ABSTRACT
PURPOSE: To assess the efficacy and safety of topical application of clotrimazole versus others in the treatment of oropharyngeal candidiasis (OPC). METHOD: Four electronic databases, registries of ongoing trials, and manual search were used to identify randomized controlled trials (RCTs) that compared the efficacy of clotrimazole to other antifungal agents in patients who were clinically diagnosed with oral candidiasis up to November 1st, 2019. Primary outcomes were clinical response and mycological cure rates. Secondary outcomes include relapse rate, incidence of systemic infections, and compliance. Adverse effects were also evaluated. RESULTS: Sixteen RCTs with a total of 1685 patients were included. Half of the eligible studies were considered at high risk of performance bias and more than a third, at high risk of reporting bias. Our analysis showed no significant difference in clinical response between clotrimazole and all other antifungal agents. However, clotrimazole was less effective in terms of mycologic cure and relapse rate. Sensitivity analysis comparing clotrimazole to other topical antifungal agents only showed no differences in clinical response, microbiologic cure or relapse. Further sensitivity analysis showed significant efficacy of fluconazole over clotrimazole. CONCLUSION: This meta-analysis indicated that clotrimazole is less effective than fluconazole but as effective as other topical therapies in treating OPC. Well-designed high-quality RCT is needed to validate these findings.
ABSTRACT
OBJECTIVE: To understand the influence of demographics and education levels on awareness levels, and on the prevalence of hesitancy to receive the influenza vaccine among adult patients at King Saud University Medical City (KSUMC). METHOD: A crosssectional study in the outpatient pharmacy area at KSUMC was conducted. Data was collected from January 1 to January 31, 2020. A total of 318 random adult patients were encountered and a predesigned survey was administered. After capturing demographic information, respondents were categorized into 3 groups: group A consisted of respondents who had never heard of the influenza vaccine; group B was comprised of respondents who answered that they had never received the influenza vaccine; and group C included respondents who answered that they had received at least one influenza vaccine. RESULTS: Out of the 317 survey respondents, 36 (11%) had never heard of the influenza vaccine (Group A). Of the remaining 281 (89%), 122 (39%) had not received the vaccine (Group B), whereas 159 (50%) had received it (Group C). Chi-square test results indicated a significant association between age group and awareness of the vaccine (p = .023). Moreover, there was a significant association between education level and awareness of the vaccine (p = .002). The prevalence of vaccination hesitancy was 42%. Chi-square test results indicated a significant association between gender and vaccination hesitancy (p < .001), and between education level and vaccination hesitancy (p = .011). CONCLUSION: Influenza vaccination hesitancy is prevalent among the study's population. Further efforts by health care providers and public health services may be necessary to educate the community regarding the influenza vaccine's safety and efficacy.
