We have located links that may give you full text access.
Clinical Trial
Comparative Study
Journal Article
Randomized Controlled Trial
A controlled trial of povidone-iodine to treat infectious conjunctivitis in children.
American Journal of Ophthalmology 2002 November
PURPOSE: To report the efficacy of povidone-iodine as a treatment for conjunctivitis in pediatric patients.
DESIGN: Double-masked, controlled, prospective clinical trial.
METHODS: In an ophthalmology clinic in a general hospital in Manila, Philippines, 459 children (mean [SD] age 6.6 [6.6] years; range, 7 months-21 years) with acute conjunctivitis were studied. Infected eyes were cultured for bacteria and underwent immunofluorescent testing for Chlamydia trachomatis. Viral conjunctivitis was diagnosed if bacterial cultures were negative and diagnostic criteria were met. Subjects were alternated to receive povidone-iodine 1.25% or neomycin-polymyxin-B-gramicidin ophthalmic solution, one drop 4 times daily in the affected eye. Ocular inflammation was evaluated daily by the family or patient and weekly by an ophthalmologist. The main outcome measures were days until cured and proportion cured after 1 and 2 weeks of treatment.
RESULTS: Despite adequate statistical power (power >80% for a 1-day difference and P <.05), there was no significant difference between treatment groups regarding the number of days to cure or proportion cured at 1 or 2 weeks whether caused by bacteria or virus (P =.133-.824 for the four comparisons). After 1 week of treatment, povidone-iodine cured marginally more chlamydial infections than the antibiotic (P =.057). By 2 weeks, fewer chlamydial infections were cured than those of viral or bacterial etiology (P =.0001). The younger the patient, the faster their conjunctivitis resolved (R = 0.13, P =.013).
CONCLUSIONS: Povidone-iodine 1.25% ophthalmic solution was as effective as neomycin-polymyxin B-gramicidin for treating bacterial conjunctivitis, somewhat more effective against chlamydia, and as ineffective against viral conjunctivitis. Povidone-iodine ophthalmic solution should be strongly considered as treatment for bacterial and chlamydial conjunctivitis, especially in developing countries where topical antibiotics are often unavailable or costly.
DESIGN: Double-masked, controlled, prospective clinical trial.
METHODS: In an ophthalmology clinic in a general hospital in Manila, Philippines, 459 children (mean [SD] age 6.6 [6.6] years; range, 7 months-21 years) with acute conjunctivitis were studied. Infected eyes were cultured for bacteria and underwent immunofluorescent testing for Chlamydia trachomatis. Viral conjunctivitis was diagnosed if bacterial cultures were negative and diagnostic criteria were met. Subjects were alternated to receive povidone-iodine 1.25% or neomycin-polymyxin-B-gramicidin ophthalmic solution, one drop 4 times daily in the affected eye. Ocular inflammation was evaluated daily by the family or patient and weekly by an ophthalmologist. The main outcome measures were days until cured and proportion cured after 1 and 2 weeks of treatment.
RESULTS: Despite adequate statistical power (power >80% for a 1-day difference and P <.05), there was no significant difference between treatment groups regarding the number of days to cure or proportion cured at 1 or 2 weeks whether caused by bacteria or virus (P =.133-.824 for the four comparisons). After 1 week of treatment, povidone-iodine cured marginally more chlamydial infections than the antibiotic (P =.057). By 2 weeks, fewer chlamydial infections were cured than those of viral or bacterial etiology (P =.0001). The younger the patient, the faster their conjunctivitis resolved (R = 0.13, P =.013).
CONCLUSIONS: Povidone-iodine 1.25% ophthalmic solution was as effective as neomycin-polymyxin B-gramicidin for treating bacterial conjunctivitis, somewhat more effective against chlamydia, and as ineffective against viral conjunctivitis. Povidone-iodine ophthalmic solution should be strongly considered as treatment for bacterial and chlamydial conjunctivitis, especially in developing countries where topical antibiotics are often unavailable or costly.
Full text links
Related Resources
Trending Papers
Challenges in Septic Shock: From New Hemodynamics to Blood Purification Therapies.Journal of Personalized Medicine 2024 Februrary 4
Molecular Targets of Novel Therapeutics for Diabetic Kidney Disease: A New Era of Nephroprotection.International Journal of Molecular Sciences 2024 April 4
The 'Ten Commandments' for the 2023 European Society of Cardiology guidelines for the management of endocarditis.European Heart Journal 2024 April 18
A Guide to the Use of Vasopressors and Inotropes for Patients in Shock.Journal of Intensive Care Medicine 2024 April 14
Diagnosis and Management of Cardiac Sarcoidosis: A Scientific Statement From the American Heart Association.Circulation 2024 April 19
Essential thrombocythaemia: A contemporary approach with new drugs on the horizon.British Journal of Haematology 2024 April 9
Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university
For the best experience, use the Read mobile app
All material on this website is protected by copyright, Copyright © 1994-2024 by WebMD LLC.
This website also contains material copyrighted by 3rd parties.
By using this service, you agree to our terms of use and privacy policy.
Your Privacy Choices
You can now claim free CME credits for this literature searchClaim now
Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university
For the best experience, use the Read mobile app