Influenza: Meta-Analyses Explore Accurate Diagnosis and Trea

[熊哥]

Two meta-analyses offer cautionary notes about the diagnosis and treatment of influenza; both appear in the Annals of Internal Medicine.
One analyzed the accuracy of rapid diagnostic tests for influenza. The analysis was based on 159 studies that compared rapid testing with a reference standard of either viral culture or reverse-transcriptase polymerase chain reaction. The authors found that the rapid tests had a specificity of 98% but a sensitivity of only 54% in adults and 67% in children. Thus, they write, a positive test is unlikely to be a false-positive, but a negative test "has a reasonable likelihood of being false negative."
The authors of the other meta-analysis — on the benefits and harms from available antiviral drugs — point to the low quality of evidence from the 74 available studies. On the basis of that evidence, they conclude that "oral oseltamivir and inhaled zanamivir may provide a net benefit over no treatment." The benefits identified included lower mortality and shorter duration of symptoms.
http://www.annals.org/content/early/201 ... 3.abstract
http://www.annals.org/content/early/201 ... 0411?aimhp

杜注: 這個may字,很有意思...