↓ Skip to main content

Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews

Antibiotics for acute maxillary sinusitis in adults

Overview of attention for article published in Cochrane database of systematic reviews, October 2015
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (84th percentile)
  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

blogs
1 blog
twitter
1 tweeter

Citations

dimensions_citation
5 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
76 Mendeley
Title
Antibiotics for acute maxillary sinusitis in adults
Published in
Cochrane database of systematic reviews, October 2015
DOI 10.1002/14651858.cd000243.pub4
Pubmed ID
Authors

Anneli Ahovuo-Saloranta, Ulla-Maija Rautakorpi, Oleg V Borisenko, Helena Liira, John W Williams Jr, Marjukka Mäkelä

Abstract

Sinusitis is one of the most common diagnoses among adults in ambulatory care, accounting for 15% to 21% of all adult outpatient antibiotic prescriptions. However, the role of antibiotics for sinusitis is controversial. To assess the effects of antibiotics in adults with acute maxillary sinusitis by comparing antibiotics with placebo, antibiotics from different classes and the side effects of different treatments. We searched CENTRAL 2013, Issue 2, MEDLINE (1946 to March week 3, 2013), EMBASE (1974 to March 2013), SIGLE (OpenSIGLE, later OpenGrey (accessed 15 January 2013)), reference lists of the identified trials and systematic reviews of placebo-controlled studies. We also searched for ongoing trials via ClinicalTrials.gov and the WHO International Clinical Trials Registry Platform (ICTRP). We imposed no language or publication restrictions. Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) comparing antibiotics with placebo or antibiotics from different classes for acute maxillary sinusitis in adults. We included trials with clinically diagnosed acute sinusitis, confirmed or not by imaging or bacterial culture. Two review authors independently screened search results, extracted data and assessed trial quality. We calculated risk ratios (RRs) for differences between intervention and control groups in whether the treatment failed or not. All measures are presented with 95% confidence intervals (CIs). We conducted the meta-analyses using either the fixed-effect or random-effects model. In meta-analyses of the placebo-controlled studies, we combined data across antibiotic classes. Primary outcomes were clinical failure rates at 7 to 15 days and 16 to 60 days follow-up. We used GRADEpro to assess the quality of the evidence. We included 63 studies in this updated review; nine placebo-controlled studies involving 1915 participants (seven of the studies clearly conducted in primary care settings) and 54 studies comparing different classes of antibiotics (10 different comparisons). Five studies at low risk of bias comparing penicillin or amoxicillin to placebo provided information on the main outcome: clinical failure rate at 7 to 15 days follow-up, defined as a lack of full recovery or improvement, for participants with symptoms lasting at least seven days. In these studies antibiotics decreased the risk of clinical failure (pooled RR of 0.66, 95% CI 0.47 to 0.94, 1084 participants randomised, 1058 evaluated, moderate quality evidence). However, the clinical benefit was small. Cure or improvement rates were high in both the placebo group (86%) and the antibiotic group (91%) in these five studies. When clinical failure was defined as a lack of full recovery (n = five studies), results were similar: antibiotics decreased the risk of failure (pooled RR of 0.73, 95% CI 0.63 to 0.85, high quality evidence) at 7 to 15 days follow-up.Adverse effects in seven of the nine placebo-controlled studies (comparing penicillin, amoxicillin, azithromycin or moxicillin to placebo) were more common in antibiotic than in placebo groups (median of difference between groups 10.5%, range 2% to 23%). However, drop-outs due to adverse effects were rare in both groups: 1.5% in antibiotic groups and 1% in control groups.In the 10 head-to-head comparisons, none of the antibiotic preparations were superior to another. However, amoxicillin-clavulanate had significantly more drop-outs due to adverse effects than cephalosporins and macrolides. There is moderate evidence that antibiotics provide a small benefit for clinical outcomes in immunocompetent primary care patients with uncomplicated acute sinusitis. However, about 80% of participants treated without antibiotics improved within two weeks. Clinicians need to weigh the small benefits of antibiotic treatment against the potential for adverse effects at both the individual and general population levels.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 tweeter who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 76 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United States 1 1%
Brazil 1 1%
Unknown 74 97%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 16 21%
Researcher 10 13%
Student > Bachelor 10 13%
Student > Postgraduate 6 8%
Other 6 8%
Other 18 24%
Unknown 10 13%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 39 51%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 4 5%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 3 4%
Linguistics 2 3%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 2 3%
Other 13 17%
Unknown 13 17%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 10. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 30 August 2021.
All research outputs
#2,710,084
of 19,512,142 outputs
Outputs from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#5,434
of 11,948 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#56,265
of 362,085 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#96
of 188 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 19,512,142 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 86th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 11,948 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 27.5. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 54% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 362,085 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 84% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 188 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 49th percentile – i.e., 49% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.