Findings

What do systematic reviews say?

9 questions · 9 findings · 4 reviews · Headline outcomes only

Sort:Best matchNewest Highest certainty Download CSV

No studies found 2 · 22.2%GRADE not reported 0 · 0%Very low 4 · 44.4%Low 1 · 11.1%Moderate 2 · 22.2%High 0 · 0%

Topical antimicrobial agent vs systemic antimicrobial agent

Adverse events · people with diabetes and foot ulcers

Topical antimicrobial agent showed no clear difference in adverse events compared with systemic antimicrobial agent (moderate certainty).

1 finding from 1 review

Topical antimicrobial agents for treating foot ulcers in people with diabetes 2017 · Cochrane Headline outcomes only
RR 0.91 [0.78, 1.06]
4 studies · 937 participants
Moderate

Antimicrobial vs placebo or no antibiotic

Minor adverse events · people undergoing cystoscopy

Antimicrobial showed no clear difference in minor adverse events compared with placebo or no antibiotics (low certainty).

1 finding from 1 review

Antimicrobial agents for preventing urinary tract infections in adults undergoing cystoscopy 2019 · Cochrane Headline outcomes only
RR 2.82 [0.54, 14.8]
4 studies · 630 participants
Low

Antimicrobial vs placebo or no antibiotic

Serious adverse events · people undergoing cystoscopy

It is very uncertain whether antimicrobial changes serious adverse events compared with placebo or no antibiotics (very low certainty).

1 finding from 1 review

Antimicrobial agents for preventing urinary tract infections in adults undergoing cystoscopy 2019 · Cochrane Headline outcomes only
no estimate extracted
4 studies · 630 participants
Very low

Antimicrobial dressings vs non‐antimicrobial dressings

Adverse events Up to 24 weeks' · people with diabetes and foot ulcers

It is very uncertain whether antimicrobial dressings changes adverse events Up to 24 weeks' compared with non‐antimicrobial dressings (very low certainty).

1 finding from 1 review

Topical antimicrobial agents for treating foot ulcers in people with diabetes 2017 · Cochrane Headline outcomes only
RR 0.96 [0.62, 1.48]
1 study · 134 participants
Very low

Topical antimicrobial agent vs an alternative topical antimicrobial agent

Adverse events Up to 24 weeks' · people with diabetes and foot ulcers

1 finding from 1 review

Topical antimicrobial agents for treating foot ulcers in people with diabetes 2017 · Cochrane Headline outcomes only
no estimate extracted
1 study · 41 participants
Very low

Topical antimicrobial agent vs growth factor

Adverse events · people with diabetes and foot ulcers

The review found no eligible studies for this question.

1 finding from 1 review

Topical antimicrobial agents for treating foot ulcers in people with diabetes 2017 · Cochrane Headline outcomes only
no estimate extracted
Studies not reported
No studies found

Topical antimicrobial agents (non‐dressing) vs topical non‐antimicrobial agent

Adverse events Up to 24 weeks' · people with diabetes and foot ulcers

1 finding from 1 review

Topical antimicrobial agents for treating foot ulcers in people with diabetes 2017 · Cochrane Headline outcomes only
no estimate extracted
2 studies · 81 participants
Very low

Summary of findings for combination antimicrobial susceptibility testing vs conventional treatment (separate testing)

Adverse events · adults and children with pulmonary exacerbation due to Pseudomonas aeruginosa

The review found no eligible studies for this question.

1 finding from 1 review

Combination antimicrobial susceptibility testing for acute exacerbations in chronic infection of Pseudomonas… 2020 · Cochrane Headline outcomes only
no estimate extracted
Studies not reported
No studies found

Intervention not reported

Adverse events: number of moderate adverse events · adults and children with cystic fibrosis and P aeruginosa

The intervention showed no clear difference in adverse events: number of moderate adverse events (moderate certainty).

1 finding from 1 review

Standard versus biofilm antimicrobial susceptibility testing to guide antibiotic therapy in cystic fibrosis 2020 · Cochrane Headline outcomes only
RR 0.36 [0.07, 1.77]
2 studies · 73 participants
Moderate