Treatment Of Scarlet Fever Research Articles

Діагностика та лікування скарлатини: обізнаність українських лікарів

In recent years, the incidence of scarlet fever has been increasing in Ukraine and in the world. Timely diagnosis is important to reduce the transmission of the pathogen, while timely and rational treatment reduces the frequency of the complications. Aim - to assess the knowledge of doctors regarding the diagnosis and treatment of scarlet fever, and to identify problems that arise in the management of patients with scarlet fever, in particular, when providing medical care at the primary level. Materials and methods. A sociological study was conducted by anonymously surveying doctors using Google Form in April-September 2023. We studied the awareness of Ukrainian doctors about the diagnosis and treatment of scarlet fever in children. The survey involved 100 doctors with different experiences and specializations. Results. 83% of doctors who participated in the survey work at the primary level of medical care. It was estimated that 48% of doctors consulted patients with scarlet fever rarely and only 4% of them dealt with such patients 2-3 times a week. Therefore, only one-third of the physicians, who took part in the survey, feel confident about the diagnosis of scarlet fever. A rapid test for qualitative detection of Group A Streptococcus antigen was used by 42% of doctors in their practice, whereas 50% of physicians did not have the ability to perform this test. 56% of doctors feel confident while prescribing treatment. More than half of the surveyed physicians (60%) prescribe the first choice antibiotics (amoxicillin or penicillin). Regarding the terms of isolation of patients with scarlet fever, the answers were different, only 24% of doctors answered correctly. Complications were observed by 22% of doctors. It was found that 34% of the respondents used the invalid order of the Ministry of Health of Ukraine No 354 from 2009 in their practice, whilst the minority relied on clinical Duodecim protocols and UpToDate (7% and 11% respectively). Conclusions. After analyzing the survey results, several problems, that need to be solved, have been identified: insufficient awareness of doctors with scarlet fever and its diagnosis due to the infrequent patient visits; and unavailability of rapid tests for qualitative detection of Group A Streptococcus antigen. A significant percentage of doctors (62%) do not use updated valid guidelines regarding treatment and, as a result, the physicians do not always prescribe antibiotic therapy adequately and conduct anti-epidemic measures appropriately enough. All these identified problems point to the need for constant updating of knowledge in everyday medical practice. No conflict of interests was declared by the authors.

Early retropharyngeal abscess formation after treatment of scarlet fever

Early retropharyngeal abscess formation after treatment of scarlet fever

Recurrent Attacks of Scarlet Fever

In the past years, all reports concerning the incidence of, as well as the morbidity from, scarlet fever have had common themes—that the disease is no longer the threat it was many decades ago and that the epidemiologic characteristics, symptoms, sequelae, and treatment of scarlet fever are usually no different from those of group A streptococcal (GAS) pharyngitis.1As a result, in the contemporary pediatric literature, there is no clinical information on the risk of second and even multiple attacks of scarlet fever. Therefore, we report the results of our recent study in which we prospectively examined the risk of recurrent attacks of GAS scarlet fever following the primary episode of the disease in a small series of children. Patient Reports.Enrollment. Between February 1991, and January 1992, children seen in the acute care clinic for signs and symptoms of scarlet fever (eg, abrupt onset of sore throat, fever,

Treatment of scarlet fever of children with new oral cephalosporin granules (S-640 P or cefatrizine granules) (author's transl)

Treatment of scarlet fever of children with new oral cephalosporin granules (S-640 P or cefatrizine granules) (author's transl)

Clinical evaluation of clindamycin in the treatment of scarlet fever and hemolytic-streptococcal tonsillitis

Clinical evaluation of clindamycin in the treatment of scarlet fever and hemolytic-streptococcal tonsillitis

Clinical Evaluation of Josamycin in the Treatment of Scarlet Fever and Hemolytic-Streptococcal Tonsillitis

Clinical Evaluation of Josamycin in the Treatment of Scarlet Fever and Hemolytic-Streptococcal Tonsillitis

Treatment of scarlet fever with phenoxypropyl penicillin

Treatment of scarlet fever with phenoxypropyl penicillin

Long-acting (DBED-) penicillin DBED- and procaine-penicillin in the treatment of scarlet fever; a clinical and sero-bacteriological follow-up study.

SummaryLong‐acting (DBED‐) penicillin given in two doses two weeks apart or in three doses one week apart has not been sufficient in all cases to eliminate promtly the hemolytic streptococci or prevent the occurrence of serious complications. A significantly better effect was obtained by combining the first injection of long‐acting penicillin with equal amounts of procaine‐penicillin, or by continuous oral procaine‐penicillin medication. The antistreptolysin titre increased more in the patients treated only with DBED‐penicillin, which corresponded with the fact that late bacteriological relapses and second attacks of scarlet fever were less common in this group. Thus, highly effective penicillin therapy seems to be combined invariably with a poor acquisition of immunity.The injections of DBED‐penicillin were followed by marked local reactions in about 1 per cent and by temperature increases over 38° in 2·7 per cent of the cases.Pénicilline‐retard et Pénicilline‐Procaine dans le traitement de la Scarlatine.Des injections de Pénicilline‐retard sur la base de deux injections à un intervalle de deux semaines, ou trois injections à un intervalle d'une semaine se sont révélées insuffisantes àéliminer rapidement le streptocoque hémolytique dans tous les cas, et à prévenir la survenue de complications. Un bien meilleur résultat a été obtenu en associant à la première injection de Pénicilline‐retard, une dose égale de Pénicilline‐Procaïne, ou en administrant cette dernière continuellement par voie orale. Le taux d'antistreptolysines a été plus élevé chez les malades traités uniquement par Pénicilline‐retard. Dans ce groupe, les récidives bactériennes tardives, et les rechutes se sont montrées plus rares. Ainsi, une thérapeutique pénicillée très active semble s'accompagner d'une médiocre immunité acquise. Les injections de Pénicilline‐retard ont été suivies de réactions locales importantes dans 1 % des cas, et d'une élévation thermique supérieure à 38° dans 2,7 % des cas.Langwirkendes Penizillin und Procain‐Penizillin in der Behandlung des Scharlachs.Langwirkendes Penizillin, verabfolgt in 2 Dosen mit zweiwöchentlichem Abstand oder 3 Dosen mit wöchentlichem Abstand, ist für sich allein nicht ausreichend, in alien Fällen die hämolytischen Streptokokken zu eliminieren und das Auftreten ernsterer Komplikationen zu verhindern. Eine deutlich bessere Wirkung wurde durch Kombina‐tion der ersten Injektion eines langwirkenden Penizillins mit der gleichen Menge Proeain‐Penizillin erreicht, oder bei kontinuierlicher oraler Procain‐Penizillin‐Medikation. Der Antistreptolysintiter steigt bei Patienten, welche nur mit langwirkendem Penizillin behandelt wurden, mehr an; dieser Befund stimmt mit der Tatsache überein, dass späte bakteriologische Rezidive und Zweiterkrankungen an Scharlach in dieser Gruppe weniger häufig sind. Eine hochwirksame Penizillintherapie scheint unabdingbar mit einer schlechten Immunisierung kombiniert zu sein. Die Injektion langwirkenden Penizillins hatte bei 1 % der Fälle eine deutliche Lokalreaktion, bei 2,7 % einen Temperaturanstieg über 38° zur Folge.Penicilina de acción lenta y penicilina procaína en el tratamiento de la escarlatina.Dos dosis de penicilina lenta administradas con un intervalo de dos semanas, o tres dosis administradas con un intervalo de una semana, no fueron suficientes, en todos los casos, para eliminar rápidamente el estreptococo hemolítico ni prevenir complicaciones.Un efecto significativamente mejor se obtuvo combinando una inyección de penicilina lenta con igual dosis de penicilina procaína o con esta última por vía oral continua. El título de antiestreptolisinas subió más en aquellos pacientes tratados solo con penicilina lenta lo cual coincide con el menor numero de recidivas bacteriológicas y nuevos ataques de la enfermedad. La alta efectividad de la terapía penicilínica parece estar invariablemente combinada con una pobre adquisición de inmunidad. Las inyecciones de penicilina retardada produjeron marcada reacción local en alrededor del 1 % y temperatura sobre 38° en 2,7 % de los casos.

PREVENTION OF FIRST-ATTACK RHEUMATIC FEVER

Article1 September 1955PREVENTION OF FIRST-ATTACK RHEUMATIC FEVERJOHN P. HUBBARD, M.D., F.A.C.P.JOHN P. HUBBARD, M.D., F.A.C.P.Search for more papers by this authorAuthor, Article, and Disclosure Informationhttps://doi.org/10.7326/0003-4819-43-3-504 SectionsAboutPDF ToolsAdd to favoritesDownload CitationsTrack CitationsPermissions ShareFacebookTwitterLinkedInRedditEmail ExcerptToday we hear a great deal about the prevention of rheumatic fever. The leading slogan of the American Heart Association this year is, "Stop Rheumatic Fever." The campaign is accompanied by leaflets, illustrated brochures and films. Wide circulation has been given to a statement entitled "Prevention of Rheumatic Fever and Bacterial Endocarditis through Control of Streptococcal Infections."The campaign is twofold: to prevent first-attack rheumatic fever in the general population, and to prevent recurrent episodes in individuals who have already had a first attack.Prophylactic measures directed toward the second of these objectives have now become well established. Today there...Bibliography1. Prevention of rheumatic fever and bacterial endocarditis through control of streptococcal infections: a statement prepared by the Committee on Prevention of Rheumatic Fever and Bacterial Endocarditis, appointed by the Council on Rheumatic Fever and Congenital Heart Disease of the American Heart Association, Circulation 11: 317-320 (Feb.) 1955. Google Scholar2. MadsenKalbak TK: Rheumatic fever subsequent to some epidemics of septic sore throat, Acta path. et microbiol. Scandinav. 17: 305 (3) 1940. CrossrefGoogle Scholar3. : A study of food-borne epidemic of tonsillitis and pharyngitis due to β-hemolytic streptococcus, type 5, Bull. Johns Hopkins Hosp. 77: 143-210, 1945. MedlineGoogle Scholar4. WeinsteinPotsubay LSF: A comparison of "symptomatic treatment," gamma globulin, and penicillin in treatment of scarlet fever, J. Pediat. 37: 291-306, 1950. CrossrefMedlineGoogle Scholar5. RammelkampWannamakerDenny CHLWFW: The epidemiology and prevention of rheumatic fever, Bull. New York Acad. Med. 28: 321-334 (May) 1952. MedlineGoogle Scholar6. Massell BF: Present status of penicillin prophylaxis of rheumatic fever, Mod. Concepts Cardiovas. Dis. 20: 108 (Sept.) 1951. MedlineGoogle Scholar7. BunnBennett WHHN: Community control of rheumatic fever, J. A. M. A. 157: 986-989 (Mar. 19) 1955. CrossrefMedlineGoogle Scholar8. BreeseDisney BBFA: The accuracy of diagnosis of beta streptococcal infections on clinical grounds, J. Pediat. 44: 670-673 (June) 1954. CrossrefMedlineGoogle Scholar This content is PDF only. To continue reading please click on the PDF icon. Author, Article, and Disclosure InformationAffiliations: Philadelphia, Pennsylvania*From the Symposium on Preventive Medicine, presented at the Thirty-sixth Annual Session of The American College of Physicians, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, April 29, 1955.†George S. Pepper Professor of Public Health and Preventive Medicine, Medical School, University of Pennsylvania.‡The specific treatment schedule recommended by the American Heart Association is one of the following:1. Benzathine Penicillin G: one intramuscular injection of 600,000 units for children; 600,000 to 900,000 units for adults.2. Procaine penicillin with aluminum monostearate in oil: one intramuscular injection of 300,000 units every third day for three doses; double this dose for adults (600,000 units every third day for three days).3. Oral penicillin: 250,000 units three times a day for a full 10 days. To prevent rheumatic fever by eradicating streptococci, therapy must be continued for the entire 10 days, even though the temperature returns to normal and the patient is asymptomatic. PreviousarticleNextarticle Advertisement FiguresReferencesRelatedDetails Metrics Cited byAn Evaluation of a Streptococcal Control ProgramErkrankungen des EndokardSTREPTOCOCCAL INFECTION IN A SCHOOL POPULATION: PRELIMINARY REPORT*†DAVID CORNFELD, M.D., GEORGES WERNER, Ph.D., RUTH WEAVER, M.D., MARJORIE T. BELLOWS, JOHN P. HUBBARD, M.D., F.A.C.P.The Etiology and Pathogenesis of Rheumatic Fever 1 September 1955Volume 43, Issue 3Page: 504-510KeywordsHeartIntramuscular injectionsPenicillinPrevention, policy, and public healthPreventive medicineProphylaxisRheumatic feverStreptococcal infectionsTemperatureUpper respiratory tract infections ePublished: 1 December 2008 Issue Published: 1 September 1955 PDF downloadLoading ...

SCARLET FEVER<subtitle>Evaluation of Continuous and Intermittent Penicillin Therapy</subtitle>

SINCE 1945 when penicillin became available for general use, several investigators have reported on its use in the treatment of scarlet fever. Although there has been general agreement on the satisfactory therapeutic role of penicillin, there is no moderately close agreement as to method of administration, type of agent used, and duration of treatment. It is felt that a satisfactory standardization of treatment might be suggested by a correlation of our results with those of other investigations. Our objective is twofold: first, to report the results of a critical clinical investigation of the effect of penicillin in the treatment of 386 scarlet fever patients, and second, to review briefly the current opinions of present-day writers in this field. CLINICAL MATERIAL The study included 386 patients whose duration of illness was four days or less before hospitalization. There were 185 males and 201 females in the group. All were hospitalized immediately

The treatment of scarlet fever with penicillin G administered orally three times a day

The treatment of scarlet fever with penicillin G administered orally three times a day

A comparison of “symptomatic treatment,” gamma globulin, and penicillin in the treatment of scarlet fever

A comparison of “symptomatic treatment,” gamma globulin, and penicillin in the treatment of scarlet fever

Treatment of Scarlet Fever and Scarlatinal Otitis with Penicillin

Treatment of Scarlet Fever and Scarlatinal Otitis with Penicillin

PENICILLIN FOR SCARLET FEVER

Almost from the moment penicillin became available for therapeutic purposes its value in the treatment of streptococcic infections was acknowledged.¹For that reason we believed it desirable to determine if penicillin would be an efficient agent in the treatment of scarlet fever. We considered that it ought to be helpful in combating scarlet fever regardless of whether the disease was mild or severe. Consequently, during the past fourteen months we have used penicillin as an exclusive therapeutic agent for 116 patients with scarlet fever. Since beginning our observations on the action of penicillin in scarlet fever, Meads, Flipse, Barnes and Finland²have published a report concerning 9 patients with scarlet fever who were treated with penicillin. Ashley³stated recently that the treatment of choice for scarlet fever consists in giving both convalescent scarlet fever serum and penicillin. But on the basis of past experience we believe equally

Observations on the treatment of scarlet fever with penicillin: Epidemiology Unit No. 82, U. S. Naval Hospital, Treasure Island Am. J. M. Sc. 211: 417 (April) 1946

Observations on the treatment of scarlet fever with penicillin: Epidemiology Unit No. 82, U. S. Naval Hospital, Treasure Island Am. J. M. Sc. 211: 417 (April) 1946

TREATMENT OF SCARLET FEVER

During the past twenty years the treatment of scarlet fever has been radically changed by new technics which have become available. Three types of therapy are now possible: (1) chemotherapy with sulfonamide compounds; (2) administration of commercial antitoxin, and (3) administration of convalescent serum. An analysis of these various therapeutic measures is pertinent if the serious effects of this disease are to be combated successfully. In 1940, Fox and Hardgrove1compared azosulfamide (disodium 4-sulfamidophenyl-2'azo-7'-acetylamino-1' - hydroxynaphthalene-3',6' disulfonate) with convalescent serum for the therapy of scarlet fever. It was demonstrated that this sulfonamide compound had no appreciable effect on the syndrome caused by the erythrogenic toxin, whereas the convalescent serum produced an immediate response. Azosulfamide was of value in treating specific complications, such as streptococcemia, meningitis and surgically inaccessible foci but was of no value for the toxic phase or type of the disease. French2noted similar results in a well

The value of sulfanilamide and scarlet fever antitoxin in the treatment of scarlet fever

Summary 1. A series of 680 patients treated at Kingston Avenue Hospital in the spring of 1940 is reported. The cases are divided into mild, moderate, and severe groups. None of the last is included as only three such cases were encountered. 2. In the mild group of cases the controls showed a complication rate of 33.3 per cent, and the sulfanilamide treated cases, 13.1 per cent. The isolation period in the control cases (24.25 days) was longer than that in the treated cases (22.87 days). 3. In the moderate group of cases both the control cases and those treated with scarlet fever antitoxin alone had appreciably larger complication rates (60.3 per cent and 41.5 per cent) than those treated with sulfanilamide alone (24.1 per cent) or in combination with antitoxin (23.8 per cent). The isolation period in the control group (29.7 days) was appreciably longer than that in the three treated groups (25.5 days). 4. The incidence of toxic manifestations from sulfanilamide was 20 per cent, of which 71 per cent were cutaneous eruptions. These were all morbilliform in character, and 57 per cent of them appeared on the tenth day of chemotherapy. 5. None of the more serious ill effects of sulfanilamide was encountered. 6. Of 111 patients receiving scarlet fever antitoxin, only four (3.6 per cent) exhibited serum disease—all mild in severity.

THERAPEUTIC PROCEDURES FOR SCARLET FEVER

There is a great difference of opinion as to the efficacy of sulfanilamide in the treatment of scarlet fever. This situation is usual with any new drug, when further experience after its introduction has shown it not to be of great specific value. Reports in the literature vary from that of Le Fevre, 1 who wrote of treating a large number of in only 1 of whom there developed the usual complications of scarlet fever, such as otitis media, adenitis or mastoiditis. to that of Schwentker and Waghlestein, 2 who actually found more otitic complications in the patients given sulfanilamide than in the controls. We have just completed a controlled study of 293 patients with scarlet fever admitted to and discharged from the Kingston Avenue Hospital for Contagious Diseases between February and June 1939. The investigation was started in an attempt to determine the value of sulfanilamide and scarlet

II. Treatment of scarlet fever with specific antitoxins of low protein content

II. Treatment of scarlet fever with specific antitoxins of low protein content

Treatment of scarlet fever with specific antitoxins of low protein content

Treatment of scarlet fever with specific antitoxins of low protein content