Evidence Hub

Fluoroquinolone use for uncomplicated urinary tract infections in women: A retrospective cohort study

N. Daneman, D. Chateau, Matthew Dahl, Jianguo Zhang, Anat Fisher, I. Sketris, J. Quail, F. Marra et al.

Clinical Microbiology and Infection, 2020

2,857,243 participants · 36 citations

Abstract

OBJECTIVES

The United States Food & Drug Administration released an advisory in 2016 that fluoroquinolones be relegated to second line agents for uncomplicated urinary tract infections (UTIs) given reports of rare but serious side effects; similar warnings have followed from Health Canada and the European Medicines Agency. The objective was to determine whether alternative non-fluoroquinolone agents are as effective as fluoroquinolones in the treatment of UTIs.

METHODS

We conducted a retrospective population-based cohort study using administrative health data from 6 Canadian provinces. We identified women (n=1,585,997) receiving antibiotic treatment for episodes of uncomplicated UTIs (n=2,857,243) between January 1 2005 and December 31 3015. Clinical outcomes within 30 days from the initial antibiotic dispensation were compared among patients treated with a fluoroquinolone versus non-fluoroquinolone agents. High-dimensional propensity score adjustments were used to ensure comparable treatment groups and minimize residual confounding.

RESULTS

Fluoroquinolone use for UTI declined over the study period in 5 of 6 provinces, and overall accounted for 22.3-48.5% of treatments. The pooled effect across the provinces indicated that fluoroquinolones were associated with less return outpatient visits (odds ratio (OR) 0.89, 95%CI 0.87-0.92), emergency department visits (OR 0.74, 95%CI 0.61-0.89), hospitalizations (OR 0.83, 95%CI 0.77-0.88), and repeat antibiotic dispensations (OR 0.77,…

How strong is the evidence?

Evidence Hub reads this as a cohort study, done in people. Its evidence level is 3 of 5 (Moderate · trial / cohort / secondary analysis). Trials without a large randomized design, cohorts and secondary analyses give moderate evidence. Reported size: 2,857,243 participants or records.

How the five levels of evidence work. The level is assigned automatically from the abstract and can be wrong, so check the paper.

Read the paper

Related studies

Go deeper in Evidence Hub

Evidence Hub adds a study data sheet (design, sample size, evidence level, key numbers), an AI summary and a chat grounded in the paper's text.

Open this study Sign up free