| Title |
Treatment of Uncomplicated Recurrent Urinary Tract Infection with Chinese Medicine Formula: A Randomized Controlled Trial
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Chinese Journal of Integrative Medicine, July 2017
|
| DOI | 10.1007/s11655-017-2960-4 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Shi-wei Liu, Jie Guo, Wei-kang Wu, Ze-liang Chen, Ning Zhang |
| Abstract |
To evaluate Chinese medicine (CM) formula Bazheng Powder () as an alternative therapeutic option for female patients with recurrent urinary tract infection (RUTI). A randomized double-blinded trial was performed. Eligible female patients with RUTI were recruited from one hospital and two community health centers. By using a blocked randomization scheme, participants were randomized to receive a CM formula (10 herbs) for 4 weeks or antibiotics for 1 week, followed by 3 weeks of placebo. Clinical cure rate and microbiological cure and recurrence after treatment were evaluated. A total 122 eligible patients were enrolled, with 61 cases in each group. The clinical cure rate by the intentto- treatment approach was 90.2% for the CM group and 82.0% for the antibiotics group (P>0.05). Bacteria were cleared from 88.5% (54/61) of patients in the CM group and 82.0% (50/61) in the antibiotics group. The recurrence rate in recovered patients at the 6-month follow-up was 9.1% (5/61) and 14.0 (7/61) in the CM and antibiotics groups, respectively (P>0.05). CM formula Bazheng Powder is a good alternative option for RUTI treatment. (Registration No. NCT01745328). |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United Kingdom | 1 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 1 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 24 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 24 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Other | 4 | 17% |
| Unspecified | 3 | 13% |
| Student > Master | 3 | 13% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 2 | 8% |
| Student > Postgraduate | 2 | 8% |
| Other | 5 | 21% |
| Unknown | 5 | 21% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 9 | 38% |
| Unspecified | 3 | 13% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 2 | 8% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 1 | 4% |
| Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science | 1 | 4% |
| Other | 2 | 8% |
| Unknown | 6 | 25% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 01 August 2017.
All research outputs
#15,474,679
of 22,996,001 outputs
Outputs from Chinese Journal of Integrative Medicine
#304
of 681 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#199,484
of 316,999 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Chinese Journal of Integrative Medicine
#4
of 10 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,996,001 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 22nd percentile – i.e., 22% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 681 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 3.8. This one is in the 43rd percentile – i.e., 43% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 316,999 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 28th percentile – i.e., 28% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 10 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has scored higher than 6 of them.