Is rice based oral rehydration therapy effective in young infants?

Islam, Asma; Ahmed, Maha Abdul-Aziz; Yameen, A; Rangaswamy, Thara; Molla, Ayesha; Issani, Z; Hendricks, Kristy; Snyder, John

doi:10.1136/adc.71.1.19

Cited by 11 publications

(2 citation statements)

References 22 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Other study centres were in Egypt (three trials) (el-Mougi 1988; Fayad 1993; el-Mougi 1996); Chile (two trials) (Guiraldes 1995a; Guiraldes 1995b); Mexico (two trials) (Maulen-Radovan 1994; Maulen-Radovan 2004); and one trial each was done in Australia (Wall 1997), Colombia (Bernal 2005), Madagascar (Razafindrakoto 1993), Malaysia (Iyngkaran 1998), Pakistan (Islam 1994), the Philippines (Santos Ocampo 1993), Romania (Nanulescu 1999), Sudan (Mustafa 1995), and Thailand (Intarakhao 2010). All but two trials were conducted in hospital settings.…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…A few trials reported the number of participants with vomiting (11 trials) (Patra 1982; Bhan 1987; el-Mougi 1988; Mohan 1988; Alam 1992; Islam 1994; Mustafa 1995, rice; Mustafa 1995, sorghum; Dutta 1998, adults; Dutta 1998, children; Iyngkaran 1998); hyponatraemia (six trials) (Dutta 1988; Guiraldes 1995a; Bhattacharya 1998; Dutta 2000; Zaman 2001; Ramakrishna 2008); hypokalaemia (two trials) (Bhan 1987; Zaman 2007); and development of persistent diarrhoea (two trials) (Fayad 1993; Faruque 1997). …”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Polymer-based oral rehydration solution for treating acute watery diarrhoea

Gregorio

Gonzales

Dans

et al. 2016

Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

BackgroundAcute diarrhoea is one of the main causes of morbidity and mortality among children in low-income countries. Glucose-based oral rehydration solution (ORS) helps replace fluid and prevent further dehydration from acute diarrhoea. Since 2004, the World Health Organization (WHO) has recommended the osmolarity of less than 270 mOsm/L (ORS ≤ 270) versus greater than 310 mOsm/L formulation (ORS ≥ 310). Polymer-based ORS (for example, prepared using rice or wheat) slowly releases glucose and may be superior to glucose-based ORS.ObjectivesTo compare polymer-based oral rehydration solution (polymer-based ORS) with glucose-based oral rehydration solution (glucose-based ORS) for treating acute watery diarrhoea.Search methodsWe searched the following sources up to 5 September 2016: the Cochrane Infectious Diseases Group (CIDG) Specialized Register, the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) (the Cochrane Library 2016, Issue 9), MEDLINE (1966 to 5 September 2016), EMBASE (1974 to 5 September 2016), LILACS (1982 to 5 September 2016), and mRCT (2007 to 5 September 2016). We also contacted researchers, organizations, and pharmaceutical companies, and searched reference lists.Selection criteriaWe included randomized controlled trials (RCTs) of people with acute watery diarrhoea (cholera and non-cholera associated) that compared polymer-based and glucose-based ORS (with identical electrolyte contents).Data collection and analysisTwo review authors independently assessed the search results and risk of bias, and extracted data. In multiple-treatment arms with two or more treatment groups, we combined outcomes as appropriate and compared collectively with the control group.Main resultsThirty-five trials that included 4284 participants met the inclusion criteria: 28 trials exclusively included children, five included adults, and two included both adults and children.Polymer-based ORS versus glucose-based ORS (osmolarity ≤ 270)Eight trials (752 participants) evaluated this comparison, and seven trials used rice as a polymer source. Polymer-based ORS may decrease mean stool output in the first 24 hours by 24 mL/kg (mean difference (MD) −24.60 mL/kg, 95% CI −40.69 to −8.51; one trial, 99 participants, low quality evidence). The average duration of diarrhoea may be reduced by eight hours (MD −8.24 hours, 95% CI −13.17 to −3.30; I² statistic = 86%, five trials, 364 participants, low quality evidence) with polymer ORS but results are heterogeneous. Limited trials showed no observed difference in the risk of unscheduled use of intravenous fluid (RR 0.66, 95% CI 0.43 to 1.02; I² statistic = 30%; four trials, 376 participants, very low quality evidence), vomiting (very low quality evidence), and hyponatraemia (very low quality evidence).Polymer-based ORS versus glucose-based ORS (osmolarity ≥ 310)Twenty-seven trials (3532 participants) evaluated this comparison using a variety of polymers. On average, polymer ORS may reduce the total stool output in the first 24 hours by around 65 mL/kg (MD −65.47 mL/kg, 95% CI −83....

show abstract