Antihistamines in the common cold: A common prescription for a common condition

Detalhes bibliográficos
Autor(a) principal: Santos, José Agostinho
Data de Publicação: 2012
Tipo de documento: Artigo
Idioma: por
Título da fonte: Repositório Científico de Acesso Aberto de Portugal (Repositórios Cientìficos)
Texto Completo: https://doi.org/10.32385/rpmgf.v28i1.10916
Resumo: ANTIHISTAMINES IN THE COMMON COLD: A COMMON PRESCRIPTON FOR A COMMON CONDITION Goals: Antihistamines are popular among doctors for treatment of symptoms of the common cold. The aim of this paper is to review the evidence for the effectiveness and safety of antihistamines as the sole treatment for symptoms of the common cold in children and adults. Data sources:Medline, evidence-based medicine internet sites, Index of Portuguese Medical Journals and references of selected articles. Review methods: Clinical guidelines, systematic reviews, and randomized controlled trials (RCT), published between January 1980 and October 2010 were collected using the MeSH terms: antihistamine and common cold. The Strength Of Recommendation Taxonomy (SORT) scale of the American Academy of Family Physicians was used for assigning levels of evidence and the strength of recommendation. Results: Seventy articles were found and seven were selected for this review. These include two guidelines on the management of the common cold that do not recommend antihistamines as a sole treatment option and one Cochrane meta-analysis that found no clinical benefit from the use of antihistamines alone. The results of some studies included suggested an increased risk of sedative effects with the use of first generation antihistamines. The authors of this meta-analysis recommend discontinuing the practice of prescribing these drugs in the common cold (level of evidence 1). Four RCT found that different antihistamines were no more effective than placebo in reducing acute cough. Three studies showed no significant differences in side effects (level of evidence 1). Conclusions: The evidence shows that the use of antihistamines as monotherapy in symptomatic treatment of the common cold is ineffective in children and adults (SOR A). Many trials suggest an increased risk of sedative effects with this therapy (SOR B). Sedation may be confused with prostration that would suggest a worsening of the clinical situation. This may add an unnecessary cost to a common prescription.
id RCAP_c86894dc2daf0f46dd4ee3660be6b4d4
oai_identifier_str oai:ojs.rpmgf.pt:article/10916
network_acronym_str RCAP
network_name_str Repositório Científico de Acesso Aberto de Portugal (Repositórios Cientìficos)
repository_id_str 7160
spelling Antihistamines in the common cold: A common prescription for a common conditionAnti-histamínicos no resfriado comum: Uma prescrição igualmente comumAntihistamineCommon ColdAnti-histamínicosResfriado ComumANTIHISTAMINES IN THE COMMON COLD: A COMMON PRESCRIPTON FOR A COMMON CONDITION Goals: Antihistamines are popular among doctors for treatment of symptoms of the common cold. The aim of this paper is to review the evidence for the effectiveness and safety of antihistamines as the sole treatment for symptoms of the common cold in children and adults. Data sources:Medline, evidence-based medicine internet sites, Index of Portuguese Medical Journals and references of selected articles. Review methods: Clinical guidelines, systematic reviews, and randomized controlled trials (RCT), published between January 1980 and October 2010 were collected using the MeSH terms: antihistamine and common cold. The Strength Of Recommendation Taxonomy (SORT) scale of the American Academy of Family Physicians was used for assigning levels of evidence and the strength of recommendation. Results: Seventy articles were found and seven were selected for this review. These include two guidelines on the management of the common cold that do not recommend antihistamines as a sole treatment option and one Cochrane meta-analysis that found no clinical benefit from the use of antihistamines alone. The results of some studies included suggested an increased risk of sedative effects with the use of first generation antihistamines. The authors of this meta-analysis recommend discontinuing the practice of prescribing these drugs in the common cold (level of evidence 1). Four RCT found that different antihistamines were no more effective than placebo in reducing acute cough. Three studies showed no significant differences in side effects (level of evidence 1). Conclusions: The evidence shows that the use of antihistamines as monotherapy in symptomatic treatment of the common cold is ineffective in children and adults (SOR A). Many trials suggest an increased risk of sedative effects with this therapy (SOR B). Sedation may be confused with prostration that would suggest a worsening of the clinical situation. This may add an unnecessary cost to a common prescription.Objectivos: A literatura salienta a popularidade, entre a comunidade médica, da abordagem terapêutica com anti-histamínicos para o resfriado comum. O objectivo deste trabalho consiste em rever a evidência sobre a efectividade e a segurança dos anti-histamínicos em monoterapia no resfriado comum em pacientes pediátricos e adultos. Fontes de dados: Medline, sítios de medicina baseada na evidência, Índex de Revistas Médicas Portuguesas e referências bibliográficas dos artigos seleccionados. Métodos de revisão: Pesquisa de normas de orientação clínica (NOC), revisões sistemáticas e ensaios clínicos aleatorizados e controlados (ECAC), publicados entre Janeiro/1980 e Outubro/2010, utilizando os termos MeSH: antihistamines e common cold. Foi utilizada a escala Strength Of Recommendation Taxonomy (SORT) para atribuição dos níveis de evidência e forças de recomendação. Resultados: Foram encontrados 70 artigos, dos quais sete foram seleccionados: duas NOC para abordagem do resfriado comum que não incluem anti-histamínicos em monoterapia como opção terapêutica; uma meta-análise da Cochrane que não encontrou benefício clínico com o uso de anti-histamínicos em monoterapia e que sugere um risco acrescido de efeitos sedativos com os de 1.a geração. Os autores recomendam a descontinuação da prescrição destes fármacos no resfriado comum (nível de evidência 1); quatro ECAC de boa qualidade nos quais se verificou que a terapêutica com diferentes anti-histamínicos foi tão eficaz quanto o placebo na redução da tosse aguda e, em três dos quais não se apresentaram diferenças significativas nos efeitos laterais (nível de evidência 1). Conclusões: A evidência disponível indica que o uso de anti-histamínicos em monoterapia na terapêutica sintomática do resfriado comum não é efectivo em crianças e adultos (SOR A). Diversos estudos sugerem um risco acrescido de efeitos sedativos com esta terapêutica (SOR B). Esta sedação é frequentemente confundida com uma prostração que sugeriria um agravamento do quadro, algo a acrescentar a um custo desnecessário associado a esta prescrição que apenas é evidentemente comum.Associação Portuguesa de Medicina Geral e Familiar2012-01-01info:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersioninfo:eu-repo/semantics/articleapplication/pdfhttps://doi.org/10.32385/rpmgf.v28i1.10916https://doi.org/10.32385/rpmgf.v28i1.10916Portuguese Journal of Family Medicine and General Practice; Vol. 28 No. 1 (2012): Revista Portuguesa de Medicina Geral e Familiar; 43-8Revista Portuguesa de Medicina Geral e Familiar; Vol. 28 Núm. 1 (2012): Revista Portuguesa de Medicina Geral e Familiar; 43-8Revista Portuguesa de Medicina Geral e Familiar; Vol. 28 N.º 1 (2012): Revista Portuguesa de Medicina Geral e Familiar; 43-82182-51812182-517310.32385/rpmgf.v28i1reponame:Repositório Científico de Acesso Aberto de Portugal (Repositórios Cientìficos)instname:Agência para a Sociedade do Conhecimento (UMIC) - FCT - Sociedade da Informaçãoinstacron:RCAAPporhttps://rpmgf.pt/ojs/index.php/rpmgf/article/view/10916https://rpmgf.pt/ojs/index.php/rpmgf/article/view/10916/10651Santos, José Agostinhoinfo:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess2024-09-17T11:59:30Zoai:ojs.rpmgf.pt:article/10916Portal AgregadorONGhttps://www.rcaap.pt/oai/openairemluisa.alvim@gmail.comopendoar:71602024-09-17T11:59:30Repositório Científico de Acesso Aberto de Portugal (Repositórios Cientìficos) - Agência para a Sociedade do Conhecimento (UMIC) - FCT - Sociedade da Informaçãofalse
dc.title.none.fl_str_mv Antihistamines in the common cold: A common prescription for a common condition
Anti-histamínicos no resfriado comum: Uma prescrição igualmente comum
title Antihistamines in the common cold: A common prescription for a common condition
spellingShingle Antihistamines in the common cold: A common prescription for a common condition
Santos, José Agostinho
Antihistamine
Common Cold
Anti-histamínicos
Resfriado Comum
title_short Antihistamines in the common cold: A common prescription for a common condition
title_full Antihistamines in the common cold: A common prescription for a common condition
title_fullStr Antihistamines in the common cold: A common prescription for a common condition
title_full_unstemmed Antihistamines in the common cold: A common prescription for a common condition
title_sort Antihistamines in the common cold: A common prescription for a common condition
author Santos, José Agostinho
author_facet Santos, José Agostinho
author_role author
dc.contributor.author.fl_str_mv Santos, José Agostinho
dc.subject.por.fl_str_mv Antihistamine
Common Cold
Anti-histamínicos
Resfriado Comum
topic Antihistamine
Common Cold
Anti-histamínicos
Resfriado Comum
description ANTIHISTAMINES IN THE COMMON COLD: A COMMON PRESCRIPTON FOR A COMMON CONDITION Goals: Antihistamines are popular among doctors for treatment of symptoms of the common cold. The aim of this paper is to review the evidence for the effectiveness and safety of antihistamines as the sole treatment for symptoms of the common cold in children and adults. Data sources:Medline, evidence-based medicine internet sites, Index of Portuguese Medical Journals and references of selected articles. Review methods: Clinical guidelines, systematic reviews, and randomized controlled trials (RCT), published between January 1980 and October 2010 were collected using the MeSH terms: antihistamine and common cold. The Strength Of Recommendation Taxonomy (SORT) scale of the American Academy of Family Physicians was used for assigning levels of evidence and the strength of recommendation. Results: Seventy articles were found and seven were selected for this review. These include two guidelines on the management of the common cold that do not recommend antihistamines as a sole treatment option and one Cochrane meta-analysis that found no clinical benefit from the use of antihistamines alone. The results of some studies included suggested an increased risk of sedative effects with the use of first generation antihistamines. The authors of this meta-analysis recommend discontinuing the practice of prescribing these drugs in the common cold (level of evidence 1). Four RCT found that different antihistamines were no more effective than placebo in reducing acute cough. Three studies showed no significant differences in side effects (level of evidence 1). Conclusions: The evidence shows that the use of antihistamines as monotherapy in symptomatic treatment of the common cold is ineffective in children and adults (SOR A). Many trials suggest an increased risk of sedative effects with this therapy (SOR B). Sedation may be confused with prostration that would suggest a worsening of the clinical situation. This may add an unnecessary cost to a common prescription.
publishDate 2012
dc.date.none.fl_str_mv 2012-01-01
dc.type.status.fl_str_mv info:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersion
dc.type.driver.fl_str_mv info:eu-repo/semantics/article
format article
status_str publishedVersion
dc.identifier.uri.fl_str_mv https://doi.org/10.32385/rpmgf.v28i1.10916
https://doi.org/10.32385/rpmgf.v28i1.10916
url https://doi.org/10.32385/rpmgf.v28i1.10916
dc.language.iso.fl_str_mv por
language por
dc.relation.none.fl_str_mv https://rpmgf.pt/ojs/index.php/rpmgf/article/view/10916
https://rpmgf.pt/ojs/index.php/rpmgf/article/view/10916/10651
dc.rights.driver.fl_str_mv info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess
eu_rights_str_mv openAccess
dc.format.none.fl_str_mv application/pdf
dc.publisher.none.fl_str_mv Associação Portuguesa de Medicina Geral e Familiar
publisher.none.fl_str_mv Associação Portuguesa de Medicina Geral e Familiar
dc.source.none.fl_str_mv Portuguese Journal of Family Medicine and General Practice; Vol. 28 No. 1 (2012): Revista Portuguesa de Medicina Geral e Familiar; 43-8
Revista Portuguesa de Medicina Geral e Familiar; Vol. 28 Núm. 1 (2012): Revista Portuguesa de Medicina Geral e Familiar; 43-8
Revista Portuguesa de Medicina Geral e Familiar; Vol. 28 N.º 1 (2012): Revista Portuguesa de Medicina Geral e Familiar; 43-8
2182-5181
2182-5173
10.32385/rpmgf.v28i1
reponame:Repositório Científico de Acesso Aberto de Portugal (Repositórios Cientìficos)
instname:Agência para a Sociedade do Conhecimento (UMIC) - FCT - Sociedade da Informação
instacron:RCAAP
instname_str Agência para a Sociedade do Conhecimento (UMIC) - FCT - Sociedade da Informação
instacron_str RCAAP
institution RCAAP
reponame_str Repositório Científico de Acesso Aberto de Portugal (Repositórios Cientìficos)
collection Repositório Científico de Acesso Aberto de Portugal (Repositórios Cientìficos)
repository.name.fl_str_mv Repositório Científico de Acesso Aberto de Portugal (Repositórios Cientìficos) - Agência para a Sociedade do Conhecimento (UMIC) - FCT - Sociedade da Informação
repository.mail.fl_str_mv mluisa.alvim@gmail.com
_version_ 1817547192656723968