4.6 Article

Recurrent Uncomplicated Urinary Tract Infections in Women: AUA/CUA/SUFU Guideline

期刊

JOURNAL OF UROLOGY
卷 202, 期 2, 页码 282-289

出版社

LIPPINCOTT WILLIAMS & WILKINS
DOI: 10.1097/JU.0000000000000296

关键词

urinary bladder; urinary tract infections; women; recurrence

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Purpose: This document seeks to establish guidance for the evaluation and management of women with recurrent urinary tract infections (rUTI) to prevent inappropriate use of antibiotics, decrease the risk of antibiotic resistance, reduce adverse effects of antibiotic use, provide guidance on antibiotic and nonantibiotic strategies for prevention, and improve clinical outcomes and quality of life by reducing recurrence of urinary tract infection (UTI) events. Materials and Methods: The systematic review utilized to inform this guideline was conducted by a methodology team at the Pacific Northwest Evidence-based Practice Center. A research librarian conducted searches in Ovid MEDLINE (1946 to January Week 1 2018), Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (through December 2017) and Embase (through January 16, 2018). An update literature search was conducted on September 20, 2018. Results: When sufficient evidence existed, the body of evidence was assigned a strength rating of A (high), B (moderate), or C (low). Such evidence-based statements are provided as Strong, Moderate, or Conditional Recommendations. In instances of insufficient evidence, additional guidance is provided as Clinical Principles and Expert Opinions. Conclusions: Our ability to diagnose, treat, and manage rUTI long-term has evolved due to additional insights into the pathophysiology of rUTI, a new appreciation for the adverse effects of repetitive antimicrobial therapy, rising rates of bacterial antimicrobial resistance (AMR), and better reporting of the natural history and clinical outcomes of acute cystitis and rUTI. As new data continue to emerge in this space, this document will undergo review to ensure continued accuracy.

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

4.6
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