to WHOEML(2011),NEML(2009),CNF(2010),other guidelines and the quantity and quality of evidence,we offered a weak recommendation for ondansetron,metoclopramide,smectite,racecadotril and loperamide applied in the treatment of acute gastroenteritis.We made a recommendation against antibiotics,dexamethasone,kaolin-pectin,activated charcoal,attapulgite and bismuth subsalicylate.(4) Evidence from domestic studies: a result of 14 CCTs(n=1 635,low quality) indicated that in the significant efficiency and total efficiency,smectite(smecta) was superior to routine liquid infusion,norfloxacin,gentamicin or furaxone.Among these 14 CCTs,two CCTs reported smectite(smecta) caused nausea and vomiting(three cases);one CCT reported pain and distention in the abdomen(one case) and general discomfort(one case);and the rest reported no adverse reaction.A result of 10 CCTs(n=1 017,low quality) indicated that for acute diarrhea,racecadotril was superior to routine treatment in the significant efficiency(OR=2.55,95%CI 1.64 to 3.94,P0.01) and total efficiency(OR=4.32,95%CI 2.96 to 6.30,P0.01).A result of two CCTs(n=344,low quality) indicated that racecadotril was superior to smectite in the total efficiency in treating acute diarrhea.A result of two CCTs(n=1 056,low quality) indicated that racecadotril was superior to routine treatment in the total efficiency in treating acute adult diarrhea(OR=5.19,95%CI 3.54 to 7.63,P0.01).A result of two CCTs(n=182,low quality) reported children presented with nausea(two cases).A result of one CCT(n=947,low quality) reported adults presented with constipation(fifteen cases),anorexia(four cases),headache(nine cases) and abdominal pain(one case).Conclusion For acute gastroentitis,we offer a weak recommendation for smectite(powder,for oral use) used in adults(once 3 g,tid.,mixed with warm water before intake),child under one year of age(3 g daily,bid.),and child above one year of age(once 3 g,qd.or bid.).Retention enema could be appiled to children with acute gastroenteritis.We also offer a weak recommendation for racecadotril(capsule) used in adults(one capsule,tid.,taken continuously less than seven days).Due to the lack of evidence from clinical trials,we make a recommendation against racecadotril applied to women with pregnancy and lactation or children.In order to produce high-quality local evidence,we propose that(1) Further clinical studies should be standardized in diagnosis and criteria.(2) The design and implementation quality of clinical studies should be improved.(3) Original studies on pharmacoeconomic studies and drug applicability are needed.