Evidence Hub

Oral versus parenteral antibiotic therapy in adult patients with community-acquired pneumonia: A systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

Ge-Ling Teng, Feng Jin, Jing-Yu Chi, Hong-Mei Zhang, Xiu Li

Journal of Global Antimicrobial Resistance, 2023

2,158 participants · 6 citations

Abstract

OBJECTIVES

Antibiotic therapy is widely used for patients with community-acquired pneumonia (CAP), yet whether the efficacy of antibiotics differs based on the treatment mode remains unclear. This study aimed to summarize the evidence regarding the efficacy and safety of oral versus parenteral administration of antibiotic therapy for the treatment of patients with CAP.

METHODS

The databases of PubMed, EmBase, and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials were systematically searched for eligible randomized controlled trials (RCTs) from inception until December 11, 2021. The effectiveness of oral versus parenteral administration of antibiotic therapy was estimated using a random-effects model. Additional sensitivity, subgroup, and publication bias analyses were performed.

RESULTS

Of 912 identified articles, 12 RCTs involving 2,158 patients with CAP were included in our pooled analysis. Mostly included trials with low certainty and some concerns regarding risk of bias including lack of allocation concealment and blinding of participants and personnel. Overall, oral antibiotic therapy did not affect the incidence of clinical success at the end of treatment (relative risk [RR], 1.01; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.98-1.05; P=0.417), clinical success at follow-up (RR, 1.02; 95% CI, 0.98-1.06; P=0.301), and adverse events (RR, 0.87; 95% CI, 0.56-1.35; P=0.527). Moreover, oral antibiotic therapy had a beneficial effect on the risk of all-cause mortality (RR, 0.58; 95% CI,…

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. Reported size: 2,158 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