Show simple item record

dc.contributor.authorCentor, Robert Maccabbee
dc.contributor.authorAllison, Jeroan J.
dc.contributor.authorCohen, Stuart James
dc.date2022-08-11T08:10:43.000
dc.date.accessioned2022-08-23T17:17:42Z
dc.date.available2022-08-23T17:17:42Z
dc.date.issued2007-03-14
dc.date.submitted2010-08-05
dc.identifier.citationJ Gen Intern Med. 2007 Jan;22(1):127-30. <a href="http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s11606-006-0020-4">Link to article on publisher's site</a>
dc.identifier.issn0884-8734 (Linking)
dc.identifier.doi10.1007/s11606-006-0020-4
dc.identifier.pmid17351852
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/20.500.14038/47689
dc.description.abstractDespite numerous controlled trials, clinical practice guidelines and cost-effective analyses, controversy persists regarding the appropriate management strategy for adult pharyngitis. In this perspective, we explore this controversy by comparing two competing clinical guidelines. Although the guidelines appear to make widely diverging recommendations, we show that the controversy centers on only a small proportion of patients: those presenting with severe pharyngitis. We examine recently published data to illustrate that this seemingly simple problem of strep throat remains a philosophical issue: should we give primacy to relieving acute time-limited symptoms, or should we emphasize the potential societal risk of antibiotic resistance? We accept potentially over treating a minority of adult pharyngitis patients with the most severe presentations to reduce suffering in an approximately equal number of patients who will have false negative test results if the test-and-treat strategy were used.
dc.language.isoen_US
dc.relation<a href="http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?db=pubmed&cmd=Retrieve&list_uids=17351852&dopt=Abstract">Link to Article in PubMed</a>
dc.relation.urlhttp://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s11606-006-0020-4
dc.subjectAnti-Bacterial Agents
dc.subjectAntigens, Bacterial
dc.subjectDrug Resistance, Bacterial
dc.subjectHumans
dc.subjectPharyngitis
dc.subjectPractice Guidelines as Topic
dc.subjectReagent Kits, Diagnostic
dc.subjectSeverity of Illness Index
dc.subjectBioinformatics
dc.subjectBiostatistics
dc.subjectEpidemiology
dc.subjectHealth Services Research
dc.titlePharyngitis management: defining the controversy
dc.typeJournal Article
dc.source.journaltitleJournal of general internal medicine
dc.source.volume22
dc.source.issue1
dc.identifier.legacycoverpagehttps://escholarship.umassmed.edu/qhs_pp/814
dc.identifier.contextkey1426288
html.description.abstract<p>Despite numerous controlled trials, clinical practice guidelines and cost-effective analyses, controversy persists regarding the appropriate management strategy for adult pharyngitis. In this perspective, we explore this controversy by comparing two competing clinical guidelines. Although the guidelines appear to make widely diverging recommendations, we show that the controversy centers on only a small proportion of patients: those presenting with severe pharyngitis. We examine recently published data to illustrate that this seemingly simple problem of strep throat remains a philosophical issue: should we give primacy to relieving acute time-limited symptoms, or should we emphasize the potential societal risk of antibiotic resistance? We accept potentially over treating a minority of adult pharyngitis patients with the most severe presentations to reduce suffering in an approximately equal number of patients who will have false negative test results if the test-and-treat strategy were used.</p>
dc.identifier.submissionpathqhs_pp/814
dc.contributor.departmentDepartment of Quantitative Health Sciences
dc.source.pages127-30


This item appears in the following Collection(s)

Show simple item record