Intended for healthcare professionals

Practice Rapid Recommendations

A living WHO guideline on drugs for covid-19

BMJ 2020; 370 doi: https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.m3379 (Published 04 September 2020) Cite this as: BMJ 2020;370:m3379

Visual summary of recommendation

Population Disease severity Non-severe Severe Critical SpO 2 <90% on room air Respiratory rate >30 in adults Raised respiratory rate in children Signs of severe respiratory distress Requires life sustaining treatment Acute respiratory distress syndrome Sepsis Septic shock Absence of signs of severe or critical disease This recommendation applies only to people with these characteristics: Patients with confirmed covid-19 Recommendation 1 Recommendation 2 ≥60 in children <2 months≥50 in children 2-11 months≥40 in children 1-5 years
Interventions compared Nocorticosteroids Usualsupportive care Corticosteroids Suggested regimen Acceptable alternative regimens Dexamethasone 6 mg Oral or intravenous Hydrocortisone 50 mg Intravenous Every 8 hours for 7-10 days Daily for7-10 days Every 6 hours for 7-10 days Methylprednisolone 10 mg Intravenous Daily for7-10 days Prednisone 40 mg Oral
Recommendation 1 We recommend corticosteroids Usual supportive care Corticosteroids or Patients with severe and critical covid-19 Strong All or nearly all informed people would likely want usual supportive care without corticosteroids. Benefits would outweigh harms for almost everyone Weak Most people would likely want usual supportive care without corticosteroids. Benefits would outweigh harms for the majority, but not for everyone Weak Most people would likely want corticosteroids. Benefits would outweigh harms for the majority, but not for everyone Strong All or nearly all informed people would likely want corticosteroids. Benefits would outweigh harms for almost everyone
Recommendation 2 We suggest no corticosteroids Usual supportive care Corticosteroids or Patients with non-severe covid-19 Strong All or nearly all informed people would likely want usual supportive care without corticosteroids. Benefits would outweigh harms for almost everyone Weak Most people would likely want usual supportive care without corticosteroids. Benefits would outweigh harms for the majority, but not for everyone Weak Most people would likely want corticosteroids. Benefits would outweigh harms for the majority, but not for everyone Strong All or nearly all informed people would likely want corticosteroids. Benefits would outweigh harms for almost everyone

©BMJ Publishing Group Limited.

Disclaimer: This infographic is not a validated clinical decision aid. This information is provided without any representations, conditions or warranties that it is accurate or up to date. BMJ and its licensors assume no responsibility for any aspect of treatment administered with the aid of this information. Any reliance placed on this information is strictly at the user's own risk. For the full disclaimer wording see BMJ's terms and conditions: https://www.bmj.com/company/legal-information/

Find recommendations, evidence summaries and consultation decision aids for use in your practice

Sorry, there is no peer review to display for this article

Our policy of displaying a paper's peer review history applies only to papers published from early 2015.

For research papers The BMJ has fully open peer review. This means that accepted research papers submitted from September 2014 onwards usually have their prepublication history posted alongside them on thebmj.com.

This prepublication history comprises all previous versions of the manuscript, the study protocol (submitting the protocol is mandatory for all clinical trials and encouraged for all other studies at The BMJ), the report from the manuscript committee meeting, the reviewers’ comments, and the authors’ responses to all the comments from reviewers and editors.

In rare instances we determine after careful consideration that we should not make certain portions of the prepublication record publicly available. For example, in cases of stigmatised illnesses we seek to protect the confidentiality of reviewers who have these illnesses. In other instances there may be legal or regulatory considerations that make it inadvisable or impermissible to make available certain parts of the prepublication record.

In all instances in which we have determined that elements of the prepublication record should not be made publicly available, we expect that authors will respect these decisions and also will not share this information.