Limits...
Intravenous moxifloxacin in routine hospital treatment of respiratory tract infections in China: results of a multicenter, noninterventional study.

Chen R, Ma W, Yu X, Liu X, Zhu J, Liang H, Wu X, Guo T - Int J Gen Med (2011)

Bottom Line: A total of 1953 patients treated with MXF were documented and were valid for an effectiveness and safety evaluation.Physicians assessed overall effectiveness as "good" or "very good" in 93.3% (n = 1822/1953) of all patients.The incidence rates of adverse events (AEs) and adverse drug reactions (ADRs) were 0.72% (n = 14) and 0.67% (n = 13), respectively.

View Article: PubMed Central - PubMed

Affiliation: State Key Laboratory of Respiratory Disease, First Affiliated Hospital of Guangzhou Medical University, China;

ABSTRACT

Objective: To investigate the effectiveness, safety, and tolerability of moxifloxacin (MXF) (intravenous [IV] or sequential therapy [IV followed by oral]) under daily treatment conditions in a large number of patients with respiratory tract infections.

Design: Patients with a diagnosis of respiratory tract infection should be treated with MXF IV and/or tablets 400 mg once daily for a duration at the physician's discretion. For each patient, the physician documented data at an initial visit and at the end of therapy (EOT) visit and/or, in the case of sequential therapy, an interim visit when the patient switched to oral treatment.

Results: A total of 1953 patients treated with MXF were documented and were valid for an effectiveness and safety evaluation. An improvement was observed in 98.1% (n = 1911/1949) of patients treated with MXF. Recovery was documented in 89.9% (n = 1754/1951) of the patients. At the EOT visit, severity of infection was assessed to be "relieved" or at least "improved" in 96.5% (n = 1873/1940) of the patients. Physicians assessed overall effectiveness as "good" or "very good" in 93.3% (n = 1822/1953) of all patients. The physicians' overall tolerability rating was "very good" or "good" in 93.5% (n = 1827/1953) of all patients. The incidence rates of adverse events (AEs) and adverse drug reactions (ADRs) were 0.72% (n = 14) and 0.67% (n = 13), respectively. One serious AE "falling white blood cell count" occurred (0.05%), which was also defined as a serious ADR and resolved.

Conclusion: MXF was generally well tolerated and highly effective in the treatment of different respiratory tract infections. The incidence of AEs and ADRs was low. The efficacy, safety, and tolerability information collected in this study confirms the clinical safety profile of MXF and its value as antibiotic treatment for respiratory tract infections.

No MeSH data available.


Related in: MedlinePlus

Physicians’ final assessment of effectiveness.
© Copyright Policy
Related In: Results  -  Collection


getmorefigures.php?uid=PMC3108199&req=5

f5-ijgm-4-317: Physicians’ final assessment of effectiveness.

Mentions: Moxifloxacin IV treatment, as well as sequential therapy (moxifloxacin IV/oral), was very effective in the treatment of respiratory tract infections. For 93.3% (n = 1822/1953) of the documented patients, effectiveness was rated as “very good” (56.4%, n = 1102/1953) and “good” (36.9%, n = 720/1953) by the attending physician. For “sufficient” and “insufficient”, 5.3% (n = 103/1953) and 1.3% (n = 25/1953) were rated individually. The overall effectiveness assessment made by the physicians is shown in Figure 5. Stratification by diagnosis revealed best ratings (“very good” and “good”) in the patient group suffering from CAP (94.5%). Of the AECB patients, 92.6% had “very good” and “good” effectiveness ratings, compared with 88.1% of patients with other infections. The physicians’ final assessment of effectiveness was also stratified by severity of the infection at the initial visit: Effectiveness was assessed as “very good” and “good” in 95.1% of patients with a “mild” infection, in 94.6% of patients with a “moderate” infection, and in 89.8% of patients with a “severe” infection. In multimorbid patients with at least two concomitant diseases, effectiveness was assessed as “very good” and “good” in 91.3% of patients compared with 95.0% of patients with fewer than two concomitant diseases.


Intravenous moxifloxacin in routine hospital treatment of respiratory tract infections in China: results of a multicenter, noninterventional study.

Chen R, Ma W, Yu X, Liu X, Zhu J, Liang H, Wu X, Guo T - Int J Gen Med (2011)

Physicians’ final assessment of effectiveness.
© Copyright Policy
Related In: Results  -  Collection

Show All Figures
getmorefigures.php?uid=PMC3108199&req=5

f5-ijgm-4-317: Physicians’ final assessment of effectiveness.
Mentions: Moxifloxacin IV treatment, as well as sequential therapy (moxifloxacin IV/oral), was very effective in the treatment of respiratory tract infections. For 93.3% (n = 1822/1953) of the documented patients, effectiveness was rated as “very good” (56.4%, n = 1102/1953) and “good” (36.9%, n = 720/1953) by the attending physician. For “sufficient” and “insufficient”, 5.3% (n = 103/1953) and 1.3% (n = 25/1953) were rated individually. The overall effectiveness assessment made by the physicians is shown in Figure 5. Stratification by diagnosis revealed best ratings (“very good” and “good”) in the patient group suffering from CAP (94.5%). Of the AECB patients, 92.6% had “very good” and “good” effectiveness ratings, compared with 88.1% of patients with other infections. The physicians’ final assessment of effectiveness was also stratified by severity of the infection at the initial visit: Effectiveness was assessed as “very good” and “good” in 95.1% of patients with a “mild” infection, in 94.6% of patients with a “moderate” infection, and in 89.8% of patients with a “severe” infection. In multimorbid patients with at least two concomitant diseases, effectiveness was assessed as “very good” and “good” in 91.3% of patients compared with 95.0% of patients with fewer than two concomitant diseases.

Bottom Line: A total of 1953 patients treated with MXF were documented and were valid for an effectiveness and safety evaluation.Physicians assessed overall effectiveness as "good" or "very good" in 93.3% (n = 1822/1953) of all patients.The incidence rates of adverse events (AEs) and adverse drug reactions (ADRs) were 0.72% (n = 14) and 0.67% (n = 13), respectively.

View Article: PubMed Central - PubMed

Affiliation: State Key Laboratory of Respiratory Disease, First Affiliated Hospital of Guangzhou Medical University, China;

ABSTRACT

Objective: To investigate the effectiveness, safety, and tolerability of moxifloxacin (MXF) (intravenous [IV] or sequential therapy [IV followed by oral]) under daily treatment conditions in a large number of patients with respiratory tract infections.

Design: Patients with a diagnosis of respiratory tract infection should be treated with MXF IV and/or tablets 400 mg once daily for a duration at the physician's discretion. For each patient, the physician documented data at an initial visit and at the end of therapy (EOT) visit and/or, in the case of sequential therapy, an interim visit when the patient switched to oral treatment.

Results: A total of 1953 patients treated with MXF were documented and were valid for an effectiveness and safety evaluation. An improvement was observed in 98.1% (n = 1911/1949) of patients treated with MXF. Recovery was documented in 89.9% (n = 1754/1951) of the patients. At the EOT visit, severity of infection was assessed to be "relieved" or at least "improved" in 96.5% (n = 1873/1940) of the patients. Physicians assessed overall effectiveness as "good" or "very good" in 93.3% (n = 1822/1953) of all patients. The physicians' overall tolerability rating was "very good" or "good" in 93.5% (n = 1827/1953) of all patients. The incidence rates of adverse events (AEs) and adverse drug reactions (ADRs) were 0.72% (n = 14) and 0.67% (n = 13), respectively. One serious AE "falling white blood cell count" occurred (0.05%), which was also defined as a serious ADR and resolved.

Conclusion: MXF was generally well tolerated and highly effective in the treatment of different respiratory tract infections. The incidence of AEs and ADRs was low. The efficacy, safety, and tolerability information collected in this study confirms the clinical safety profile of MXF and its value as antibiotic treatment for respiratory tract infections.

No MeSH data available.


Related in: MedlinePlus