Evidence Hub

Efficacy and safety profile of moxifloxacin in treatment of urogenital system infections: A meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

Y. Mu, Jinyu Huang, Rui Liu, Xun Deng, Li-Qing Wang, P. Fang, Mei-Dan Wei, Yong Wang

2012

2 citations

Abstract

higher than conventional therapy [RR = 1.08, 95%CI (1.02, 1.14), P = 0.008; RR = 1.09, 95%CI (1.04, 1.14), P = 0.0005; RR = 1.04, 95%CI (0.99, 1.09), P = 0.08]; the incidences of adverse drug reactions between moxifloxacin and control group were not statistically significant [RR = 0.88, 95%CI (0.72, 1.06), P = 0.17]. In three large studies of pelvic inflammatory disease (PID) patients, no statistically significant difference was found between moxifloxacin monotherapy group and control group about clinical cure rates, microbiological success rates and the incidences of adverse drug reactions [RR = 0.98, 95%CI (0.95, 1.02), P = 0.33; RR = 1.06, 95%CI (0.96, 1.16), P = 0.25; RR = 0.85, 95%CI (0.68, 1.05), P = 0.13]. Moxifloxacin can be suggested as the regimen of choice for treatment of urogenital system infections.

How strong is the evidence?

Evidence Hub reads this as a meta-analysis, done in people. Its evidence level is 1 of 5 (Highest · pooled evidence). Pooled evidence from several studies sits at the top of the evidence pyramid.

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