Wong Tiffany, Stang Antonia S, Ganshorn Heather, Hartling Lisa, Maconochie Ian K, Thomsen Anna M, Johnson David W
Department of Pediatrics, University of British Columbia, BC Children's Hospital, Vancouver, Canada.
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2013 Oct 30;2013(10):CD009572. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD009572.pub2.
Health professionals frequently recommend fever treatment regimens for children that either combine paracetamol and ibuprofen or alternate them. However, there is uncertainty about whether these regimens are better than the use of single agents, and about the adverse effect profile of combination regimens.
To assess the effects and side effects of combining paracetamol and ibuprofen, or alternating them on consecutive treatments, compared with monotherapy for treating fever in children.
In September 2013, we searched Cochrane Infectious Diseases Group Specialized Register; Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL); MEDLINE; EMBASE; LILACS; and International Pharmaceutical Abstracts (2009-2011).
We included randomized controlled trials comparing alternating or combined paracetamol and ibuprofen regimens with monotherapy in children with fever.
One review author and two assistants independently screened the searches and applied inclusion criteria. Two authors assessed risk of bias and graded the evidence independently. We conducted separate analyses for different comparison groups (combined therapy versus monotherapy, alternating therapy versus monotherapy, combined therapy versus alternating therapy).
Six studies, enrolling 915 participants, are included.Compared to giving a single antipyretic alone, giving combined paracetamol and ibuprofen to febrile children can result in a lower mean temperature at one hour after treatment (MD -0.27 °Celsius, 95% CI -0.45 to -0.08, two trials, 163 participants, moderate quality evidence). If no further antipyretics are given, combined treatment probably also results in a lower mean temperature at four hours (MD -0.70 °Celsius, 95% CI -1.05 to -0.35, two trials, 196 participants, moderate quality evidence), and in fewer children remaining or becoming febrile for at least four hours after treatment (RR 0.08, 95% CI 0.02 to 0.42, two trials, 196 participants, moderate quality evidence). Only one trial assessed a measure of child discomfort (fever associated symptoms at 24 hours and 48 hours), but did not find a significant difference in this measure between the treatment regimens (one trial, 156 participants, evidence quality not graded).In practice, caregivers are often advised to initially give a single agent (paracetamol or ibuprofen), and then give a further dose of the alternative if the child's fever fails to resolve or recurs. Giving alternating treatment in this way may result in a lower mean temperature at one hour after the second dose (MD -0.60 °Celsius, 95% CI -0.94 to -0.26, two trials, 78 participants, low quality evidence), and may also result in fewer children remaining or becoming febrile for up to three hours after it is given (RR 0.25, 95% CI 0.11 to 0.55, two trials, 109 participants, low quality evidence). One trial assessed child discomfort (mean pain scores at 24, 48 and 72 hours), finding that these mean scores were lower, with alternating therapy, despite fewer doses of antipyretic being given overall (one trial, 480 participants, low quality evidence)Only one small trial compared alternating therapy with combined therapy. No statistically significant differences were seen in mean temperature, or the number of febrile children at one, four or six hours (one trial, 40 participants, very low quality evidence).There were no serious adverse events in the trials that were directly attributed to the medications used.
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: There is some evidence that both alternating and combined antipyretic therapy may be more effective at reducing temperatures than monotherapy alone. However, the evidence for improvements in measures of child discomfort remains inconclusive. There is insufficient evidence to know which of combined or alternating therapy might be more beneficial.Future research needs to measure child discomfort using standardized tools, and assess the safety of combined and alternating antipyretic therapy.
医疗专业人员经常为儿童推荐对乙酰氨基酚和布洛芬联合使用或交替使用的发热治疗方案。然而,这些方案是否优于单一药物使用,以及联合治疗方案的不良反应情况尚不确定。
评估对乙酰氨基酚和布洛芬联合使用或在连续治疗中交替使用与单一疗法相比,治疗儿童发热的效果和副作用。
2013年9月,我们检索了Cochrane传染病组专业注册库;Cochrane对照试验中心注册库(CENTRAL);MEDLINE;EMBASE;LILACS;以及国际药学文摘(2009 - 2011年)。
我们纳入了比较对乙酰氨基酚和布洛芬交替或联合治疗方案与单一疗法治疗发热儿童的随机对照试验。
一位综述作者和两名助手独立筛选检索结果并应用纳入标准。两名作者独立评估偏倚风险并对证据进行分级。我们对不同的比较组(联合治疗与单一疗法、交替治疗与单一疗法、联合治疗与交替治疗)进行了单独分析。
纳入了6项研究,共915名参与者。与单独使用单一退烧药相比,给发热儿童联合使用对乙酰氨基酚和布洛芬可使治疗后1小时的平均体温更低(平均差 -0.27摄氏度,95%置信区间 -0.45至 -0.08,两项试验,163名参与者,中等质量证据)。如果不再给予其他退烧药,联合治疗可能还会使4小时时的平均体温更低(平均差 -0.70摄氏度,95%置信区间 -1.05至 -0.35,两项试验,196名参与者,中等质量证据),并且治疗后至少4小时仍发热或再次发热的儿童更少(风险比0.08,95%置信区间0.02至0.42,两项试验,196名参与者,中等质量证据)。只有一项试验评估了儿童不适的一项指标(24小时和48小时时与发热相关的症状),但未发现不同治疗方案在该指标上有显著差异(一项试验,156名参与者,证据质量未分级)。在实际操作中,护理人员通常被建议先给予单一药物(对乙酰氨基酚或布洛芬),如果孩子的发热未消退或复发,再给予另一药物的进一步剂量。以这种方式进行交替治疗可能会使第二剂给药后1小时的平均体温更低(平均差 -0.60摄氏度,95%置信区间 -0.94至 -0.26,两项试验,78名参与者,低质量证据),并且给药后长达3小时仍发热或再次发热的儿童也可能更少(风险比0.25,95%置信区间0.11至0.55,两项试验,109名参与者,低质量证据)。一项试验评估了儿童不适(24、48和72小时时的平均疼痛评分),发现尽管总体退烧药剂量较少,但交替治疗的这些平均评分更低(一项试验,480名参与者,低质量证据)。只有一项小型试验比较了交替治疗与联合治疗。在1小时、4小时或6小时时的平均体温或发热儿童数量方面未发现统计学上的显著差异(一项试验,40名参与者,极低质量证据)。试验中没有直接归因于所用药物的严重不良事件。
有一些证据表明,交替和联合退烧药治疗在降低体温方面可能比单独使用单一疗法更有效。然而,关于改善儿童不适指标的证据仍然不明确。没有足够的证据来确定联合治疗或交替治疗哪种可能更有益。未来的研究需要使用标准化工具测量儿童不适,并评估联合和交替退烧药治疗的安全性。