SlideShare a Scribd company logo
1 of 23
Get Homework/Assignment Done
Homeworkping.com
Homework Help
https://www.homeworkping.com/
Research Paper help
https://www.homeworkping.com/
Online Tutoring
https://www.homeworkping.com/
click here for freelancing tutoring sites
BioMed Central BMC Pediatrics Research article Open Access Acyclovir for
treating varicella in otherwise healthy children and adolescents: a systematic
review of randomised controlled trials Terry P Klassen*, Elaine M Belseck,
Natasha Wiebe and Lisa Hartling Address: Alberta Research Center for Child
Health Evidence, Department of Pediat rics, University of Alberta, 2C3.00 WMC,
Edmonton, Alberta, T6G 2R7, Canada E-mail: Terry P Klassen*
-terry.klassen@ualberta.ca; Elaine M Belseck -elaine.be lseck@shaw.ca; Natasha
Wiebe -nwiebe@ualberta.ca; Lisa Hartling -hartling@ualberta.ca *Corresponding
author Published: 30 September 2002 Received: 19 July 2002 BMC Pediatrics 2002,
2:9 Accepted: 30 September 2002 This article is available from:
http://www.biomedcentral.com/1471-2431/2/9 © 2002 Klassen et al; licensee
BioMed Central Ltd. This article is published in Op en Access: verbatim copying
and redistribution of this article are permitted in all media for any purpose,
provided this notice is preserved along with the a rticle's original URL.
Abstract Background: Acyclovir has the potential to shorten the course of
chickenpox whic h may result in reduced costs and morbidity. We conducted a
systematic review of randomised c ontrolled trials that evaluated acyclovir for
the treatment of chickenpox in otherwise healthy ch ildren. Methods: MEDLINE,
EMBASE, and the Cochrane Library were searched. The reference lists of relevant
articles were examined and primary authors and Glaxo Wellcome were cont acted to
identify additional trials. Two reviewers independently screened studies for inc
lusion, assessed study quality using the Jadad scale and allocation concealment,
and extracted da ta. Continuous data were converted to a weighted mean
difference (WMD). Overall estimates were not c alculated due to differences in
the age groups studied. Results: Three studies were included. Methodological
quality was 3 (n = 2) and 4 (n = 1) on the Jadad scale. Acyclovir was associated
with a significant reduction in the number of days with fever, from -1.0 (95% CI
-1.5,-0.5) to -1.3 (95% CI -2.0,-0.6). Results were inconsiste nt with respect
to the number of days to no new lesions, the maximum number of lesions and
relief o
f pruritis. There were no clinically important differences between acyclovir and
placebo with resp ect to complications or adverse effects. Conclusion: Acyclovir
appears to be effective in reducing the number of days wit h fever among
otherwise healthy children with chickenpox. The results were inconsistent with r
espect to the number of days to no new lesions, the maximum number of lesions
and the relief o f itchiness. The clinical importance of acyclovir treatment in
otherwise healthy children remains controversial. Background Varicella, or
chickenpox, is a common, highly contagious illness caused by the varicella-
zoster virus (VZV) [1]. It is primarily a disease of early childhood with 90% of
cases occurring in children 1 to 14 years of age [2]. The disease spreads by
direct person-to-person contact of open lesions or airborne droplets [1], and
tends to increase in severity with each subsequent case within a household [3].
The period of transmission begins one to two days before any rash appears [4]
and continues for the first five to six days [1]. The disease may be more severe
in neonates [5,6], adults [7], and individuals who have impaired immune Page 1
of 9 (page number not for citation purposes)
BMC Pediatrics 2002, 2 systems [8,9]. After one episode of varicella,
individuals usually have lifelong immunity [1]. Chickenpox is generally self-
limiting in young children and is manifested by fever, mild constitutional
symptoms, and a pruritic, vesicular rash. Symptoms usually appear 11 20 days
after exposure to VZV [2]. The rash most often appears in three successive crops
of lesions numbering on average 300 to 400 [10]. The lesions progress from
macules through to crusted lesions over a three-day period [11]. The rash is
most commonly distributed over the trunk, scalp and face. Diagnosis can be made
clinically by the rash characteristic of chickenpox [2] and a history of contact
[1]. Complications of chicken pox are varied and may occur in 5 10% of all
patients. Complications among otherwise healthy children are rare [12,13], but
are more common among neonates, adults and immunocompromised individuals [2,14].
Data with respect to complication rates among specific subgroups are lacking.
Complications primarily involve the skin, the central nervous system, and the
respiratory system [13,15]. The most frequent complication is bacterial
infection secondary to cutaneous lesions [2,13]. The most common neurological
complications are cerebellar ataxia and encephalitis. Complications of the
respiratory system include pneumonia and upper respiratory tract infections
(particularly otitis media). Traditional treatment for chickenpox is symptomatic
through the use of lotions to relieve itchiness [1] and acetaminophen to reduce
fever and pain [4]. Newer treatments include immunoglobulins, vaccines, and
anti-viral drugs for the prevention of chicken pox, as well as immunoglobulins
and anti-viral drugs to moderate and shorten the course of the disease. As an
anti-viral drug, acyclovir prevents the replication of the VZV [16,17] and has
the potential to eradicate VZV and relieve symptoms more rapidly. Since the drug
is only absorbed by the cells that are infected with the virus, acyclovir has
minimal adverse effects [18]. Some reported adverse effects to the oral
administration of acyclovir include nausea, vomiting, diarrhea, and vertigo
[18]. The economic burden associated with chickenpox results from costs
associated with hospitalisations, physician visits, prescription and non-
prescription medications, and lost income by caregivers who must remain at home
during the course of the child's illness [19]. It has been estimated that lost
wages account for more than 95% of the total costs [20]. The U.S. Centers for
Disease Control and Prevention recommend that children remain at home for six
days after the rash onset [10]. These recommendations vary according to local
public health authorities; others
http://www.biomedcentral.com/1471-2431/2/9 advocate return to normal activity
earlier, particularly with milder forms of the disease [21]. The Canadian
Pediatric Society recommends that children return to school as soon as they feel
well enough to resume normal activities, regardless of the state of the rash
[22]. Because of the potential costs associated with lost time from work by
primary caregivers, an intervention that reduces the length of illness may be
well received. We conducted a systematic review to assess the evidence on the
efficacy of acyclovir in: (a) alleviating symptoms (number of lesions, pruritis,
fever); and, (b) shortening the duration of the illness. The secondary objective
was to examine complications of chickenpox and adverse effects associated with
acyclovir, as reported in the relevant efficacy trials. This review was
conducted in association with the Acute Respiratory Infections Group of The
Cochrane Collaboration [23]. Methods A comprehensive search was conducted to
identify all relevant studies regardless of language of publication or
publication status. MEDLINE (1966-October 2001), EMBASE (1988-September 2001),
and the Cochrane Controlled Trials Register (2002, Issue 2) were searched. The
reference lists of all relevant articles were reviewed for additional studies. A
letter was sent to the primary author of relevant studies as well as the
pharmaceutical company that manufactures acyclovir (GlaxoSmithKline) in order to
identify any other relevant trials. Finally, PubMed was searched towards the
completion of the review to identify any recent publications (January 2001-April
2002). The complete search strategies are presented in an additional file (See
Additional File 1: search_strategies.pdf). The output from the searches was
screened independently by two reviewers (NW, EMB or LH). All potentially
relevant studies were retrieved as full manuscripts and then independently
reviewed for inclusion according to established criteria. Differences regarding
inclusion were resolved by consensus reached after discussion. Studies were
included if they: 1) were randomised controlled trials; 2) evaluated otherwise
healthy children 0 18 years of age who had chickenpox; 3) compared acyclovir to
placebo; 4) evaluated at least one objective outcome (i.e., amount of time to no
new lesions, maximum number of lesions, time to resolution of fever and
pruritis, complications, and adverse events). All relevant studies were masked
by obscuring the authors' names and institutions, the locations of the study,
reference lists, journal of publication and any other potential identifiers.
Each of the included studies was evaluated for methodological quality using the
previously validated Jadad 5-point scale to assess randomisation (0 2 points),
Page 2 of 9
(page number not for citation purposes)
BMC Pediatrics 2002, 2 double blinding (0 2 points) and withdrawals and dropouts
(0 1 point) [24]. Concealment of allocation was described as adequate,
inadequate or unclear [25]. Two observers independently assessed quality (NW,
TPK). Differences were resolved by consensus. Data were extracted using a
structured form that captured the following information: patient demographics;
patient status (inpatient or outpatient); the intervention (including dosage and
route of administration); outcomes (i.e. length of time from randomisation to no
new lesions, crusting, defervescence (i.e. reduction in fever), and cessation of
pruritis); funding source; and, whether the studies used an intention-to-treat
analysis. All complications from chickpox reported in the studies were recorded.
As well, information on all adverse effects related to the use of acyclovir was
collected. Two reviewers (NW, EMB) extracted data independently, and results
were compared. Differences were resolved by referring to the original paper.
Data were analysed using Review Manager 4.1 (Cochrane Collaboration, 2001);
Splus 2000 (Insightful Corporation, 1999) was used for imputations. Continuous
data (e.g., duration of symptoms in days and maximum number of lesions) were
converted to the weighted mean difference (WMD). Medians were substituted for
means for all outcomes in the study by Balfour et al. [26]. Means were
calculated from proportions of patients remaining with lesions [27], fever
[27,28], and pruritis [27]. Day 5 (fever, pruritis) and day 7 (new lesions) were
used as the last possible day for the event to occur. These substitutions give
less conservative estimates of variance. Interquartile ranges were converted
into variances [26]. Imputing using upper bound p-values gave conservative
variances in both treatment groups [27,28]. Weighted mean differences were not
combined into an overall estimate due to the varied age groups between studies.
There were too few studies to consider statistical heterogeneity between studies
or to perform subgroup or sensitivity analyses. Publication bias was also not
assessed for the same reason. Power analyses for complications were exploratory.
Individual study results were pooled and chi-square tests were the bases of the
power analyses. Since the adverse event data were not independent (the numbers
were reported by event not by patient), risk differences could not be
calculated, nor any further analysis. Results Description of studies Five
hundred and ninety unique references were retrieved. Eight studies were
identified as being potentially relevant. Four of the studies were excluded
because they were not
RCTs [29 32]; one RCT was excluded because it evaluated
http://www.biomedcentral.com/1471-2431/2/9 immediate versus delayed anti-viral
treatment therefore all patients eventually received acyclovir [33]. Three
studies were included in this analysis [26 28]. There was 100% agreement between
the two reviewers with respect to study relevance. The three relevant trials are
described in Table 1. They were all conducted in the United States and published
in English. All three studies were placebo-controlled and evaluated the efficacy
of acyclovir among immunocompetent children in an outpatient setting.
Methodological quality of included studies The quality scores of included
studies, as measured by the Jadad scale, were four in one trial [26] and three
in the remaining two trials [27,28]. All three studies were described as being
randomised and double-blinded. Only one trial described a detailed and
appropriate method of randomisation [26]. One trial [26] described an
appropriate method of double-blinding. Two of the three trials adequately
discussed withdrawals [27,28]. Allocation concealment was unclear in all three
trials. Two studies [27,28] performed intention-to-treat analyses on adverse
events and on a select few of the remaining outcomes. All three studies received
pharmaceutical sponsorship. In addition, two studies received financial support
from other external sources [26,28]. Primary outcome: number of days to no new
lesions Two of the studies found a statistically significant advantage to taking
acyclovir (figure 1). The number of days to no new lesions was reduced by 1.2
(95% CI -1.5,-1.0) and 1.1 days (95% CI -1.8,-0.5), respectively [27,28]. The
third study found no statistically significant difference (0 days; 95% CI-
0.5,0.5) [26]. Additional outcomes The results with respect to the maximum
number of lesions appeared to be homogeneous, however, only two of three studies
reported a significant difference favouring treatment with acyclovir (figure 2).
The WMDs ranged from -24 (95% CI -74,26) [28] to -164 (95% CI -228,100) [26].
The number of days to no fever was reduced by treatment with acyclovir in all
three trials: -1.1 days (95% CI-1.3,0.9), -1.0 (95% CI -1.5,-0.5), and -1.3 (95%
CI -2.0,-0.6) [27,26,28] (figure 3). The number of days to relief of pruritis
was reported in two studies: Dunkle et al. found a 0.8 day advantage with
acyclovir treatment (95% CI -1.0,-0.7) [27] and Balfour et al., found no
advantage (0 days; 95% CI -0.6,0.6) [26]
(figure 4). Page 3 of 9 (page number not for citation purposes)
BMC Pediatrics 2002, 2 http://www.biomedcentral.com/1471-2431/2/9 Figure 1
Metagraph of Acyclovir versus Placebo: time to no new lesions Table 1:
Characteristics of randomised controlled trials comparing acyclovir to placebo
among immunocompetent children Study Number of participants Age Range (mean)
Acyclovir protocol Outcomes Quality Total Per group Jadad Score Allocation
Concealment Balfour 1990 102 50 acyclovir 50 placebo 5 16 years (8.1) 5 7 years:
20 mg/kg 7 12 years: 15 mg/kg 12 16 years: 10 mg/kg Days to fever, crusting, no
new lesions, maximum number of lesions, decrease in number of lesions and
cessation of 4 Unclear 4x/days for 5-7 days itching Maximum number of lesions
Dunkle 1991 815 408 acyclovir 407 placebo 2 12 years (5.2) 20 mg/kg 4/day for 5
days Maximum number of lesions Number with >500 lesions Residual lesions at day
28 3 Unclear Balfour 1992 62 31 acyclovir 31 placebo 13 18 years (14.8) 800 mg
4/day for 5 days Days to maximum number of lesions and cessation of itching
Maximum number of lesions 3 Unclear
Residual lesions at day 28 Page 4 of 9 (page number not for citation purposes)
BMC Pediatrics 2002, 2 http://www.biomedcentral.com/1471-2431/2/9 Figure 2
Metagraph of Acyclovir versus Placebo: maximum number of lesions Figure 3
Metagraph of Acyclovir versus Placebo: time to no fever Page 5 of 9 (page number
not for citation purposes)
BMC Pediatrics 2002, 2 http://www.biomedcentral.com/1471-2431/2/9 Figure 4
Metagraph of Acyclovir versus Placebo: time to no pruritis The earlier Balfour
study [26] results were imputed from non-parametric data and may have produced
less precise results. If so, this may indicate a stronger advantage for taking
acyclovir in the number of days to no new lesions and relief of itching. This
might also indicate a smaller advantage for taking acyclovir in reducing the
maximum number of lesions. Adverse effects Reported adverse effects related to
the use of acyclovir involving the gastrointestinal system included: anorexia
(23 acyclovir; 30 placebo); diarrhea (25 acyclovir; 18 placebo); nausea/vomiting
(11 acyclovir; 10 placebo); stomach ache/abdominal pain (22 acyclovir; 14
placebo); flatulence (2 acyclovir; 4 placebo). Those involving the respiratory
system included: coryza (18 acyclovir; 23 placebo); cough (23 acyclovir; 29
placebo); ear pain/redness (5 acyclovir; 6 placebo); sore throat (24 acyclovir;
33 placebo). The following adverse effects involving the skin were noted: hives
(1 acyclovir; 1 placebo); rash, other than varicella (3 acyclovir; 1 placebo).
Other reported effects were: conjunctivitis (acyclovir 8; placebo 11); headache
(acyclovir 21; placebo 22); malaise (acyclovir 25; placebo 28); irritability
(acyclovir 1); skin odour (acyclovir 1); insomnia (acyclovir 5; placebo 5); nose
bleed (acyclovir 2; placebo 1); dizziness (acyclovir 3; placebo 2); restlessness
(acyclovir 1; placebo 1); arthralgia (placebo 3); frequency (place bo 1); night
sweats (placebo 1); hyperkinesias (acyclovir 1; placebo 1); pain (acyclovir 1);
spasmodic hand movements (acyclovir 1; placebo 1). Complications Complications
from chickenpox were grouped by those involving the skin, central nervous
system, or respiratory system (figure 5). Fifteen patients developed secondary
bacterial skin infections (5 acyclovir; 10 placebo). Central nervous system
complications included cerebellar ataxia (1 placebo) and meningoencephalitis (1
placebo). Respiratory ailments included pneumonia (1 acyclovir), otitis media (2
acyclovir; 4 placebo), pharyngitis (2 acyclovir; 2 placebo), and bronchitis (1
acyclovir). There were no significant differences between the treatment groups
with respect to all the grouped complications arising from chickenpox. Skin
complications gave the largest simply pooled difference at 1%. The review is not
sufficiently powered to detect this difference, however, the size of difference
is not deemed clinically important. The central nervous system and respiratory
simply pooled differences
were less than 0.5%. Discussion This systematic review of acyclovir for the
treatment of chickenpox in otherwise healthy children supports a reduction in
disease severity and a shorter course of disease. Page 6 of 9 (page number not
for citation purposes)
BMC Pediatrics 2002, 2 http://www.biomedcentral.com/1471-2431/2/9 Figure 5
Metagraph of Acyclovir versus Placebo: complications Complications are grouped a
s skin, CNS and respiratory. This is demonstrated by a one-day reduction in the
number of days with fever. Results were inconsistent, however, with respect to
the number of days to no new lesions, the maximum number of lesions and the
number of days to relief of pruritis. The results for the earlier Balfour study
[26] were imputed from non-parametric data and may therefore be less precise
possibly strengthening the evidence that supports the use of acyclovir in
otherwise healthy children. There were no clinically important differences
between acyclovir and placebo with respect to complications associated with
chickenpox or adverse effects associated with the drug. The quality of the
included studies was relatively good as measured by the Jadad scale, thus having
a low risk of bias in the studies' conduct. However, caution is heeded when
interpreting the results given that all studies had pharmaceutical sponsorship
and some of the authors were affiliated with the original manufacturer of
acyclovir. Research has shown that study conclusions are associated with
authors' affiliations [34,35] and that studies with pharmaceutical sponsorship
are more likely to have outcomes favouring the drug under study [36]. We
identified only three studies relevant to this review. These studies were
heterogeneous in that each studied a different age group. Because of the small
number of studies and their different study populations, we did not feel that it
was appropriate to provide overall estimates of efficacy. Publication bias was
also not assessed because of the small number of trials. Although these studies
have demonstrated the efficacy of acyclovir, the clinical importance of
acyclovir treatment in otherwise healthy children remains controversial. The
debate in the literature features four common themes: First, the treatment
appears to confer at best modest benefits for a disease that is self-limiting
and has few complications in otherwise healthy children [13,19]. Second, trials
have demonstrated acyclovir to be efficacious when treatment was initiated
within 24 hours of rash onset. Various authors have criticized this as being
impractical in that many patients may not detect disease onset, and obtain a
prescription until well after this 24hour window [15,19,37]. In a recent trial
Balfour et al. showed that patients who initiated acyclovir within 24 hours of
rash onset showed better clinical response to
therapy compared to those who initiated treatment at 48 or 72 hours [33].
Further, patients who began therapy after 48 hours responded more favourably
than those who Page 7 of 9 (page number not for citation purposes)
BMC Pediatrics 2002, 2 started after 72 hours. Others have questioned the extent
of compliance in practice with the treatment regimens that have been studied
(i.e., four doses per day) [37,38]. Alterations in compliance may dilute already
moderate results [19]. Third, while no formal cost-benefit analysis has been
conducted, various critics have suggested that treatment benefits do not justify
the additional costs of the drug as well as the physician visits required to
obtain a prescription [13,37,38]. If treatment with acyclovir does not
significantly alter the complication rate of varicella, then the rate of
hospitalisations, and their associated costs, is unlikely to change [36]. In
addition, only one study specifically measured the impact of acyclovir treatment
on school attendance [26]. This study found no difference in the number of days
missed from school between the acyclovir and placebo groups. Treatment with
acyclovir may not have a substantial impact on the number of days missed from
school as public health authorities in some jurisdictions move towards more
permissive policies regarding school attendance following VZV infection [22].
Finally, concerns have been raised regarding the emergence of an acyclovir
resistant strain of VZV [13,37 39]. There is evidence to suggest that resistant
strains of VZV do not occur [33,40,41]. At present, there appear to be too many
unanswered questions to advocate the widespread use of acyclovir in otherwise
healthy children. The treatment of chickenpox with acyclovir may become
immaterial as public health authorities worldwide move towards adopting the
varicella vaccine to protect against VZV [10,15]. This review has raised
questions for further research. First a comprehensive cost-benefit analysis is
required. Second, there were few data available on the impact of acyclovir on
the number of days missed from school or work. If one of the more important
advantages of acyclovir is to allow individuals to return to their activities
sooner, this needs to be specifically evaluated and documented. Third, there is
no evidence regarding different doses of acyclovir treatment. Smaller doses may
reduce costs and increase compliance. Fourth, further research needs to focus on
the identification and treatment of immunocompetent children who are at higher
risk of more severe diseases such as children with chronic respiratory
conditions or children exposed through intrafamilial contact. Finally, other
antivirals against varicella with improved bioavailability are now available
(i.e., valaciclovir and famciclovir) and need to be studied in pediatric
populations. http://www.biomedcentral.com/1471-2431/2/9 Conclusions
When initiated within 24 hours of rash onset, treatment with acyclovir shows a
therapeutic benefit by reducing the length of time with fever in immunocompetent
children. However, the results are inconsistent with respect to the number of
days to no new lesions, the maximum number of lesions and relief of pruritis.
The existing evidence does not support the widespread use of acyclovir among
young immunocompetent children in which chickenpox is selflimiting and results
in few complications. Competing interests None declared. Authors' contributions
TPK conducted the quality assessment, provided overall methodological and
clinical expertise, and contributed to the final manuscript. EMB screened
studies for inclusion, performed data extraction, and contributed to the final
manuscript. NW screened studies for inclusion, performed the statistical
analyses and quality assessment, and contributed to the final manuscript. LH
assisted with searching and screening studies for inclusion, provided input on
the analyses, and contributed to the final manuscript. All authors read and
approved the final manuscript. Additional material Additional file 1 Search
strategies This file contains the detailed search strategies for MEDLINE,
EMBASE, CENTRAL (Cochrane Library), and PubMed. Click here for file
[http://www.biomedcentral.com/content/supplementary/147124312-9-S1.pdf]
Acknowledgements We thank Marlene Dorgan and Ellen Crumley for assistance with
searching the literature. The Alberta Research Centre for Child Health Evidence
is supported by an establishment grant from the Alberta Heritage Foundation for
Medical Research. References 1. Brunell PA: Varicella-zoster infections. In:
Textbook of pediatric infectious diseases (Edited by: Feign RD, Cherry JD)
Philadelphia, WB Saunders 1987, 1602-1607 2. Preblud SR, Orenstein WA, Bart KJ:
Varicella: clinical manifestations, epidemiology and health impact in children.
Pediatr Infect Dis J 1984, 3:505-509 3. Ross AH: Modifications of chickenpox in
family contacts by administration of gamma globulin. New Engl J Med 1962,
267:369-76 4. Avery ME: Varicella-zoster. In: Pediatric Medicine (Edited by:
Avery ME, First LR) Baltimore, Williams and Wilkins 1987, 1180-1181 5. Gershon
AA: Varicella in mother and infant: problems old and new. In: Infections of the
fetus and newborn infant (Edited by: Krugman S, Gershon AA) New York, Alan R.
Liss, Inc. 1975, 75-95 Page 8 of 9 (page number not for citation purposes)
BMC Pediatrics 2002, 2 6. Meyers JD: Congenital varicella in term infants; risk
reconsidered. J Infect Dis 1974, 129:215-217 7. Preblud SR: Age-specific risks
of varicella complications. Pediatrics 1981, 68:14-17 8. Feldman SF, Hughes WT,
Daniel CB: Varicella in children with cancer: seventy-seven cases. Pediatrics
1975, 56:388-397 9. Feldhoff CM, Balfour HH Jr, Simmons RL, Najarian JS, Mauer
SM: Varicella in children with renal transplants. J Pediatr 1981, 98:25-31 10.
Centers for Disease Control and Prevention: Infectious diseases information:
varicella-zoster virus. CDC: National Center for Infectious Diseases 2001
[http://www.cdc.gov/ncidod/diseases/ list_varaicl.htm] 11. Feder HM: Treatment
of adult chickenpox with oral acyclovir. Arch Intern Med 1990, 150:2061-5 12.
Conway SP: Effect of oral acyclovir against primary and secondary viraemia in
incubation period of varicella (commentary). Arch Dis Child 1993, 69:642-643 13.
Mouzard A: Traitement par antiviral de la varicelle du nourrisson et de
l'enfant: les arguments contre. Med Mal Infect 1998, 28:832-836 14. Rotbart HA,
Levin MJ, Hayward AR: Immune responses to varicella zoster virus infections in
healthy children. J Infect Dis 1993, 167:195-199 15. Drwal-Klein LA, O'Donovan
CA: Varicella in pediatric patients. Ann Pharmacother 1993, 27(Jul/Aug):938-949
16. Laskin OL: Acyclovir: pharmacology and clinical experience. Arch Intern Med
1994, 144:1241-1246 17. Arvin AM: Oral therapy with acyclovir in infants and
children. Pediatr Infect Dis J 1987, 6:56-58 18. Croze SM, Stoukides CA: Oral
acyclovir in immunocompetent patients with varicella. Ann Pharmacother 1994,
28:208-209 19. Brunell PA: Chickenpox-examining our options. New Engl J Med
1991, 325:1577-1599 20. Preblud SR: Complications and costs. Pediatrics 1985,
78(Supplemental): 728-735 21. Moore DA, Hopkins RS: Assessment of a school
exclusion policy during a chickenpox outbreak. Am J Epidemiol 1991, 133:11611167
22. Canadian Pediatric Society (CPS): School and daycare exclusion
policies for chickenpox: a rational approach. Infectious Diseases Immunization
Committee, Canadian Paediatric Society. Pediatr Child Health 1999, 4:287-288 23.
Klassen TP, Belseck E, Wiebe N: Acyclovir for treating varicella in otherwise
healthy children and adolescents (Protocol for a Cochrane Review). In: The
Cochrane Library, Oxford: Update Software 2002 24. Jadad AR, Moore RA, Carroll
D, Jenkinson C, Reynolds DJM, Gavaghan DJ, McQuay HJ: Assessing the quality of
reports of randomised clinical trials: is blinding necessary. Control Clin
Trials 1996, 17:1-12 25. Schulz KF, Chalmers I, Hayes RJ, Altman DG: Empirical
evidence of bias: dimensions of methodological quality associated with estimates
of treatment effects in controlled trials. JAMA 1995, 273:408-412 26. Balfour
HH, Kelly JM, Suarez CS, Heussner RC, Englund JA, Crane DD, et al: Acyclovir
treatment of varicella in otherwise healthy children. J Pediatr 1990, 116:633-
639 27. Dunkle LM, Arvin AM, Whitley RJ, Rotbart HA, Feder HM, Feldman S, et al:
A controlled trial of acyclovir for chickenpox in normal children. New Engl J
Med 1991, 325:1539-1544 28. Balfour HH, Rotbart HA, Feldman S, Dunkle LM, Feder
HM, Prober CG, et al: Acyclovir treatment of varicella in otherwise healthy
adolescents. J Pediatr 1992, 120:627-633 29. Feder HM: Treatment of adult
chickenpox with oral acyclovir. Arch Intern Med 1990, 150:2061-2065 30. Huang Y-
C, Lin T-Y, Chiu C-H: Acyclovir prophylaxis of varicella after household
exposure. Pediatr Infect Dis J 1995, 14:152-154 31. Suga S, Yoshikawa T, Ozaki
T, Asano Y: Effect of oral acyclovir against primary and secondary viraemia in
incubation period of varicella. Arch Dis Child 1993, 69:639-643 32. Lin T-Y,
Huang Y-C, Ning H-C, Hsueh C: Oral acyclovir prophylaxis of varicella after
intimate contact. Pediatr Infect Dis J 1997, 16:1162-1165 33. Balfour HH,
Edelman CK, Anderson RS, Reed NV, Slivken RM, Marmor LH, Dix L, Aeppli D,
Talarico CL: Controlled trial of acycloh ttp://www.biomedcentral.com/1471-
2431/2/9 vir for chickenpox evaluating time of initiation and duration of
therapy and viral resistance. Pediatr Infect Dis J 2001, 20:919926 34. Barnes
DE, Vero LA: Why review articles on the health effects of passive smoking reach
different conclusions. JAMA 1998, 279:1566-1570 35. Jadad AR, Moher M, Browman
GP, Booker L, Sigouin C, Fuentes M, Stevens R: Systematic reviews and meta-
analyses on treatment
of asthma: critical evaluation. BMJ 2000, 320:537-540 36. Cho MK, Bero LA: The
quality of drug studies published in symposium proceedings. Ann Intern Med 1996,
124:485-489 37. McKendrick MW: Acyclovir for childhood chickenpox. Cost is
unjustified. British Medical Journal 1995, 310:108-109 38. Balfour HH: No reason
not to treat. BMJ 1995, 310:109-110 39. Ghirga G, Ghirga P, Pizzabiocca A,
Maccarini I, Presti A: Treatment of varicella with low doses of acyclovir for
two days (letter; comment). J Pediatr 1992, 120(4Pt1):664-665 40. Cole NL,
Balfour HH Jr: Varicella-zoster virus does not become more resistant to
acyclovir during therapy. J Infect Dis 1986, 153:605-608 41. Englund JA,
Zimmerman ME, Swierkosz DM, Goodman JL, Schll DR, Balfour HH Jr: Herpes simplex
virus resistant to acyclovir. A study in a tertiary care center. Ann Intern Med
1990, 112:416-422 Pre-publication history The pre-publication history for this
paper can be accessed here: http://www.biomedcentral.com/1471-2431/2/9/prepub
Publish with BioMed Central and every scientist can read your work free of
charge "BioMedcentral will be the most significant development for disseminating
the results of biomedical research in our lifetime." Paul Nurse, Director-
General, Imperial Cancer Research Fund Publish with BMC and your research papers
will be: available free of charge to the entire biomedical community peer
reviewed and published immediately upon acceptance cited in PubMed and archived
on PubMed Central yours - you keep the copyright BioMedcentral.com Submit your
manuscript here: http://www.biomedcentral.com/manuscript/
editorial@biomedcentral.com Page 9 of 9 (page number not for citation purposes)
160705251 varicella
160705251 varicella

More Related Content

What's hot

OUT BREAK INVESTIGATION
OUT BREAK INVESTIGATION OUT BREAK INVESTIGATION
OUT BREAK INVESTIGATION Tauseef Jawaid
 
Systematic review with meta-analysis: Saccharomyces boulardii in the preventi...
Systematic review with meta-analysis: Saccharomyces boulardii in the preventi...Systematic review with meta-analysis: Saccharomyces boulardii in the preventi...
Systematic review with meta-analysis: Saccharomyces boulardii in the preventi...Utai Sukviwatsirikul
 
DENGUE THE BREAKBONE FEVER: PATHOPHYSIOLOGICAL AND PHARMACOTHERAPEUTIC UPDATE
DENGUE THE BREAKBONE FEVER: PATHOPHYSIOLOGICAL AND PHARMACOTHERAPEUTIC UPDATEDENGUE THE BREAKBONE FEVER: PATHOPHYSIOLOGICAL AND PHARMACOTHERAPEUTIC UPDATE
DENGUE THE BREAKBONE FEVER: PATHOPHYSIOLOGICAL AND PHARMACOTHERAPEUTIC UPDATEDr. Amit Gangwal Jain (MPharm., PhD.)
 
CV JOHN NIXON 241116
CV  JOHN NIXON 241116CV  JOHN NIXON 241116
CV JOHN NIXON 241116John Nixon
 
Concept of clinical and genetic epidemiology and their
Concept of clinical and genetic epidemiology and theirConcept of clinical and genetic epidemiology and their
Concept of clinical and genetic epidemiology and theirBikram Dhami
 
Efficacy of diphenhydramine vs desloratadine and placebo in patients with mod...
Efficacy of diphenhydramine vs desloratadine and placebo in patients with mod...Efficacy of diphenhydramine vs desloratadine and placebo in patients with mod...
Efficacy of diphenhydramine vs desloratadine and placebo in patients with mod...Georgi Daskalov
 
Consensus Guidelines: Childhood Convulsive Status Epilepticus (Indian Pediatr...
Consensus Guidelines: Childhood Convulsive Status Epilepticus (Indian Pediatr...Consensus Guidelines: Childhood Convulsive Status Epilepticus (Indian Pediatr...
Consensus Guidelines: Childhood Convulsive Status Epilepticus (Indian Pediatr...Dr Padmesh Vadakepat
 
Molecular epidemiology an introduction
Molecular epidemiology  an introductionMolecular epidemiology  an introduction
Molecular epidemiology an introductionBhoj Raj Singh
 
Public Health for Pre-Health Professionals
Public Health for Pre-Health ProfessionalsPublic Health for Pre-Health Professionals
Public Health for Pre-Health ProfessionalsNicholas Mercado
 
Saccharomyces boulardii in the prevention of antibiotic-associated diarrhoea ...
Saccharomyces boulardii in the prevention of antibiotic-associated diarrhoea ...Saccharomyces boulardii in the prevention of antibiotic-associated diarrhoea ...
Saccharomyces boulardii in the prevention of antibiotic-associated diarrhoea ...Utai Sukviwatsirikul
 
Meta-Analysis of Probiotics for the Prevention of Antibiotic Associated Diarr...
Meta-Analysis of Probiotics for the Prevention of Antibiotic Associated Diarr...Meta-Analysis of Probiotics for the Prevention of Antibiotic Associated Diarr...
Meta-Analysis of Probiotics for the Prevention of Antibiotic Associated Diarr...Utai Sukviwatsirikul
 
Descriptive epidemiology
Descriptive epidemiologyDescriptive epidemiology
Descriptive epidemiologyDalia El-Shafei
 
A study to assess the knowledge regarding prevention of pneumonia among middl...
A study to assess the knowledge regarding prevention of pneumonia among middl...A study to assess the knowledge regarding prevention of pneumonia among middl...
A study to assess the knowledge regarding prevention of pneumonia among middl...Alexander Decker
 
Sinusite Bacteriana Aguda na Infância: Diagnóstico e Tratamento
Sinusite Bacteriana Aguda na Infância: Diagnóstico e Tratamento Sinusite Bacteriana Aguda na Infância: Diagnóstico e Tratamento
Sinusite Bacteriana Aguda na Infância: Diagnóstico e Tratamento blogped1
 

What's hot (19)

OUT BREAK INVESTIGATION
OUT BREAK INVESTIGATION OUT BREAK INVESTIGATION
OUT BREAK INVESTIGATION
 
Systematic review with meta-analysis: Saccharomyces boulardii in the preventi...
Systematic review with meta-analysis: Saccharomyces boulardii in the preventi...Systematic review with meta-analysis: Saccharomyces boulardii in the preventi...
Systematic review with meta-analysis: Saccharomyces boulardii in the preventi...
 
1138-4368-3-PB.pdf
1138-4368-3-PB.pdf1138-4368-3-PB.pdf
1138-4368-3-PB.pdf
 
DENGUE THE BREAKBONE FEVER: PATHOPHYSIOLOGICAL AND PHARMACOTHERAPEUTIC UPDATE
DENGUE THE BREAKBONE FEVER: PATHOPHYSIOLOGICAL AND PHARMACOTHERAPEUTIC UPDATEDENGUE THE BREAKBONE FEVER: PATHOPHYSIOLOGICAL AND PHARMACOTHERAPEUTIC UPDATE
DENGUE THE BREAKBONE FEVER: PATHOPHYSIOLOGICAL AND PHARMACOTHERAPEUTIC UPDATE
 
CV JOHN NIXON 241116
CV  JOHN NIXON 241116CV  JOHN NIXON 241116
CV JOHN NIXON 241116
 
Concept of clinical and genetic epidemiology and their
Concept of clinical and genetic epidemiology and theirConcept of clinical and genetic epidemiology and their
Concept of clinical and genetic epidemiology and their
 
Pramit dengue presentation
Pramit dengue presentationPramit dengue presentation
Pramit dengue presentation
 
Efficacy of diphenhydramine vs desloratadine and placebo in patients with mod...
Efficacy of diphenhydramine vs desloratadine and placebo in patients with mod...Efficacy of diphenhydramine vs desloratadine and placebo in patients with mod...
Efficacy of diphenhydramine vs desloratadine and placebo in patients with mod...
 
Consensus Guidelines: Childhood Convulsive Status Epilepticus (Indian Pediatr...
Consensus Guidelines: Childhood Convulsive Status Epilepticus (Indian Pediatr...Consensus Guidelines: Childhood Convulsive Status Epilepticus (Indian Pediatr...
Consensus Guidelines: Childhood Convulsive Status Epilepticus (Indian Pediatr...
 
Pediatrics asthma
Pediatrics asthmaPediatrics asthma
Pediatrics asthma
 
Molecular epidemiology an introduction
Molecular epidemiology  an introductionMolecular epidemiology  an introduction
Molecular epidemiology an introduction
 
Study designs
Study designsStudy designs
Study designs
 
Public Health for Pre-Health Professionals
Public Health for Pre-Health ProfessionalsPublic Health for Pre-Health Professionals
Public Health for Pre-Health Professionals
 
Saccharomyces boulardii in the prevention of antibiotic-associated diarrhoea ...
Saccharomyces boulardii in the prevention of antibiotic-associated diarrhoea ...Saccharomyces boulardii in the prevention of antibiotic-associated diarrhoea ...
Saccharomyces boulardii in the prevention of antibiotic-associated diarrhoea ...
 
Meta-Analysis of Probiotics for the Prevention of Antibiotic Associated Diarr...
Meta-Analysis of Probiotics for the Prevention of Antibiotic Associated Diarr...Meta-Analysis of Probiotics for the Prevention of Antibiotic Associated Diarr...
Meta-Analysis of Probiotics for the Prevention of Antibiotic Associated Diarr...
 
epid2-1
epid2-1epid2-1
epid2-1
 
Descriptive epidemiology
Descriptive epidemiologyDescriptive epidemiology
Descriptive epidemiology
 
A study to assess the knowledge regarding prevention of pneumonia among middl...
A study to assess the knowledge regarding prevention of pneumonia among middl...A study to assess the knowledge regarding prevention of pneumonia among middl...
A study to assess the knowledge regarding prevention of pneumonia among middl...
 
Sinusite Bacteriana Aguda na Infância: Diagnóstico e Tratamento
Sinusite Bacteriana Aguda na Infância: Diagnóstico e Tratamento Sinusite Bacteriana Aguda na Infância: Diagnóstico e Tratamento
Sinusite Bacteriana Aguda na Infância: Diagnóstico e Tratamento
 

Viewers also liked

160723746 a-case-study-of-a-patient-with-pih-docx
160723746 a-case-study-of-a-patient-with-pih-docx160723746 a-case-study-of-a-patient-with-pih-docx
160723746 a-case-study-of-a-patient-with-pih-docxhomeworkping7
 
206361986 cases-ethics
206361986 cases-ethics206361986 cases-ethics
206361986 cases-ethicshomeworkping7
 
163971199 case-report-i
163971199 case-report-i163971199 case-report-i
163971199 case-report-ihomeworkping7
 
106418371 case-ika-epilepsi
106418371 case-ika-epilepsi106418371 case-ika-epilepsi
106418371 case-ika-epilepsihomeworkping7
 
102453430 beef-hormones-gmo-case-study-final-draft
102453430 beef-hormones-gmo-case-study-final-draft102453430 beef-hormones-gmo-case-study-final-draft
102453430 beef-hormones-gmo-case-study-final-drafthomeworkping7
 
205073848 transpo-11-20
205073848 transpo-11-20205073848 transpo-11-20
205073848 transpo-11-20homeworkping7
 
107020474 case-study-presentation
107020474 case-study-presentation107020474 case-study-presentation
107020474 case-study-presentationhomeworkping7
 
162672331 alla-chaptersh
162672331 alla-chaptersh162672331 alla-chaptersh
162672331 alla-chaptershhomeworkping7
 
106826880 cc-update-09-24-12
106826880 cc-update-09-24-12106826880 cc-update-09-24-12
106826880 cc-update-09-24-12homeworkping7
 
163236411 dena-case-study
163236411 dena-case-study163236411 dena-case-study
163236411 dena-case-studyhomeworkping7
 
206569099 ben-final-case-study-osmak
206569099 ben-final-case-study-osmak206569099 ben-final-case-study-osmak
206569099 ben-final-case-study-osmakhomeworkping7
 

Viewers also liked (15)

160723746 a-case-study-of-a-patient-with-pih-docx
160723746 a-case-study-of-a-patient-with-pih-docx160723746 a-case-study-of-a-patient-with-pih-docx
160723746 a-case-study-of-a-patient-with-pih-docx
 
206361986 cases-ethics
206361986 cases-ethics206361986 cases-ethics
206361986 cases-ethics
 
163971199 case-report-i
163971199 case-report-i163971199 case-report-i
163971199 case-report-i
 
106418371 case-ika-epilepsi
106418371 case-ika-epilepsi106418371 case-ika-epilepsi
106418371 case-ika-epilepsi
 
102453430 beef-hormones-gmo-case-study-final-draft
102453430 beef-hormones-gmo-case-study-final-draft102453430 beef-hormones-gmo-case-study-final-draft
102453430 beef-hormones-gmo-case-study-final-draft
 
205073848 transpo-11-20
205073848 transpo-11-20205073848 transpo-11-20
205073848 transpo-11-20
 
158953938 ff
158953938 ff158953938 ff
158953938 ff
 
107020474 case-study-presentation
107020474 case-study-presentation107020474 case-study-presentation
107020474 case-study-presentation
 
162672331 alla-chaptersh
162672331 alla-chaptersh162672331 alla-chaptersh
162672331 alla-chaptersh
 
108459462 chapter-7
108459462 chapter-7108459462 chapter-7
108459462 chapter-7
 
106826880 cc-update-09-24-12
106826880 cc-update-09-24-12106826880 cc-update-09-24-12
106826880 cc-update-09-24-12
 
102901204 case-3
102901204 case-3102901204 case-3
102901204 case-3
 
163236411 dena-case-study
163236411 dena-case-study163236411 dena-case-study
163236411 dena-case-study
 
206569099 ben-final-case-study-osmak
206569099 ben-final-case-study-osmak206569099 ben-final-case-study-osmak
206569099 ben-final-case-study-osmak
 
161144815 obesity
161144815 obesity161144815 obesity
161144815 obesity
 

Similar to 160705251 varicella

Assessing the effects of prognostic factors in recovery of tuberculosis patie...
Assessing the effects of prognostic factors in recovery of tuberculosis patie...Assessing the effects of prognostic factors in recovery of tuberculosis patie...
Assessing the effects of prognostic factors in recovery of tuberculosis patie...Alexander Decker
 
Vaccination in adults - Slideset by Professor Paolo Bonanni
Vaccination in adults - Slideset by Professor Paolo BonanniVaccination in adults - Slideset by Professor Paolo Bonanni
Vaccination in adults - Slideset by Professor Paolo BonanniWAidid
 
Prevalence of Pulmonary and Rifampicin-resistant Tuberculosis Among Patients ...
Prevalence of Pulmonary and Rifampicin-resistant Tuberculosis Among Patients ...Prevalence of Pulmonary and Rifampicin-resistant Tuberculosis Among Patients ...
Prevalence of Pulmonary and Rifampicin-resistant Tuberculosis Among Patients ...Healthcare and Medical Sciences
 
Vaccination2014 150420100600-conversion-gate02
Vaccination2014 150420100600-conversion-gate02Vaccination2014 150420100600-conversion-gate02
Vaccination2014 150420100600-conversion-gate02Marly0710
 
Vaccine-surveillance-report-week-42.pdf
Vaccine-surveillance-report-week-42.pdfVaccine-surveillance-report-week-42.pdf
Vaccine-surveillance-report-week-42.pdfMartin Hoffmann
 
Otite Media Aguda - Diagnóstico e Tratamento
Otite Media Aguda - Diagnóstico e TratamentoOtite Media Aguda - Diagnóstico e Tratamento
Otite Media Aguda - Diagnóstico e Tratamentoblogped1
 
Bacteriological profile of childhood sepsis at a tertiary health centre in so...
Bacteriological profile of childhood sepsis at a tertiary health centre in so...Bacteriological profile of childhood sepsis at a tertiary health centre in so...
Bacteriological profile of childhood sepsis at a tertiary health centre in so...QUESTJOURNAL
 
Influenza Vaccine Case Study
Influenza Vaccine Case StudyInfluenza Vaccine Case Study
Influenza Vaccine Case StudyGina Alfaro
 
Adverse effects of delayed antimicrobial treatment and surgical source contro...
Adverse effects of delayed antimicrobial treatment and surgical source contro...Adverse effects of delayed antimicrobial treatment and surgical source contro...
Adverse effects of delayed antimicrobial treatment and surgical source contro...Manuel Pivaral
 
The international survey on the management of allergic rhinitis by physicians...
The international survey on the management of allergic rhinitis by physicians...The international survey on the management of allergic rhinitis by physicians...
The international survey on the management of allergic rhinitis by physicians...Georgi Daskalov
 
Flu Vaccines....What are they good for?
Flu Vaccines....What are they good for?Flu Vaccines....What are they good for?
Flu Vaccines....What are they good for?McKinley Chiropractic
 
Flu Vaccines....What are They Good For?
Flu Vaccines....What are They Good For?Flu Vaccines....What are They Good For?
Flu Vaccines....What are They Good For?McKinley Chiropractic
 
OM-85 Applicability in routine clinical practice - Professor Susanna Esposito
OM-85 Applicability in routine clinical practice - Professor Susanna EspositoOM-85 Applicability in routine clinical practice - Professor Susanna Esposito
OM-85 Applicability in routine clinical practice - Professor Susanna EspositoWAidid
 
Vaccines for preventing influenza in healthy adults
Vaccines for preventing influenza in healthy adultsVaccines for preventing influenza in healthy adults
Vaccines for preventing influenza in healthy adultsRafael Bravo Toledo
 

Similar to 160705251 varicella (20)

Assessing the effects of prognostic factors in recovery of tuberculosis patie...
Assessing the effects of prognostic factors in recovery of tuberculosis patie...Assessing the effects of prognostic factors in recovery of tuberculosis patie...
Assessing the effects of prognostic factors in recovery of tuberculosis patie...
 
Vaccination in adults - Slideset by Professor Paolo Bonanni
Vaccination in adults - Slideset by Professor Paolo BonanniVaccination in adults - Slideset by Professor Paolo Bonanni
Vaccination in adults - Slideset by Professor Paolo Bonanni
 
Prevalence of Pulmonary and Rifampicin-resistant Tuberculosis Among Patients ...
Prevalence of Pulmonary and Rifampicin-resistant Tuberculosis Among Patients ...Prevalence of Pulmonary and Rifampicin-resistant Tuberculosis Among Patients ...
Prevalence of Pulmonary and Rifampicin-resistant Tuberculosis Among Patients ...
 
Vaccination2014 150420100600-conversion-gate02
Vaccination2014 150420100600-conversion-gate02Vaccination2014 150420100600-conversion-gate02
Vaccination2014 150420100600-conversion-gate02
 
Vaccine Truth
Vaccine TruthVaccine Truth
Vaccine Truth
 
final thesis
final thesisfinal thesis
final thesis
 
Vaccine-surveillance-report-week-42.pdf
Vaccine-surveillance-report-week-42.pdfVaccine-surveillance-report-week-42.pdf
Vaccine-surveillance-report-week-42.pdf
 
Microbiological Study of Pharyngitis at a Teaching Hospital, Chinakakani, (An...
Microbiological Study of Pharyngitis at a Teaching Hospital, Chinakakani, (An...Microbiological Study of Pharyngitis at a Teaching Hospital, Chinakakani, (An...
Microbiological Study of Pharyngitis at a Teaching Hospital, Chinakakani, (An...
 
Otite Media Aguda - Diagnóstico e Tratamento
Otite Media Aguda - Diagnóstico e TratamentoOtite Media Aguda - Diagnóstico e Tratamento
Otite Media Aguda - Diagnóstico e Tratamento
 
Bacteriological profile of childhood sepsis at a tertiary health centre in so...
Bacteriological profile of childhood sepsis at a tertiary health centre in so...Bacteriological profile of childhood sepsis at a tertiary health centre in so...
Bacteriological profile of childhood sepsis at a tertiary health centre in so...
 
Influenza Vaccine Case Study
Influenza Vaccine Case StudyInfluenza Vaccine Case Study
Influenza Vaccine Case Study
 
Okike for web
Okike for webOkike for web
Okike for web
 
Adverse effects of delayed antimicrobial treatment and surgical source contro...
Adverse effects of delayed antimicrobial treatment and surgical source contro...Adverse effects of delayed antimicrobial treatment and surgical source contro...
Adverse effects of delayed antimicrobial treatment and surgical source contro...
 
Pneumococcal vaccines
Pneumococcal vaccinesPneumococcal vaccines
Pneumococcal vaccines
 
The international survey on the management of allergic rhinitis by physicians...
The international survey on the management of allergic rhinitis by physicians...The international survey on the management of allergic rhinitis by physicians...
The international survey on the management of allergic rhinitis by physicians...
 
Flu Vaccines...What Good Are They?
Flu Vaccines...What Good Are They?Flu Vaccines...What Good Are They?
Flu Vaccines...What Good Are They?
 
Flu Vaccines....What are they good for?
Flu Vaccines....What are they good for?Flu Vaccines....What are they good for?
Flu Vaccines....What are they good for?
 
Flu Vaccines....What are They Good For?
Flu Vaccines....What are They Good For?Flu Vaccines....What are They Good For?
Flu Vaccines....What are They Good For?
 
OM-85 Applicability in routine clinical practice - Professor Susanna Esposito
OM-85 Applicability in routine clinical practice - Professor Susanna EspositoOM-85 Applicability in routine clinical practice - Professor Susanna Esposito
OM-85 Applicability in routine clinical practice - Professor Susanna Esposito
 
Vaccines for preventing influenza in healthy adults
Vaccines for preventing influenza in healthy adultsVaccines for preventing influenza in healthy adults
Vaccines for preventing influenza in healthy adults
 

More from homeworkping7

207797480 effective-study-skills-3
207797480 effective-study-skills-3207797480 effective-study-skills-3
207797480 effective-study-skills-3homeworkping7
 
207745685 b-777-oral-study
207745685 b-777-oral-study207745685 b-777-oral-study
207745685 b-777-oral-studyhomeworkping7
 
207702106 spec-pro-cases
207702106 spec-pro-cases207702106 spec-pro-cases
207702106 spec-pro-caseshomeworkping7
 
207619526 urc-case-study
207619526 urc-case-study207619526 urc-case-study
207619526 urc-case-studyhomeworkping7
 
207528705 family-case-study-1
207528705 family-case-study-1207528705 family-case-study-1
207528705 family-case-study-1homeworkping7
 
207492751 examples-of-unethical-behavior-in-the-workplace
207492751 examples-of-unethical-behavior-in-the-workplace207492751 examples-of-unethical-behavior-in-the-workplace
207492751 examples-of-unethical-behavior-in-the-workplacehomeworkping7
 
207372012 long-case-rawalo-dedi
207372012 long-case-rawalo-dedi207372012 long-case-rawalo-dedi
207372012 long-case-rawalo-dedihomeworkping7
 
207287040 a-study-on-impact-of-ites-sectors-in-india
207287040 a-study-on-impact-of-ites-sectors-in-india207287040 a-study-on-impact-of-ites-sectors-in-india
207287040 a-study-on-impact-of-ites-sectors-in-indiahomeworkping7
 
207285085 classic-knitwear-case-study
207285085 classic-knitwear-case-study207285085 classic-knitwear-case-study
207285085 classic-knitwear-case-studyhomeworkping7
 
207244508 united-color-of-benaton
207244508 united-color-of-benaton207244508 united-color-of-benaton
207244508 united-color-of-benatonhomeworkping7
 
207135483 oblicon-case-digestsxavier
207135483 oblicon-case-digestsxavier207135483 oblicon-case-digestsxavier
207135483 oblicon-case-digestsxavierhomeworkping7
 
207095812 supply-chain-management
207095812 supply-chain-management207095812 supply-chain-management
207095812 supply-chain-managementhomeworkping7
 
207043126 ikea-case-study-solution
207043126 ikea-case-study-solution207043126 ikea-case-study-solution
207043126 ikea-case-study-solutionhomeworkping7
 
206915421 avatar-case-study
206915421 avatar-case-study206915421 avatar-case-study
206915421 avatar-case-studyhomeworkping7
 
206891661 ee2002-lab-manual-fall-2013
206891661 ee2002-lab-manual-fall-2013206891661 ee2002-lab-manual-fall-2013
206891661 ee2002-lab-manual-fall-2013homeworkping7
 
206885611 eskom-ee-simama-ranta-2014
206885611 eskom-ee-simama-ranta-2014206885611 eskom-ee-simama-ranta-2014
206885611 eskom-ee-simama-ranta-2014homeworkping7
 
206883782 lawyers-fiduciary-obligations
206883782 lawyers-fiduciary-obligations206883782 lawyers-fiduciary-obligations
206883782 lawyers-fiduciary-obligationshomeworkping7
 
206869083 ortho-study-guide
206869083 ortho-study-guide206869083 ortho-study-guide
206869083 ortho-study-guidehomeworkping7
 

More from homeworkping7 (20)

207797480 effective-study-skills-3
207797480 effective-study-skills-3207797480 effective-study-skills-3
207797480 effective-study-skills-3
 
207745685 b-777-oral-study
207745685 b-777-oral-study207745685 b-777-oral-study
207745685 b-777-oral-study
 
207702106 spec-pro-cases
207702106 spec-pro-cases207702106 spec-pro-cases
207702106 spec-pro-cases
 
207619526 urc-case-study
207619526 urc-case-study207619526 urc-case-study
207619526 urc-case-study
 
207528705 family-case-study-1
207528705 family-case-study-1207528705 family-case-study-1
207528705 family-case-study-1
 
207492751 examples-of-unethical-behavior-in-the-workplace
207492751 examples-of-unethical-behavior-in-the-workplace207492751 examples-of-unethical-behavior-in-the-workplace
207492751 examples-of-unethical-behavior-in-the-workplace
 
207402181 ee-ass1
207402181 ee-ass1207402181 ee-ass1
207402181 ee-ass1
 
207372012 long-case-rawalo-dedi
207372012 long-case-rawalo-dedi207372012 long-case-rawalo-dedi
207372012 long-case-rawalo-dedi
 
207287040 a-study-on-impact-of-ites-sectors-in-india
207287040 a-study-on-impact-of-ites-sectors-in-india207287040 a-study-on-impact-of-ites-sectors-in-india
207287040 a-study-on-impact-of-ites-sectors-in-india
 
207285085 classic-knitwear-case-study
207285085 classic-knitwear-case-study207285085 classic-knitwear-case-study
207285085 classic-knitwear-case-study
 
207244508 united-color-of-benaton
207244508 united-color-of-benaton207244508 united-color-of-benaton
207244508 united-color-of-benaton
 
207137236 ee2207-lm
207137236 ee2207-lm207137236 ee2207-lm
207137236 ee2207-lm
 
207135483 oblicon-case-digestsxavier
207135483 oblicon-case-digestsxavier207135483 oblicon-case-digestsxavier
207135483 oblicon-case-digestsxavier
 
207095812 supply-chain-management
207095812 supply-chain-management207095812 supply-chain-management
207095812 supply-chain-management
 
207043126 ikea-case-study-solution
207043126 ikea-case-study-solution207043126 ikea-case-study-solution
207043126 ikea-case-study-solution
 
206915421 avatar-case-study
206915421 avatar-case-study206915421 avatar-case-study
206915421 avatar-case-study
 
206891661 ee2002-lab-manual-fall-2013
206891661 ee2002-lab-manual-fall-2013206891661 ee2002-lab-manual-fall-2013
206891661 ee2002-lab-manual-fall-2013
 
206885611 eskom-ee-simama-ranta-2014
206885611 eskom-ee-simama-ranta-2014206885611 eskom-ee-simama-ranta-2014
206885611 eskom-ee-simama-ranta-2014
 
206883782 lawyers-fiduciary-obligations
206883782 lawyers-fiduciary-obligations206883782 lawyers-fiduciary-obligations
206883782 lawyers-fiduciary-obligations
 
206869083 ortho-study-guide
206869083 ortho-study-guide206869083 ortho-study-guide
206869083 ortho-study-guide
 

Recently uploaded

Magic bus Group work1and 2 (Team 3).pptx
Magic bus Group work1and 2 (Team 3).pptxMagic bus Group work1and 2 (Team 3).pptx
Magic bus Group work1and 2 (Team 3).pptxdhanalakshmis0310
 
SKILL OF INTRODUCING THE LESSON MICRO SKILLS.pptx
SKILL OF INTRODUCING THE LESSON MICRO SKILLS.pptxSKILL OF INTRODUCING THE LESSON MICRO SKILLS.pptx
SKILL OF INTRODUCING THE LESSON MICRO SKILLS.pptxAmanpreet Kaur
 
Micro-Scholarship, What it is, How can it help me.pdf
Micro-Scholarship, What it is, How can it help me.pdfMicro-Scholarship, What it is, How can it help me.pdf
Micro-Scholarship, What it is, How can it help me.pdfPoh-Sun Goh
 
Activity 01 - Artificial Culture (1).pdf
Activity 01 - Artificial Culture (1).pdfActivity 01 - Artificial Culture (1).pdf
Activity 01 - Artificial Culture (1).pdfciinovamais
 
Application orientated numerical on hev.ppt
Application orientated numerical on hev.pptApplication orientated numerical on hev.ppt
Application orientated numerical on hev.pptRamjanShidvankar
 
psychiatric nursing HISTORY COLLECTION .docx
psychiatric  nursing HISTORY  COLLECTION  .docxpsychiatric  nursing HISTORY  COLLECTION  .docx
psychiatric nursing HISTORY COLLECTION .docxPoojaSen20
 
Python Notes for mca i year students osmania university.docx
Python Notes for mca i year students osmania university.docxPython Notes for mca i year students osmania university.docx
Python Notes for mca i year students osmania university.docxRamakrishna Reddy Bijjam
 
Grant Readiness 101 TechSoup and Remy Consulting
Grant Readiness 101 TechSoup and Remy ConsultingGrant Readiness 101 TechSoup and Remy Consulting
Grant Readiness 101 TechSoup and Remy ConsultingTechSoup
 
Key note speaker Neum_Admir Softic_ENG.pdf
Key note speaker Neum_Admir Softic_ENG.pdfKey note speaker Neum_Admir Softic_ENG.pdf
Key note speaker Neum_Admir Softic_ENG.pdfAdmir Softic
 
Jual Obat Aborsi Hongkong ( Asli No.1 ) 085657271886 Obat Penggugur Kandungan...
Jual Obat Aborsi Hongkong ( Asli No.1 ) 085657271886 Obat Penggugur Kandungan...Jual Obat Aborsi Hongkong ( Asli No.1 ) 085657271886 Obat Penggugur Kandungan...
Jual Obat Aborsi Hongkong ( Asli No.1 ) 085657271886 Obat Penggugur Kandungan...ZurliaSoop
 
Food safety_Challenges food safety laboratories_.pdf
Food safety_Challenges food safety laboratories_.pdfFood safety_Challenges food safety laboratories_.pdf
Food safety_Challenges food safety laboratories_.pdfSherif Taha
 
Seal of Good Local Governance (SGLG) 2024Final.pptx
Seal of Good Local Governance (SGLG) 2024Final.pptxSeal of Good Local Governance (SGLG) 2024Final.pptx
Seal of Good Local Governance (SGLG) 2024Final.pptxnegromaestrong
 
General Principles of Intellectual Property: Concepts of Intellectual Proper...
General Principles of Intellectual Property: Concepts of Intellectual  Proper...General Principles of Intellectual Property: Concepts of Intellectual  Proper...
General Principles of Intellectual Property: Concepts of Intellectual Proper...Poonam Aher Patil
 
Making communications land - Are they received and understood as intended? we...
Making communications land - Are they received and understood as intended? we...Making communications land - Are they received and understood as intended? we...
Making communications land - Are they received and understood as intended? we...Association for Project Management
 
Introduction to Nonprofit Accounting: The Basics
Introduction to Nonprofit Accounting: The BasicsIntroduction to Nonprofit Accounting: The Basics
Introduction to Nonprofit Accounting: The BasicsTechSoup
 
2024-NATIONAL-LEARNING-CAMP-AND-OTHER.pptx
2024-NATIONAL-LEARNING-CAMP-AND-OTHER.pptx2024-NATIONAL-LEARNING-CAMP-AND-OTHER.pptx
2024-NATIONAL-LEARNING-CAMP-AND-OTHER.pptxMaritesTamaniVerdade
 
Accessible Digital Futures project (20/03/2024)
Accessible Digital Futures project (20/03/2024)Accessible Digital Futures project (20/03/2024)
Accessible Digital Futures project (20/03/2024)Jisc
 
PROCESS RECORDING FORMAT.docx
PROCESS      RECORDING        FORMAT.docxPROCESS      RECORDING        FORMAT.docx
PROCESS RECORDING FORMAT.docxPoojaSen20
 
SOC 101 Demonstration of Learning Presentation
SOC 101 Demonstration of Learning PresentationSOC 101 Demonstration of Learning Presentation
SOC 101 Demonstration of Learning Presentationcamerronhm
 

Recently uploaded (20)

Magic bus Group work1and 2 (Team 3).pptx
Magic bus Group work1and 2 (Team 3).pptxMagic bus Group work1and 2 (Team 3).pptx
Magic bus Group work1and 2 (Team 3).pptx
 
Asian American Pacific Islander Month DDSD 2024.pptx
Asian American Pacific Islander Month DDSD 2024.pptxAsian American Pacific Islander Month DDSD 2024.pptx
Asian American Pacific Islander Month DDSD 2024.pptx
 
SKILL OF INTRODUCING THE LESSON MICRO SKILLS.pptx
SKILL OF INTRODUCING THE LESSON MICRO SKILLS.pptxSKILL OF INTRODUCING THE LESSON MICRO SKILLS.pptx
SKILL OF INTRODUCING THE LESSON MICRO SKILLS.pptx
 
Micro-Scholarship, What it is, How can it help me.pdf
Micro-Scholarship, What it is, How can it help me.pdfMicro-Scholarship, What it is, How can it help me.pdf
Micro-Scholarship, What it is, How can it help me.pdf
 
Activity 01 - Artificial Culture (1).pdf
Activity 01 - Artificial Culture (1).pdfActivity 01 - Artificial Culture (1).pdf
Activity 01 - Artificial Culture (1).pdf
 
Application orientated numerical on hev.ppt
Application orientated numerical on hev.pptApplication orientated numerical on hev.ppt
Application orientated numerical on hev.ppt
 
psychiatric nursing HISTORY COLLECTION .docx
psychiatric  nursing HISTORY  COLLECTION  .docxpsychiatric  nursing HISTORY  COLLECTION  .docx
psychiatric nursing HISTORY COLLECTION .docx
 
Python Notes for mca i year students osmania university.docx
Python Notes for mca i year students osmania university.docxPython Notes for mca i year students osmania university.docx
Python Notes for mca i year students osmania university.docx
 
Grant Readiness 101 TechSoup and Remy Consulting
Grant Readiness 101 TechSoup and Remy ConsultingGrant Readiness 101 TechSoup and Remy Consulting
Grant Readiness 101 TechSoup and Remy Consulting
 
Key note speaker Neum_Admir Softic_ENG.pdf
Key note speaker Neum_Admir Softic_ENG.pdfKey note speaker Neum_Admir Softic_ENG.pdf
Key note speaker Neum_Admir Softic_ENG.pdf
 
Jual Obat Aborsi Hongkong ( Asli No.1 ) 085657271886 Obat Penggugur Kandungan...
Jual Obat Aborsi Hongkong ( Asli No.1 ) 085657271886 Obat Penggugur Kandungan...Jual Obat Aborsi Hongkong ( Asli No.1 ) 085657271886 Obat Penggugur Kandungan...
Jual Obat Aborsi Hongkong ( Asli No.1 ) 085657271886 Obat Penggugur Kandungan...
 
Food safety_Challenges food safety laboratories_.pdf
Food safety_Challenges food safety laboratories_.pdfFood safety_Challenges food safety laboratories_.pdf
Food safety_Challenges food safety laboratories_.pdf
 
Seal of Good Local Governance (SGLG) 2024Final.pptx
Seal of Good Local Governance (SGLG) 2024Final.pptxSeal of Good Local Governance (SGLG) 2024Final.pptx
Seal of Good Local Governance (SGLG) 2024Final.pptx
 
General Principles of Intellectual Property: Concepts of Intellectual Proper...
General Principles of Intellectual Property: Concepts of Intellectual  Proper...General Principles of Intellectual Property: Concepts of Intellectual  Proper...
General Principles of Intellectual Property: Concepts of Intellectual Proper...
 
Making communications land - Are they received and understood as intended? we...
Making communications land - Are they received and understood as intended? we...Making communications land - Are they received and understood as intended? we...
Making communications land - Are they received and understood as intended? we...
 
Introduction to Nonprofit Accounting: The Basics
Introduction to Nonprofit Accounting: The BasicsIntroduction to Nonprofit Accounting: The Basics
Introduction to Nonprofit Accounting: The Basics
 
2024-NATIONAL-LEARNING-CAMP-AND-OTHER.pptx
2024-NATIONAL-LEARNING-CAMP-AND-OTHER.pptx2024-NATIONAL-LEARNING-CAMP-AND-OTHER.pptx
2024-NATIONAL-LEARNING-CAMP-AND-OTHER.pptx
 
Accessible Digital Futures project (20/03/2024)
Accessible Digital Futures project (20/03/2024)Accessible Digital Futures project (20/03/2024)
Accessible Digital Futures project (20/03/2024)
 
PROCESS RECORDING FORMAT.docx
PROCESS      RECORDING        FORMAT.docxPROCESS      RECORDING        FORMAT.docx
PROCESS RECORDING FORMAT.docx
 
SOC 101 Demonstration of Learning Presentation
SOC 101 Demonstration of Learning PresentationSOC 101 Demonstration of Learning Presentation
SOC 101 Demonstration of Learning Presentation
 

160705251 varicella

  • 1. Get Homework/Assignment Done Homeworkping.com Homework Help https://www.homeworkping.com/ Research Paper help https://www.homeworkping.com/ Online Tutoring https://www.homeworkping.com/ click here for freelancing tutoring sites BioMed Central BMC Pediatrics Research article Open Access Acyclovir for treating varicella in otherwise healthy children and adolescents: a systematic review of randomised controlled trials Terry P Klassen*, Elaine M Belseck, Natasha Wiebe and Lisa Hartling Address: Alberta Research Center for Child Health Evidence, Department of Pediat rics, University of Alberta, 2C3.00 WMC, Edmonton, Alberta, T6G 2R7, Canada E-mail: Terry P Klassen* -terry.klassen@ualberta.ca; Elaine M Belseck -elaine.be lseck@shaw.ca; Natasha Wiebe -nwiebe@ualberta.ca; Lisa Hartling -hartling@ualberta.ca *Corresponding author Published: 30 September 2002 Received: 19 July 2002 BMC Pediatrics 2002, 2:9 Accepted: 30 September 2002 This article is available from: http://www.biomedcentral.com/1471-2431/2/9 © 2002 Klassen et al; licensee BioMed Central Ltd. This article is published in Op en Access: verbatim copying and redistribution of this article are permitted in all media for any purpose, provided this notice is preserved along with the a rticle's original URL. Abstract Background: Acyclovir has the potential to shorten the course of chickenpox whic h may result in reduced costs and morbidity. We conducted a systematic review of randomised c ontrolled trials that evaluated acyclovir for the treatment of chickenpox in otherwise healthy ch ildren. Methods: MEDLINE, EMBASE, and the Cochrane Library were searched. The reference lists of relevant articles were examined and primary authors and Glaxo Wellcome were cont acted to identify additional trials. Two reviewers independently screened studies for inc lusion, assessed study quality using the Jadad scale and allocation concealment, and extracted da ta. Continuous data were converted to a weighted mean difference (WMD). Overall estimates were not c alculated due to differences in the age groups studied. Results: Three studies were included. Methodological quality was 3 (n = 2) and 4 (n = 1) on the Jadad scale. Acyclovir was associated with a significant reduction in the number of days with fever, from -1.0 (95% CI -1.5,-0.5) to -1.3 (95% CI -2.0,-0.6). Results were inconsiste nt with respect to the number of days to no new lesions, the maximum number of lesions and relief o
  • 2. f pruritis. There were no clinically important differences between acyclovir and placebo with resp ect to complications or adverse effects. Conclusion: Acyclovir appears to be effective in reducing the number of days wit h fever among otherwise healthy children with chickenpox. The results were inconsistent with r espect to the number of days to no new lesions, the maximum number of lesions and the relief o f itchiness. The clinical importance of acyclovir treatment in otherwise healthy children remains controversial. Background Varicella, or chickenpox, is a common, highly contagious illness caused by the varicella- zoster virus (VZV) [1]. It is primarily a disease of early childhood with 90% of cases occurring in children 1 to 14 years of age [2]. The disease spreads by direct person-to-person contact of open lesions or airborne droplets [1], and tends to increase in severity with each subsequent case within a household [3]. The period of transmission begins one to two days before any rash appears [4] and continues for the first five to six days [1]. The disease may be more severe in neonates [5,6], adults [7], and individuals who have impaired immune Page 1 of 9 (page number not for citation purposes)
  • 3. BMC Pediatrics 2002, 2 systems [8,9]. After one episode of varicella, individuals usually have lifelong immunity [1]. Chickenpox is generally self- limiting in young children and is manifested by fever, mild constitutional symptoms, and a pruritic, vesicular rash. Symptoms usually appear 11 20 days after exposure to VZV [2]. The rash most often appears in three successive crops of lesions numbering on average 300 to 400 [10]. The lesions progress from macules through to crusted lesions over a three-day period [11]. The rash is most commonly distributed over the trunk, scalp and face. Diagnosis can be made clinically by the rash characteristic of chickenpox [2] and a history of contact [1]. Complications of chicken pox are varied and may occur in 5 10% of all patients. Complications among otherwise healthy children are rare [12,13], but are more common among neonates, adults and immunocompromised individuals [2,14]. Data with respect to complication rates among specific subgroups are lacking. Complications primarily involve the skin, the central nervous system, and the respiratory system [13,15]. The most frequent complication is bacterial infection secondary to cutaneous lesions [2,13]. The most common neurological complications are cerebellar ataxia and encephalitis. Complications of the respiratory system include pneumonia and upper respiratory tract infections (particularly otitis media). Traditional treatment for chickenpox is symptomatic through the use of lotions to relieve itchiness [1] and acetaminophen to reduce fever and pain [4]. Newer treatments include immunoglobulins, vaccines, and anti-viral drugs for the prevention of chicken pox, as well as immunoglobulins and anti-viral drugs to moderate and shorten the course of the disease. As an anti-viral drug, acyclovir prevents the replication of the VZV [16,17] and has the potential to eradicate VZV and relieve symptoms more rapidly. Since the drug is only absorbed by the cells that are infected with the virus, acyclovir has minimal adverse effects [18]. Some reported adverse effects to the oral administration of acyclovir include nausea, vomiting, diarrhea, and vertigo [18]. The economic burden associated with chickenpox results from costs associated with hospitalisations, physician visits, prescription and non- prescription medications, and lost income by caregivers who must remain at home during the course of the child's illness [19]. It has been estimated that lost wages account for more than 95% of the total costs [20]. The U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention recommend that children remain at home for six days after the rash onset [10]. These recommendations vary according to local public health authorities; others
  • 4. http://www.biomedcentral.com/1471-2431/2/9 advocate return to normal activity earlier, particularly with milder forms of the disease [21]. The Canadian Pediatric Society recommends that children return to school as soon as they feel well enough to resume normal activities, regardless of the state of the rash [22]. Because of the potential costs associated with lost time from work by primary caregivers, an intervention that reduces the length of illness may be well received. We conducted a systematic review to assess the evidence on the efficacy of acyclovir in: (a) alleviating symptoms (number of lesions, pruritis, fever); and, (b) shortening the duration of the illness. The secondary objective was to examine complications of chickenpox and adverse effects associated with acyclovir, as reported in the relevant efficacy trials. This review was conducted in association with the Acute Respiratory Infections Group of The Cochrane Collaboration [23]. Methods A comprehensive search was conducted to identify all relevant studies regardless of language of publication or publication status. MEDLINE (1966-October 2001), EMBASE (1988-September 2001), and the Cochrane Controlled Trials Register (2002, Issue 2) were searched. The reference lists of all relevant articles were reviewed for additional studies. A letter was sent to the primary author of relevant studies as well as the pharmaceutical company that manufactures acyclovir (GlaxoSmithKline) in order to identify any other relevant trials. Finally, PubMed was searched towards the completion of the review to identify any recent publications (January 2001-April 2002). The complete search strategies are presented in an additional file (See Additional File 1: search_strategies.pdf). The output from the searches was screened independently by two reviewers (NW, EMB or LH). All potentially relevant studies were retrieved as full manuscripts and then independently reviewed for inclusion according to established criteria. Differences regarding inclusion were resolved by consensus reached after discussion. Studies were included if they: 1) were randomised controlled trials; 2) evaluated otherwise healthy children 0 18 years of age who had chickenpox; 3) compared acyclovir to placebo; 4) evaluated at least one objective outcome (i.e., amount of time to no new lesions, maximum number of lesions, time to resolution of fever and pruritis, complications, and adverse events). All relevant studies were masked by obscuring the authors' names and institutions, the locations of the study, reference lists, journal of publication and any other potential identifiers. Each of the included studies was evaluated for methodological quality using the previously validated Jadad 5-point scale to assess randomisation (0 2 points), Page 2 of 9
  • 5. (page number not for citation purposes)
  • 6. BMC Pediatrics 2002, 2 double blinding (0 2 points) and withdrawals and dropouts (0 1 point) [24]. Concealment of allocation was described as adequate, inadequate or unclear [25]. Two observers independently assessed quality (NW, TPK). Differences were resolved by consensus. Data were extracted using a structured form that captured the following information: patient demographics; patient status (inpatient or outpatient); the intervention (including dosage and route of administration); outcomes (i.e. length of time from randomisation to no new lesions, crusting, defervescence (i.e. reduction in fever), and cessation of pruritis); funding source; and, whether the studies used an intention-to-treat analysis. All complications from chickpox reported in the studies were recorded. As well, information on all adverse effects related to the use of acyclovir was collected. Two reviewers (NW, EMB) extracted data independently, and results were compared. Differences were resolved by referring to the original paper. Data were analysed using Review Manager 4.1 (Cochrane Collaboration, 2001); Splus 2000 (Insightful Corporation, 1999) was used for imputations. Continuous data (e.g., duration of symptoms in days and maximum number of lesions) were converted to the weighted mean difference (WMD). Medians were substituted for means for all outcomes in the study by Balfour et al. [26]. Means were calculated from proportions of patients remaining with lesions [27], fever [27,28], and pruritis [27]. Day 5 (fever, pruritis) and day 7 (new lesions) were used as the last possible day for the event to occur. These substitutions give less conservative estimates of variance. Interquartile ranges were converted into variances [26]. Imputing using upper bound p-values gave conservative variances in both treatment groups [27,28]. Weighted mean differences were not combined into an overall estimate due to the varied age groups between studies. There were too few studies to consider statistical heterogeneity between studies or to perform subgroup or sensitivity analyses. Publication bias was also not assessed for the same reason. Power analyses for complications were exploratory. Individual study results were pooled and chi-square tests were the bases of the power analyses. Since the adverse event data were not independent (the numbers were reported by event not by patient), risk differences could not be calculated, nor any further analysis. Results Description of studies Five hundred and ninety unique references were retrieved. Eight studies were identified as being potentially relevant. Four of the studies were excluded because they were not
  • 7. RCTs [29 32]; one RCT was excluded because it evaluated http://www.biomedcentral.com/1471-2431/2/9 immediate versus delayed anti-viral treatment therefore all patients eventually received acyclovir [33]. Three studies were included in this analysis [26 28]. There was 100% agreement between the two reviewers with respect to study relevance. The three relevant trials are described in Table 1. They were all conducted in the United States and published in English. All three studies were placebo-controlled and evaluated the efficacy of acyclovir among immunocompetent children in an outpatient setting. Methodological quality of included studies The quality scores of included studies, as measured by the Jadad scale, were four in one trial [26] and three in the remaining two trials [27,28]. All three studies were described as being randomised and double-blinded. Only one trial described a detailed and appropriate method of randomisation [26]. One trial [26] described an appropriate method of double-blinding. Two of the three trials adequately discussed withdrawals [27,28]. Allocation concealment was unclear in all three trials. Two studies [27,28] performed intention-to-treat analyses on adverse events and on a select few of the remaining outcomes. All three studies received pharmaceutical sponsorship. In addition, two studies received financial support from other external sources [26,28]. Primary outcome: number of days to no new lesions Two of the studies found a statistically significant advantage to taking acyclovir (figure 1). The number of days to no new lesions was reduced by 1.2 (95% CI -1.5,-1.0) and 1.1 days (95% CI -1.8,-0.5), respectively [27,28]. The third study found no statistically significant difference (0 days; 95% CI- 0.5,0.5) [26]. Additional outcomes The results with respect to the maximum number of lesions appeared to be homogeneous, however, only two of three studies reported a significant difference favouring treatment with acyclovir (figure 2). The WMDs ranged from -24 (95% CI -74,26) [28] to -164 (95% CI -228,100) [26]. The number of days to no fever was reduced by treatment with acyclovir in all three trials: -1.1 days (95% CI-1.3,0.9), -1.0 (95% CI -1.5,-0.5), and -1.3 (95% CI -2.0,-0.6) [27,26,28] (figure 3). The number of days to relief of pruritis was reported in two studies: Dunkle et al. found a 0.8 day advantage with acyclovir treatment (95% CI -1.0,-0.7) [27] and Balfour et al., found no advantage (0 days; 95% CI -0.6,0.6) [26]
  • 8. (figure 4). Page 3 of 9 (page number not for citation purposes)
  • 9. BMC Pediatrics 2002, 2 http://www.biomedcentral.com/1471-2431/2/9 Figure 1 Metagraph of Acyclovir versus Placebo: time to no new lesions Table 1: Characteristics of randomised controlled trials comparing acyclovir to placebo among immunocompetent children Study Number of participants Age Range (mean) Acyclovir protocol Outcomes Quality Total Per group Jadad Score Allocation Concealment Balfour 1990 102 50 acyclovir 50 placebo 5 16 years (8.1) 5 7 years: 20 mg/kg 7 12 years: 15 mg/kg 12 16 years: 10 mg/kg Days to fever, crusting, no new lesions, maximum number of lesions, decrease in number of lesions and cessation of 4 Unclear 4x/days for 5-7 days itching Maximum number of lesions Dunkle 1991 815 408 acyclovir 407 placebo 2 12 years (5.2) 20 mg/kg 4/day for 5 days Maximum number of lesions Number with >500 lesions Residual lesions at day 28 3 Unclear Balfour 1992 62 31 acyclovir 31 placebo 13 18 years (14.8) 800 mg 4/day for 5 days Days to maximum number of lesions and cessation of itching Maximum number of lesions 3 Unclear
  • 10. Residual lesions at day 28 Page 4 of 9 (page number not for citation purposes)
  • 11. BMC Pediatrics 2002, 2 http://www.biomedcentral.com/1471-2431/2/9 Figure 2 Metagraph of Acyclovir versus Placebo: maximum number of lesions Figure 3 Metagraph of Acyclovir versus Placebo: time to no fever Page 5 of 9 (page number not for citation purposes)
  • 12. BMC Pediatrics 2002, 2 http://www.biomedcentral.com/1471-2431/2/9 Figure 4 Metagraph of Acyclovir versus Placebo: time to no pruritis The earlier Balfour study [26] results were imputed from non-parametric data and may have produced less precise results. If so, this may indicate a stronger advantage for taking acyclovir in the number of days to no new lesions and relief of itching. This might also indicate a smaller advantage for taking acyclovir in reducing the maximum number of lesions. Adverse effects Reported adverse effects related to the use of acyclovir involving the gastrointestinal system included: anorexia (23 acyclovir; 30 placebo); diarrhea (25 acyclovir; 18 placebo); nausea/vomiting (11 acyclovir; 10 placebo); stomach ache/abdominal pain (22 acyclovir; 14 placebo); flatulence (2 acyclovir; 4 placebo). Those involving the respiratory system included: coryza (18 acyclovir; 23 placebo); cough (23 acyclovir; 29 placebo); ear pain/redness (5 acyclovir; 6 placebo); sore throat (24 acyclovir; 33 placebo). The following adverse effects involving the skin were noted: hives (1 acyclovir; 1 placebo); rash, other than varicella (3 acyclovir; 1 placebo). Other reported effects were: conjunctivitis (acyclovir 8; placebo 11); headache (acyclovir 21; placebo 22); malaise (acyclovir 25; placebo 28); irritability (acyclovir 1); skin odour (acyclovir 1); insomnia (acyclovir 5; placebo 5); nose bleed (acyclovir 2; placebo 1); dizziness (acyclovir 3; placebo 2); restlessness (acyclovir 1; placebo 1); arthralgia (placebo 3); frequency (place bo 1); night sweats (placebo 1); hyperkinesias (acyclovir 1; placebo 1); pain (acyclovir 1); spasmodic hand movements (acyclovir 1; placebo 1). Complications Complications from chickenpox were grouped by those involving the skin, central nervous system, or respiratory system (figure 5). Fifteen patients developed secondary bacterial skin infections (5 acyclovir; 10 placebo). Central nervous system complications included cerebellar ataxia (1 placebo) and meningoencephalitis (1 placebo). Respiratory ailments included pneumonia (1 acyclovir), otitis media (2 acyclovir; 4 placebo), pharyngitis (2 acyclovir; 2 placebo), and bronchitis (1 acyclovir). There were no significant differences between the treatment groups with respect to all the grouped complications arising from chickenpox. Skin complications gave the largest simply pooled difference at 1%. The review is not sufficiently powered to detect this difference, however, the size of difference is not deemed clinically important. The central nervous system and respiratory simply pooled differences
  • 13. were less than 0.5%. Discussion This systematic review of acyclovir for the treatment of chickenpox in otherwise healthy children supports a reduction in disease severity and a shorter course of disease. Page 6 of 9 (page number not for citation purposes)
  • 14. BMC Pediatrics 2002, 2 http://www.biomedcentral.com/1471-2431/2/9 Figure 5 Metagraph of Acyclovir versus Placebo: complications Complications are grouped a s skin, CNS and respiratory. This is demonstrated by a one-day reduction in the number of days with fever. Results were inconsistent, however, with respect to the number of days to no new lesions, the maximum number of lesions and the number of days to relief of pruritis. The results for the earlier Balfour study [26] were imputed from non-parametric data and may therefore be less precise possibly strengthening the evidence that supports the use of acyclovir in otherwise healthy children. There were no clinically important differences between acyclovir and placebo with respect to complications associated with chickenpox or adverse effects associated with the drug. The quality of the included studies was relatively good as measured by the Jadad scale, thus having a low risk of bias in the studies' conduct. However, caution is heeded when interpreting the results given that all studies had pharmaceutical sponsorship and some of the authors were affiliated with the original manufacturer of acyclovir. Research has shown that study conclusions are associated with authors' affiliations [34,35] and that studies with pharmaceutical sponsorship are more likely to have outcomes favouring the drug under study [36]. We identified only three studies relevant to this review. These studies were heterogeneous in that each studied a different age group. Because of the small number of studies and their different study populations, we did not feel that it was appropriate to provide overall estimates of efficacy. Publication bias was also not assessed because of the small number of trials. Although these studies have demonstrated the efficacy of acyclovir, the clinical importance of acyclovir treatment in otherwise healthy children remains controversial. The debate in the literature features four common themes: First, the treatment appears to confer at best modest benefits for a disease that is self-limiting and has few complications in otherwise healthy children [13,19]. Second, trials have demonstrated acyclovir to be efficacious when treatment was initiated within 24 hours of rash onset. Various authors have criticized this as being impractical in that many patients may not detect disease onset, and obtain a prescription until well after this 24hour window [15,19,37]. In a recent trial Balfour et al. showed that patients who initiated acyclovir within 24 hours of rash onset showed better clinical response to
  • 15. therapy compared to those who initiated treatment at 48 or 72 hours [33]. Further, patients who began therapy after 48 hours responded more favourably than those who Page 7 of 9 (page number not for citation purposes)
  • 16. BMC Pediatrics 2002, 2 started after 72 hours. Others have questioned the extent of compliance in practice with the treatment regimens that have been studied (i.e., four doses per day) [37,38]. Alterations in compliance may dilute already moderate results [19]. Third, while no formal cost-benefit analysis has been conducted, various critics have suggested that treatment benefits do not justify the additional costs of the drug as well as the physician visits required to obtain a prescription [13,37,38]. If treatment with acyclovir does not significantly alter the complication rate of varicella, then the rate of hospitalisations, and their associated costs, is unlikely to change [36]. In addition, only one study specifically measured the impact of acyclovir treatment on school attendance [26]. This study found no difference in the number of days missed from school between the acyclovir and placebo groups. Treatment with acyclovir may not have a substantial impact on the number of days missed from school as public health authorities in some jurisdictions move towards more permissive policies regarding school attendance following VZV infection [22]. Finally, concerns have been raised regarding the emergence of an acyclovir resistant strain of VZV [13,37 39]. There is evidence to suggest that resistant strains of VZV do not occur [33,40,41]. At present, there appear to be too many unanswered questions to advocate the widespread use of acyclovir in otherwise healthy children. The treatment of chickenpox with acyclovir may become immaterial as public health authorities worldwide move towards adopting the varicella vaccine to protect against VZV [10,15]. This review has raised questions for further research. First a comprehensive cost-benefit analysis is required. Second, there were few data available on the impact of acyclovir on the number of days missed from school or work. If one of the more important advantages of acyclovir is to allow individuals to return to their activities sooner, this needs to be specifically evaluated and documented. Third, there is no evidence regarding different doses of acyclovir treatment. Smaller doses may reduce costs and increase compliance. Fourth, further research needs to focus on the identification and treatment of immunocompetent children who are at higher risk of more severe diseases such as children with chronic respiratory conditions or children exposed through intrafamilial contact. Finally, other antivirals against varicella with improved bioavailability are now available (i.e., valaciclovir and famciclovir) and need to be studied in pediatric populations. http://www.biomedcentral.com/1471-2431/2/9 Conclusions
  • 17. When initiated within 24 hours of rash onset, treatment with acyclovir shows a therapeutic benefit by reducing the length of time with fever in immunocompetent children. However, the results are inconsistent with respect to the number of days to no new lesions, the maximum number of lesions and relief of pruritis. The existing evidence does not support the widespread use of acyclovir among young immunocompetent children in which chickenpox is selflimiting and results in few complications. Competing interests None declared. Authors' contributions TPK conducted the quality assessment, provided overall methodological and clinical expertise, and contributed to the final manuscript. EMB screened studies for inclusion, performed data extraction, and contributed to the final manuscript. NW screened studies for inclusion, performed the statistical analyses and quality assessment, and contributed to the final manuscript. LH assisted with searching and screening studies for inclusion, provided input on the analyses, and contributed to the final manuscript. All authors read and approved the final manuscript. Additional material Additional file 1 Search strategies This file contains the detailed search strategies for MEDLINE, EMBASE, CENTRAL (Cochrane Library), and PubMed. Click here for file [http://www.biomedcentral.com/content/supplementary/147124312-9-S1.pdf] Acknowledgements We thank Marlene Dorgan and Ellen Crumley for assistance with searching the literature. The Alberta Research Centre for Child Health Evidence is supported by an establishment grant from the Alberta Heritage Foundation for Medical Research. References 1. Brunell PA: Varicella-zoster infections. In: Textbook of pediatric infectious diseases (Edited by: Feign RD, Cherry JD) Philadelphia, WB Saunders 1987, 1602-1607 2. Preblud SR, Orenstein WA, Bart KJ: Varicella: clinical manifestations, epidemiology and health impact in children. Pediatr Infect Dis J 1984, 3:505-509 3. Ross AH: Modifications of chickenpox in family contacts by administration of gamma globulin. New Engl J Med 1962,
  • 18. 267:369-76 4. Avery ME: Varicella-zoster. In: Pediatric Medicine (Edited by: Avery ME, First LR) Baltimore, Williams and Wilkins 1987, 1180-1181 5. Gershon AA: Varicella in mother and infant: problems old and new. In: Infections of the fetus and newborn infant (Edited by: Krugman S, Gershon AA) New York, Alan R. Liss, Inc. 1975, 75-95 Page 8 of 9 (page number not for citation purposes)
  • 19. BMC Pediatrics 2002, 2 6. Meyers JD: Congenital varicella in term infants; risk reconsidered. J Infect Dis 1974, 129:215-217 7. Preblud SR: Age-specific risks of varicella complications. Pediatrics 1981, 68:14-17 8. Feldman SF, Hughes WT, Daniel CB: Varicella in children with cancer: seventy-seven cases. Pediatrics 1975, 56:388-397 9. Feldhoff CM, Balfour HH Jr, Simmons RL, Najarian JS, Mauer SM: Varicella in children with renal transplants. J Pediatr 1981, 98:25-31 10. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention: Infectious diseases information: varicella-zoster virus. CDC: National Center for Infectious Diseases 2001 [http://www.cdc.gov/ncidod/diseases/ list_varaicl.htm] 11. Feder HM: Treatment of adult chickenpox with oral acyclovir. Arch Intern Med 1990, 150:2061-5 12. Conway SP: Effect of oral acyclovir against primary and secondary viraemia in incubation period of varicella (commentary). Arch Dis Child 1993, 69:642-643 13. Mouzard A: Traitement par antiviral de la varicelle du nourrisson et de l'enfant: les arguments contre. Med Mal Infect 1998, 28:832-836 14. Rotbart HA, Levin MJ, Hayward AR: Immune responses to varicella zoster virus infections in healthy children. J Infect Dis 1993, 167:195-199 15. Drwal-Klein LA, O'Donovan CA: Varicella in pediatric patients. Ann Pharmacother 1993, 27(Jul/Aug):938-949 16. Laskin OL: Acyclovir: pharmacology and clinical experience. Arch Intern Med 1994, 144:1241-1246 17. Arvin AM: Oral therapy with acyclovir in infants and children. Pediatr Infect Dis J 1987, 6:56-58 18. Croze SM, Stoukides CA: Oral acyclovir in immunocompetent patients with varicella. Ann Pharmacother 1994, 28:208-209 19. Brunell PA: Chickenpox-examining our options. New Engl J Med 1991, 325:1577-1599 20. Preblud SR: Complications and costs. Pediatrics 1985, 78(Supplemental): 728-735 21. Moore DA, Hopkins RS: Assessment of a school exclusion policy during a chickenpox outbreak. Am J Epidemiol 1991, 133:11611167 22. Canadian Pediatric Society (CPS): School and daycare exclusion
  • 20. policies for chickenpox: a rational approach. Infectious Diseases Immunization Committee, Canadian Paediatric Society. Pediatr Child Health 1999, 4:287-288 23. Klassen TP, Belseck E, Wiebe N: Acyclovir for treating varicella in otherwise healthy children and adolescents (Protocol for a Cochrane Review). In: The Cochrane Library, Oxford: Update Software 2002 24. Jadad AR, Moore RA, Carroll D, Jenkinson C, Reynolds DJM, Gavaghan DJ, McQuay HJ: Assessing the quality of reports of randomised clinical trials: is blinding necessary. Control Clin Trials 1996, 17:1-12 25. Schulz KF, Chalmers I, Hayes RJ, Altman DG: Empirical evidence of bias: dimensions of methodological quality associated with estimates of treatment effects in controlled trials. JAMA 1995, 273:408-412 26. Balfour HH, Kelly JM, Suarez CS, Heussner RC, Englund JA, Crane DD, et al: Acyclovir treatment of varicella in otherwise healthy children. J Pediatr 1990, 116:633- 639 27. Dunkle LM, Arvin AM, Whitley RJ, Rotbart HA, Feder HM, Feldman S, et al: A controlled trial of acyclovir for chickenpox in normal children. New Engl J Med 1991, 325:1539-1544 28. Balfour HH, Rotbart HA, Feldman S, Dunkle LM, Feder HM, Prober CG, et al: Acyclovir treatment of varicella in otherwise healthy adolescents. J Pediatr 1992, 120:627-633 29. Feder HM: Treatment of adult chickenpox with oral acyclovir. Arch Intern Med 1990, 150:2061-2065 30. Huang Y- C, Lin T-Y, Chiu C-H: Acyclovir prophylaxis of varicella after household exposure. Pediatr Infect Dis J 1995, 14:152-154 31. Suga S, Yoshikawa T, Ozaki T, Asano Y: Effect of oral acyclovir against primary and secondary viraemia in incubation period of varicella. Arch Dis Child 1993, 69:639-643 32. Lin T-Y, Huang Y-C, Ning H-C, Hsueh C: Oral acyclovir prophylaxis of varicella after intimate contact. Pediatr Infect Dis J 1997, 16:1162-1165 33. Balfour HH, Edelman CK, Anderson RS, Reed NV, Slivken RM, Marmor LH, Dix L, Aeppli D, Talarico CL: Controlled trial of acycloh ttp://www.biomedcentral.com/1471- 2431/2/9 vir for chickenpox evaluating time of initiation and duration of therapy and viral resistance. Pediatr Infect Dis J 2001, 20:919926 34. Barnes DE, Vero LA: Why review articles on the health effects of passive smoking reach different conclusions. JAMA 1998, 279:1566-1570 35. Jadad AR, Moher M, Browman GP, Booker L, Sigouin C, Fuentes M, Stevens R: Systematic reviews and meta- analyses on treatment
  • 21. of asthma: critical evaluation. BMJ 2000, 320:537-540 36. Cho MK, Bero LA: The quality of drug studies published in symposium proceedings. Ann Intern Med 1996, 124:485-489 37. McKendrick MW: Acyclovir for childhood chickenpox. Cost is unjustified. British Medical Journal 1995, 310:108-109 38. Balfour HH: No reason not to treat. BMJ 1995, 310:109-110 39. Ghirga G, Ghirga P, Pizzabiocca A, Maccarini I, Presti A: Treatment of varicella with low doses of acyclovir for two days (letter; comment). J Pediatr 1992, 120(4Pt1):664-665 40. Cole NL, Balfour HH Jr: Varicella-zoster virus does not become more resistant to acyclovir during therapy. J Infect Dis 1986, 153:605-608 41. Englund JA, Zimmerman ME, Swierkosz DM, Goodman JL, Schll DR, Balfour HH Jr: Herpes simplex virus resistant to acyclovir. A study in a tertiary care center. Ann Intern Med 1990, 112:416-422 Pre-publication history The pre-publication history for this paper can be accessed here: http://www.biomedcentral.com/1471-2431/2/9/prepub Publish with BioMed Central and every scientist can read your work free of charge "BioMedcentral will be the most significant development for disseminating the results of biomedical research in our lifetime." Paul Nurse, Director- General, Imperial Cancer Research Fund Publish with BMC and your research papers will be: available free of charge to the entire biomedical community peer reviewed and published immediately upon acceptance cited in PubMed and archived on PubMed Central yours - you keep the copyright BioMedcentral.com Submit your manuscript here: http://www.biomedcentral.com/manuscript/ editorial@biomedcentral.com Page 9 of 9 (page number not for citation purposes)