Jump to: Page Content, Site Navigation, Site Search,
You are seeing this message because your web browser does not support basic web standards. Find out more about why this message is appearing and what you can do to make your experience on this site better.
Paul Little a Community Clinical Sciences
(Primary Medical Care Group), University of Southampton, Aldermoor
Health Centre, Southampton SO15 6ST, b Nightingale Surgery, Romsey SO51 7QN, c Three Swans Surgery,
Salisbury SP1 1DX
Correspondence to: P Little psl3{at}soton.ac.uk
| |
Abstract |
|---|
|
|
|---|
Objective:
To compare immediate with delayed
prescribing of antibiotics for acute otitis media.
Otitis media (or, more descriptively, acute red ear) is one
of the commonest acute respiratory conditions managed in primary care,
yet treatment is controversial.1-3 Most children
attending their doctor will be prescribed antibiotics, but evidence
from systematic review suggests that these provide only marginal
benefit.4 There is, however, considerable debate as to the
precise nature and magnitude of benefit from antibiotics. The largest
trial from primary care gave conflicting results5: use of
antibiotics led to one day less of crying and one day less away from
school, suggesting they have important benefits, but there was little difference in analgesic (paracetamol) consumption, which suggests that
the perceived pain and distress may be little affected by antibiotics.
If the duration of illness is reduced when antibiotics are prescribed
the symptomatic benefit and distress in both treated and untreated
children requires further clarification. The benefit of prescribing
antibiotics must also be balanced against the increased likelihood of
side effects such as diarrhoea.4 Furthermore, the effect
of prescribing antibiotics on belief in and expectation for antibiotics
must be quantified: the cycle of prescribing and expectation is likely
to encourage attendance in future episodes, increase pressure on
doctors to prescribe, increase antibiotic use,6-9 and
increase the danger of antibiotic resistance.
3 10
If antibiotics are not to be prescribed initially then what
alternatives exist? Evidence from a cohort of 7000 children from Holland suggests that waiting for 72 hours with symptomatic treatment only is safe,11 but a blanket approach of no treatment may
have dangers: the only child to develop mastoiditis was not given
antibiotics after 72 hours despite remaining unwell.11
Although there are case series describing the acceptability of delayed
prescribing,12 it has not been subject to a randomised
controlled trial. The implications of this approach are unclear for
both doctors and patients, including what effect this might have on
patients' beliefs and expectation for antibiotics.
We therefore conducted an open randomised trial comparing standard
management (immediate antibiotics) with a 72 hour wait and see
policy. To assess efficacy, placebo controlled trials provide the best
evidence. However, to assess the practical implications of prescribing
strategies such as a wait and see approach (for example, collection and
use of prescriptions, satisfaction, belief in antibiotics), open trials
are also important. The main disadvantage of an open trial is the
possibility of a placebo effect favouring antibiotics. This can be
minimised, however, by using a structured management approach: the
doctor is used to support the proposed strategy, thus acting like a
"placebo" in all groups.
Setting
Sample and diagnostic criteria
Design:
Open randomised controlled trial.
Setting:
General practices in south west England.
Participants:
315 children aged between 6 months and
10 years presenting with acute otitis media.
Interventions:
Two treatment strategies, supported by
standardised advice sheets
immediate antibiotics or delayed
antibiotics (antibiotic prescription to be collected at parents'
discretion after 72 hours if child still not improving).
Main outcome measures:
Symptom resolution, absence
from school or nursery, paracetamol consumption.
Results:
On average, symptoms resolved after 3 days. Children prescribed antibiotics immediately had shorter illness (
1.1
days (95% confidence interval
0.54 to
1.48)), fewer nights disturbed (
0.72 (
0.30 to
1.13)), and slightly less paracetamol consumption (
0.52 spoons/day (
0.26 to
0.79)). There was no difference in school absence or pain or distress scores since benefits
of antibiotics occurred mainly after the first 24 hours
when distress
was less severe. Parents of 36/150 of the children given delayed
prescriptions used antibiotics, and 77% were very satisfied. Fewer
children in the delayed group had diarrhoea (14/150 (9%) v
25/135 (19%),
2=5.2, P=0.02). Fewer parents in the
delayed group believed in the effectiveness of antibiotics and in the
need to see the doctor with future episodes.
Conclusion:
Immediate antibiotic prescription provided symptomatic benefit mainly after first 24 hours, when symptoms were
already resolving. For children who are not very unwell systemically, a
wait and see approach seems feasible and acceptable to parents and
should substantially reduce the use of antibiotics for acute otitis media.
![]()
Introduction
Top
Abstract
Introduction
Methods
Results
Discussion
References
![]()
Methods
Top
Abstract
Introduction
Methods
Results
Discussion
References
We contacted 93 general practices in three health
authorities in south west England close to the administrative centre.
Forty two doctors expressed interest and recruited patients for the
study: 26/42 (62%) were from training practices, 25 (60%) managed
their own budgets (fundholders), and 14 (33%) were in mixed urban and
rural (as opposed to urban) practice settings.
The precise diagnostic criteria for acute otitis media
differ according to national perspectives and
specialty.
1 5 13-16
Diagnosis of otitis media is
uncontroversial when florid clinical signs are present (dull drum with
severe inflammation, bulging drum, or perforation with discharge), but
some authorities have advocated pneumatic otoscopy, particularly for
early presentations without florid clinical signs.
13 14
Although the reliability of pneumatic otoscopy is established for
chronic otitis media with effusion,15 a systematic review
of its diagnostic accuracy found no evidence of its validity for acute
otitis media compared with microbiological or virological evidence of
infection, nor its reliability in primary care.15
Furthermore, pneumatic otoscopy is not used routinely in Europe in
diagnosing acute otitis media in primary care, where the vast majority
of cases are managed.
1 5
that is, to inform clinical decision making in everyday practice
our inclusion criteria had to mimic the conditions of practice in Britain, where diagnosis is made on an acute history and
appearances of the tympanic membrane.
1 5
We used similar clinical criteria to those of an earlier trial to facilitate comparison of results.5 Children were eligible for inclusion if they
were aged 6 months to 10 years and attended their doctor with acute otalgia and otoscopic evidence of acute inflammation of the ear drum
(dullness or cloudiness with erythema, bulging, or perforation). To
standardise agreement about physical signs according to recommendations for research in acute otitis media,16 we sent a sheet of
clinical photographs showing examples of each physical sign (degrees of erythema, bulging drum, etc) to each participating doctor. For comparability of results, we used the same photographs as were used in
an earlier trial in primary care.5 When children were too
young for otalgia to be specifically documented from their history
(under 3 years old) then otoscopic evidence alone was a sufficient
entry criterion. To assess the influence of our pragmatic inclusion
criteria (that is, the possible diagnostic imprecision, particularly
when florid clinical signs were absent), we assessed treatment
interaction according to whether florid clinical signs were present
(see below).
Sample size
We calculated samples size (for 80% power and 95%
confidence) using means and standard deviations for the main outcomes
from a previous trial (mean consumption of analgesics in the week after
seeing the doctor, number of days crying, and number of days off
school)5 and to detect a 15% difference in the number of
children better by 72 hours after seeing their doctor. The limiting
factor in the sample size calculation was the number better 72 hours
after seeing the doctor, which required 233 children, or 291 children
in total, allowing for up to 20% loss to follow up.
Intervention
After parents had given written consent, patients were
randomised to a group when their doctor opened a sealed numbered opaque
envelope containing an advice sheet for one of two treatments (see fig
1).
|
Patients were
prescribed amoxicillin syrup, 125 mg in 5 ml, three times daily, 100 ml in total, according to British National Formulary guidelines
for the age range of children included this study, and for exact
comparability with a previous trial.5 The few patients
allergic to penicillin were prescribed erythromycin 125 mg in 5 ml
four times daily for 1 week (since this was a trial of common
prescribing strategies and not of a particular antibiotic).
Delayed treatment with antibiotics
Similar antibiotics were
prescribed, but parents were asked to wait for 72 hours after seeing
the doctor before considering using the prescription. Parents were
instructed that if their child still had substantial otalgia or fever
after the 72 hours or was not starting to get better then they should
come and collect the prescription for antibiotics, which was left at
the practice's reception. Although parents could come earlier, they
were encouraged to try to wait the 72 hours. Parents were also advised
to use the prescription if their child had a discharge for 10 days or more.
Each advice sheet listed several issues that the doctor had to
deal with in the consultation, with suggested wordings. Doctors were
not required to use the wording verbatim, but they were asked to tick
boxes by each statement to signify that they had dealt with that issue
and then return the sheet to the administrative centre. The
standardised advice in the sheets was designed to maximise the support
and placebo effect for each strategy and to ensure some consistency in
the advice given to each group no matter what the personal prescribing
preference of the doctor. Those prescribed immediate antibiotics were
advised that antibiotics could help symptoms settle and may prevent
complications, and the importance of taking the full course was
stressed. Those asked to delay using antibiotics were advised that
antibiotics do not work very well and have disadvantages (side effects
and resistance). For both groups, doctors emphasised the importance of
paracetamol in full doses for relief of pain and fever. If parents
reported that they were already using full doses of paracetamol they
were advised to use ibuprofen as well if the child was over 1 year old.
In both groups parents were asked to return to see their doctor after
three months if they were concerned about their child's hearing.
Outcome measures
Doctor documentation sheet
Doctors were asked to provide
information on days of illness, physical signs, and antibiotic prescription.
Participants were asked
to complete a daily diary of presence of symptoms (earache, unwell, sleep disturbance), perceived severity of pain (from 1 (no pain) to 10 (extreme pain)), number of episodes of distress, number of spoonfuls of
liquid paracetamol used, and temperature (using the tempadot
thermometer17) until children were asymptomatic and had
finished their medication
similar to our previous use of
diaries.6 Within three days of starting, participants were contacted by a research assistant to check that there were no problems
with filling in the diary. Parents were also asked to use a six point
Likert scale (extremely, very, moderately, slightly, not very, not at
all) to answer written questions at the start of treatment about their
worries and their satisfaction and at the end of treatment about
antibiotic use and its perceived efficacy, their intention to consult
their doctor in future, and time taken off work and
school.6 In the minority of cases when we had not received
a diary within two weeks of participants entering the study we
telephoned them: most gave diary information over the telephone (n=66),
but some (n=30) could not be contacted.
As in our previous study,6 we used diary information as
the main outcome measure rather than assessment by an observer to
minimise the intrusive nature of assessment in a pragmatic study where
we wanted to assess perceptions in as realistic an environment as
possible and because patients or their parents are best able to judge
how unwell they are, how much pain they are in, and whether they are
back to normal. We included perceived severity of pain and episodes of
distress and disturbed sleep in the diary after piloting with 20 parents, who emphasised the importance of such outcomes to them.
Validity of outcomes
Likert scales and symptom duration
We have shown the
reliability and validity of the simple Likert scales used in an earlier
study and the validity of information obtained for the minority who
required a telephone reminder.6
We provided 14 consecutive subjects with
preweighed bottles of paracetamol, which we collected at the end of the
study and weighed again. We estimated the validity of reported paracetamol use by comparing diary responses with weighed paracetamol use. There was good agreement between estimated and actual use (rank
correlation r=0.74), although in absolute terms parents slightly overestimated the amount they used (mean difference of estimated from actual=0.3 spoons (SD 0.8) per day). Mean daily paracetamol consumption also showed evidence of construct validity since it correlated with mean pain scores (r=0.54, P<0.01).
Numerical analogue scores, and reported distress
In 17 consecutive children with otitis media there was good
agreement between parents' rating by numerical analogue score and
children's own independent rating using four facial pictures
illustrating level of pain (r=0.74).18 The
validity of the numerical pain score is shown by good correlation of
the mean score with both mean paracetamol consumption
(r=0.54) and mean number of episodes of distress
(r=0.62).19
Statistical analysis
We entered data on an intention to treat basis (based on
patients' randomised group) and analysed it with SPSS.
Most of the outcomes had
small ranges and low average values. Thus, although the data were
skewed, the median and interquartile range provided a poor summary of the differences in group averages and distributions. Instead, we used
the mean and mean differences for group summary statistics. This had
the advantage (compared with the median or geometric mean) of allowing
a direct comparison with the previous major trial in primary
care5 and providing meaningful estimation at a group level
of the benefit of antibiotics (for example, treating 10 children with
antibiotics immediately will save 11 days of symptoms and result in
five spoons less of paracetamol used).
Testing differences between groups
Since the t
test is robust to assumptions about the normality of the underlying
distribution for large numbers, we used it to compare means without
assuming equality of variance. To check the assumption that statistical inference was robust to assumptions of normality, we also performed non-parametric tests (Mann-Whitney U test) for the main outcomes, which
did not alter the inferences. We compared group percentages using the
2 test.
| |
Results |
|---|
|
|
|---|
Recruitment rates and baseline characteristics
The 42 recruiting doctors identified 384 eligible children,
of whom 69 were not recruited (fig 1): the commonest reasons were
parental refusal or the doctor not having time. Table 1
shows the baseline characteristics of the 315 children
recruited and randomised to the two groups: there were no significant
group differences, suggesting no selection bias between
groups.
|
Potential bias
Responder bias
Symptom duration was documented in 285 (90%) of the 315 children randomised: 135/151 (89%) of those allocated immediate
antibiotics and 150/164 (91%) of those allocated delayed treatment. We
received diaries for 219 (70%) of the children and obtained telephone
information about duration of symptoms for a further 66 (21%). A
comparison of the baseline information from the three types of
responder (those who provided diaries, those who gave information by
telephone, and those from whom no diary information could be collected)
showed no evidence of significant bias between treatment groups (49%,
42%, and 53% respectively for immediate antibiotic group,
2=1.2, P=0.54) or between patients by age (60%,
61%, and 57% for those aged
4 years,
2=0.14,
P=0.93) or severity of symptoms (8%, 5%, and 11% for those with a
perforated drum,
2=1.5, P=0.47; 46%, 50%, and
45% for those with a bulging drum,
2=0.34,
P=0.85).
Recruitment bias
We compared the characteristics of the 140 patients of high
recruiting doctors (those who recruited >20 patients a year) with the
175 patients of low recruiting doctors (
20 patients a year). On
average, high recruiting doctors recruited 36 patients a year (that is,
most of the patients presenting to them with otitis
media20). There was no evidence of bias in terms of
patients' sex (52% and 47% respectively were boys,
2=0.38, P=0.22) or presence of red ear drum (78%
and 82% had erythema more than just peripheral injection and injection
of the handle of the malleus,
2=0.60, P=0.44) or
bulging drum (46% and 47%,
2=0.06, P=0.80).
3 years (49%
v 34%,
2=6.86, P=0.01) and more with a
perforated drum (12% v 5%,
2=5.71,
P=0.02), the differences are unlikely to affect the results significantly. The mean duration of illness in patients from high recruiting doctors was identical to that in patients from low recruiting doctors (both 3.1 days), and there was no evidence of a
treatment interaction (that is, a significantly different treatment
effect) in such patients for mean duration of illness (analysis of
variance interaction term, F=2.15, P=0.14) or for those who
were better within 72 hours (logistic regression interaction term, Wald
test=0.58, P=0.63). Similarly there was no evidence of interaction
between treatment and age (
3 years v >3 years, interaction term t=1.4, P=0.17), degree of erythema of the
drum (t=1.5, P=0.13), or bulging drum (t=0.14,
P=0.89). When we considered only those patients recruited by high
recruiting doctors, we found a similar pattern of results to those in
the main analysis for all patients (see below): comparison of the two
treatment groups showed that patients allocated immediate antibiotic
had similar mean daily pain scores (difference 0.20, P=0.37) and mean
daily episodes of distress (0.04, P=0.85) but consumed fewer spoons of
paracetamol a day (
0.59, P=0.04), had fewer days of earache (
0.61, P=0.098), and had fewer disturbed nights (
0.78, P=0.012).
Group differences
Use and collection of antibiotic prescriptions
We found
good agreement between reported collection of antibiotic prescriptions
and actual collection (
=0.97, P<0.01) for the group allocated
delayed antibiotic treatment. The patients allocated immediate
antibiotic and those allocated delayed treatment were well
differentiated in the number who took an antibiotic prescription from
the consultation (151/151 v 2/164) and the number who
reported using antibiotics at some stage during the illness (132/134
v 36/150). Of the 36 patients in the delayed treatment
group who used antibiotics, 29 waited until two days after seeing their
doctor before starting antibiotics, but only 11 waited until three days
after seeing their doctor.
|
Figure 2 shows
the difference in duration of symptoms in the two treatment groups, and
tables 2 and 3 show the principal effects
of treatment. There were significantly fewer days of discharge, less
paracetamol consumption, fewer days when the child was reported as
crying, and less night disturbance in the group allocated immediate
antibiotics. Most of these differences, however, probably reflect
modest symptomatic benefit since the clinical importance of the
difference in paracetamol consumption is debatable, and there was no
significant difference in mean pain scores, episodes of distress, or
absence from school. This interpretation is supported by secondary
evidence of the pattern of benefit for each day after seeing the doctor
(fig 3): the reduction in paracetamol use occurred only after the first
24 hours after seeing the doctor, when children were less distressed
and the illness was starting to
settle.
|
|
|
| |
Discussion |
|---|
|
|
|---|
The results of our study, the largest randomised controlled trial to date of antibiotic use for acute otitis media in primary care, suggest that immediate prescription has some benefits but that these are probably balanced by the disadvantages. Our aim was not to assess efficacy of antibiotics but the effectiveness of prescribing strategies. This is the first trial to assess the implications of immediate prescription of antibiotics compared with delayed prescribing.
Limitations of trial
Selection and diagnostic bias
The general practitioners
agreeing to participate in this trial came from a representative spread
of practice types. Despite the fact that low recruiting doctors were
apparently more reluctant to recruit young children (hence a slightly
older trial population than expected) and those with a perforated ear
drum, the impact on the results is not likely to be significant.
Patients of low recruiting doctors showed no difference from those of
high recruiting doctors in mean duration of illness and response to treatment. With diagnosing otitis media, there is always concern that
children with milder symptoms may simply have a pink ear drum due to
non-specific viral illness, fever, or crying. However, doctors in our
study were instructed to exclude any such cases if they were in doubt.
Furthermore, since there was no significant interaction between
treatment effect and the presence of florid clinical signs, the precise
diagnostic criteria are unlikely to alter our conclusions. Similarly,
the inclusion of more older children than expected is a potential
concern, but this is not likely to alter the generalisability of our
results since we found no significant difference in treatment effect
according to age, nor according to whether participating doctors were
low or high recruiters. Although we cannot exclude a modest difference
in treatment effect in younger children (since the study was not powered to specifically look at subgroups), our inference that there is
little difference in symptomatic benefit for younger children is
supported by the most recent (and largest) trial of antibiotics in
children aged under 2 years.21
There was no evidence of significant
differences in the characteristics of those patients who did not
provide information compared with those who did. Thus, non-response is not likely to significantly bias the results.
Placebo effect
An open trial design was essential to assess
the effect of treatment on participants' beliefs and behaviour, but it
has the disadvantage of allowing a placebo effect. Although we
minimised this by asking doctors to use a structured advice sheet
which was shown to abolish the antibiotic placebo effect in a
previous trial6
some placebo effect might have
contributed to the apparent benefits from antibiotics. However, the
effect if any is probably small: our conclusions about the benefit of antibiotics are the same as those from meta-analyses of blinded, placebo controlled trials, and the size of difference in paracetamol consumption that we found is the same as in the largest blinded trial
to date.5
Benefits from prescribing antibiotics immediately
Prescribing antibiotics immediately gave about one day's
benefit in symptom duration, duration of ear discharge, number of days
crying (when the child cried at some stage), and night disturbance and
resulted in less paracetamol being used. We used the antibiotic dose
recommended by UK prescribing guidelines, and the same as in a previous
trial.5 However, children aged over 6 (20% of our study
population) can be given a larger dose; thus we may have slightly
underestimated the potential benefits, and side effects, of antibiotics
in some older children. The overall benefit we found is consistent with
results from both the previous systematic review4 and with
the largest previous trials in both younger21 and older
children.5 In particular, the estimate of differences in
paracetamol use are very similar.5
less than
a spoon of paracetamol a day. An earlier trial suggested that immediate
antibiotics would reduce absence from school during the acute
illness.5 However this may have been a misleading finding:
when parents know that the illness is settling without antibiotics (as
in the current study) they are not sufficiently concerned about the
severity of illness to make any difference in school attendance.
Perhaps one of the most important findings for parents from the current
study, and consistent with the previous trial,5 is the
reduced night disturbance with antibiotics. This suggests that if
delayed prescribing is to be used instead of prescribing antibiotics
immediately, particular attention should be paid to advising parents
about giving full doses of analgesia before bed
time.
|
What is already known on this topic
There is debate whether acute ear infections (otitis media) should be treated with antibiotics A delayed prescribing strategy used in other countries has not been subject to a randomised trial What this study addsImmediate antibiotics provided benefits compared with delayed prescribing, but mainly after the first 24 hours, when symptoms were already improving Immediate antibiotics increased diarrhoea by 10% A wait and see approach is feasible, acceptable to parents, and should substantially reduce use of antibiotics |
Disadvantages of antibiotics
Prescribing antibiotics immediately increased the number of
children who had diarrhoea, which supports the findings from the
systematic review.4 Immediate prescribing also increased parents' belief in the effectiveness of antibiotics and their intention to consult their doctor with the same problem in future, as
we found in a previous trial for sore throat.6 By
prescribing early for a self limiting illness, doctors fuel expectation
and probably encourage the cycle of reattendance.7 This
will maintain parental demand for antibiotics, which encourages the
prescribing of antibiotics
8 9
and the further
development of antibiotic resistance.10
Satisfaction of parents
Doctors overestimate the pressure by patients to prescribe
antibiotics.27 Doctors also prescribe to satisfy their
patients even when they don't think the prescription is necessary
because they believe that patients will not be satisfied unless an
antibiotic is prescribed.28 This study clearly shows that
this perception is false: although satisfaction was slightly increased
when antibiotics were prescribed, most of the parents in the delayed
treatment group were very satisfied with the "wait and see" approach.
Conclusion
Immediate prescription of antibiotics for acute otitis
media reduced the duration of illness, but the benefit occurred mainly
after the first 24 hours, when symptoms were already resolving. This
must be balanced against both side effects and increasing parents'
belief in the importance of antibiotics. A wait and see approach in the
management of acute otitis media is feasible and was acceptable to most
parents and resulted in a 76% reduction in the use of antibiotic prescriptions.
| |
Acknowledgments |
|---|
We are grateful to the following doctors for their enthusiasm and help in recruiting patients: Doctors Newman, Taylor, Traynor, Tippett, Warner, Peace, Stephens, Glasspool, Stone, Webb, Snell, Devereux, Hoghton, Terry, Dickson, Nightingale, Richenbach, Bacon, Lupton, Padday, Cookson, Stanger, Glaysher, Bond, Baker, Barnsley, Jeffries, Willard, Carlisle, Hill, Collier, Cubitt, De Quincey, Over, White, Billington, Percival, Hollands, Glaysher, and Stranger.
Contributors: PL had the idea for the study, led the study, and performed the analysis. CG managed the study on a day to day basis, performed data entry, and helped with the analysis. All authors contributed to the grant application, to the development and refinement of the trial methodology, to trial management, to the format of the analysis, and to the writing of the paper. PL is the guarantor for the paper.
| |
Footnotes |
|---|
Funding: NHS Research and Development (South West and South East Regions). PL is supported by the Medical Research Council.
Competing interests: None declared.
| |
References |
|---|
|
|
|---|
| 1. | Bain J. Controversies in therapeutics: Childhood otalgia: justification for antibiotic use in general practice. BMJ 1990; 300: 1006-1007. |
| 2. | Browning G. Controversies in therapeutics: childhood otalgia: acute otitis media. Antibiotics not necessary in most cases. BMJ 1990; 300: 1005-1006. |
| 3. |
Froom J, Culpepper L, Jacobs M.
Antimicrobials for acute otitis media? A review from the international primary care network.
BMJ
1997;
315:
98-102 |
| 4. |
Del Mar C, Glaziou P, Hayem M.
Are antibiotics indicated as initial treatment for children with acute otitis media? A meta-analysis.
BMJ
1997;
314:
1526-1529 |
| 5. | Burke P, Bain J, Robinson D, Dunleavey J. Acute red ear in children: controlled trial of non-antibiotic treatment in general practice. BMJ 1991; 303: 558-562. |
| 6. |
Little PS, Williamson I, Warner G, Gould C, Gantley M, Kinmonth AL.
An open randomised trial of prescribing strategies for sore throat.
BMJ
1997;
314:
722-727 |
| 7. |
Little PS, Gould C, Williamson I, Warner G, Gantley M, Kinmonth AL.
Reattendance and complications in a randomised trial of prescribing strategies for sore throat: the medicalising effect of prescribing antibiotics.
BMJ
1997;
315:
350-352 |
| 8. |
Britten N, Ukoumunne O.
The influence of patients' hopes of receiving a prescription on doctors' perceptions and the decision to prescribe: a questionnaire survey.
BMJ
1997;
315:
1506-1510 |
| 9. |
MacFarlane J, Holmes W, MacFarlane R, Britten N.
Influence of patients' expectations on antibiotics management of acute lower respiratory illness in general practice: questionnaire study.
BMJ
1997;
315:
1211-1214 |
| 10. |
Arason V, Kristinsson K, Sigurdsson J, Stefansdottir G, Molstad S, Gudmundsson S.
Do antimicrobials increase the rate of penicillin resistant pneumococci in children? Cross sectional prevalence study.
BMJ
1996;
313:
387-391 |
| 11. | Van Buchem FL, Peeters MF, Van 'T Hof MA. Acute otitis media a new treatment strategy. BMJ 1985; 290: 1033-1037. |
| 12. | Pitts J. Shared decision making in the informed treatment of acute otitis media. Practitioner 1987; 231: 1232-1233. |
| 13. | Gates G, Northern J, Ferrer P. Diagnosis and screening. Ann Otolo Laryngol 1989; 98(suppl 139): 39-41. |
| 14. | Schwartz R, Rodriguez W, Brook I, Grundfast K. The febrile response in otitis media. JAMA 1981; 245: 2057-2058[CrossRef][Medline]. |
| 15. | Preston K. Pneumatic otoscopy: a review of the literature. Issues Compr Pediatr Nurs 1998; 21: 117-128[CrossRef][Medline]. |
| 16. | Ruuskanen O, Heikkinen T. Otitis media: etiology and diagnosis. Pediatr Infect Dis J 1994; 13: s23-6. |
| 17. | Rogers M. A viable alternative to the glass/mercury thermometer. Paediatr Nurs 1992;4. |
| 18. | Brown T, Fisk G. Anaesthesia for children. Oxford: Blackwell Scientific, 1992:129. |
| 19. | Wilkin D, Hallam L, Doggett AM. Measures of need and outcome for primary health care. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1992. |
| 20. | Office of Population Censuses and Surveys. Morbidity statistics from general practice: fourth national study 1991. London: HMSO, 1994. |
| 21. |
Damoiseaux R, Van Balen F, Hoes A, Verheij T, De Melker R.
Primary care based randomised double blind trial of amoxicillin versus placebo for acute otitis media in children aged under 2 years.
BMJ
2000;
320:
350-354 |
| 22. |
Hoppe J, Koster S, Bootz F, Niethammer D.
Acute mastoiditis relevant once again.
Infection
1994;
22:
178-182[CrossRef][Medline].
|
| 23. | Kudo F, Sasamura Y. Acute mastoiditis in infants: penicillin-resistant Streptococcus pneumoniae and its therapy. Nippon Jibiinkoka Gakkai Kaiho 1998; 101: 1075-1081[Medline]. |
| 24. | Collison P, Farver D. Acute coalescent mastoiditis caused by antibiotic resistant organisms. S D J Med 1998; 51: 379-383[Medline]. |
| 25. | Antonelli P, Dhanani N, Giannoni C, Kubilis P. Impact of resistant pneumococcus on the rates of acute mastoiditis. Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg 1999; 121: 190-194[CrossRef][Medline]. |
| 26. |
Cates C.
An evidence based approach to reducing antibiotic use in children with acute otitis media: controlled before and after study.
BMJ
1999;
318:
715-716 |
| 27. | Cartwright A, Anderson R. General practice revisited: a second study of general practice. London: Tavistock, 1981. |
| 28. |
Butler C, Rollnick S, Pill R, Maggs-Rapport F, Stott N.
Understanding the culture of prescribing: qualitative study of general practitioners' and patients' perceptions of antibiotics for sore throat.
BMJ
1998;
317:
632-637 |
(Accepted 27 November 2000)
Read all Rapid Responses