4.5 Article

Do We Know When, What and For How Long to Treat? Antibiotic Therapy for Pediatric Community-acquired Pneumonia

期刊

PEDIATRIC INFECTIOUS DISEASE JOURNAL
卷 31, 期 6, 页码 E78-E85

出版社

LIPPINCOTT WILLIAMS & WILKINS
DOI: 10.1097/INF.0b013e318255dc5b

关键词

antibiotics; antimicrobial treatment; community-acquired pneumonia; pneumonia; respiratory infection

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Community-acquired pneumonia (CAP) is a common cause of morbidity among children in developed countries and accounts for an incidence of 10-40 cases per 1000 children in the first 5 years of life. Given the clinical, social and economic importance of CAP, there is general agreement that prompt and adequate therapy is essential to reduce the impact of the disease. The aim of this discussion paper is to consider critically the available data concerning the treatment of uncomplicated pediatric CAP and to consider when, how and for how long it should be treated. This review has identified the various reasons that make it difficult to establish a rational approach to the treatment of pediatric CAP, including the definition of CAP, the absence of a pediatric CAP severity score, the difficulty of identifying the etiology, limited pharmacokinetic (PK)/pharmacodynamic (PD) studies, the high resistance of the most frequent respiratory pathogens to the most widely used anti-infectious agents and the lack of information concerning the changes in CAP epidemiology following the introduction of new vaccines against respiratory pathogens. More research is clearly required in various areas, such as the etiology of CAP and the reasons for its complications, the better definition of first-and second-line antibiotic therapies (including the doses and duration of parenteral and oral antibiotic treatment), the role of antiviral treatment and on how to follow-up patients with CAP. Finally, further efforts are needed to increase vaccination coverage against respiratory pathogens and to conduct prospective studies of their impact.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.5
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据