Question · asked by 1 review
Oral ciprofloxacin and inhaled colistin vs inhaled tobramycin: Frequency of infective pulmonary exacerbations: number of exacerbations per patient year
- Population
- adults and children with cystic fibrosis and a positive microbiological isolate of P aeruginosa from a respiratory tract specimen
- Intervention
- Oral ciprofloxacin and inhaled colistin
- Comparison
- inhaled tobramycin
- Outcome
- Frequency of infective pulmonary exacerbations: number of exacerbations per patient year
What each review found
Include earlier review versions| Finding | Effect | Studies | GRADE certainty |
|---|---|---|---|
Oral ciprofloxacin and inhaled colistin vs inhaled tobramycin (TNS) Frequency of infective pulmonary exacerbations: number of exacerbations per patient year · adults and children with cystic fibrosis and a positive microbiological isolate of P aeruginosa from a respiratory… Antibiotic strategies for eradicating Pseudomonas aeruginosa in people with cystic fibrosis (2023) · Cochrane Headline outcomes only | no estimate extracted | 1 study · 58 participants | Very low |
Findings are shown side by side, never pooled across reviews.
The reviews
| Review | Searched up to | Included studies | AMSTAR 2 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Antibiotic strategies for eradicating Pseudomonas aeruginosa in people with cystic fibrosis 2023 · Cochrane Headline outcomes only | Not reported | Not extracted | Not assessed |
Related questions
The same intervention and outcome, asked in another population or against another comparator.
- Oral ciprofloxacin and inhaled colistin vs inhaled tobramycin (TNS) plus oral ciprofloxacin · adults and children with cystic fibrosis and a positive microbiological isolate of P… · 1 review
- Oral ciprofloxacin and inhaled colistin vs no treatment · adults and children with cystic fibrosis and a positive microbiological isolate of P… · 1 review
How reviews are matched to this question
Reviews word the same question differently. Four decision models (TypeSafe's Jev, Liquid AI's d1-ultra, SubQ Snap and Baseten's Elephant) judged each wording of the population, intervention, comparator and outcome against the others; two wordings count as the same when at least three of them agree and none clearly disagrees, and findings count as this question only when all four elements match. Timing, setting and subgroup never split a question: they are shown on each finding.