Reyes HKL, Reyes GU, Reyes MHA, Guerrero BM, Gutiérrez PDM, Santos Salazar, Leonardo; Mijangos UFJ, Peña CPJ, Hernández LS, Reyes HMU, López CG, Quero HA

Language: Spanish
References: 9
Page: 56-58
PDF size: 238.66 Kb.

ABSTRACT

Introduction. Azalides and macrolides are alternatives for bacterial pharyngoamygdalitis treatment, for atypical bacterial infection and allergic to penicillin children. aim: compare acceptance erythromycins and azalide flavor in liquid formulation.
Method. A prospective, blinded, observational study to assess acceptance of three different trademarks erythromycins (erythromycin estolate, claritromycin and azitromycin). Those subjects who were able to fast, and who in their medical history data showed no allergy to the drugs used, peptic disease and no history of liver disease and a prior written acceptance included.
Results. Twenty young people were evaluated, who reported the following taste perceptions: for azithromycin (Koptin): salty 1 (5%), sweet 14 (70%), bitter 4 (20%), acid 1 (5%); for erythromycin (Ilosone): salty 1 (5%), sweet 1 (5%), bitter 18 (90%), acid 0 and for clarithromycin (Adel): salty 1 (5%), sweet 16 (80%), bitter 3 (15%), acid (0).
Conclusions. Clarithromycin (Adel) had the better acceptance (80%) by its sweet taste, followed by azithromycin (Koptin) (70%). Erythromycin (Ilosone) had the lower acceptance by it bitter flavor with 90% of non-acceptance.
These results should be considered in the medical prescription. Even when this evaluation was carried out in adults, it can be transposed to children who already value the taste of the drugs.

REFERENCES

1. Arredondo, G.J.L., Campos, S.A., Constestabile, M.A., Flores, D.J., Arcos, C.G., Galicia, L.R. et al., “Cefalosporinas orales en infecciones respiratorias”, Rev Enf Infec Ped, 2012, 10: 1-8. 3. 2.

2. Hernández, L.S., Reyes, G.U., Reyes, H.K., Reyes, H.D., Ávila, C.F., Reyes, H.U., Ortíz, V.U. et al., “Aceptación del sabor de cefalosporinas de segunda y tercera generación en suspensión reconstituida”, Enf Inf Microbiol, 2013, 33 (4): 152-155.

3. Reyes, H.K., Reyes, M.H., Reyes, G.U., Ahuja, C.I., Barrita, M.B. y Chagoya, P.C., “Aceptación del sabor de dos dicloxacilinas y una cefalosporina de primera generación”, Rev Mex Ped, 2015, 82 (6); 197-199.

4. Chávez, B.S. y Stull, T.L., “Antibacterial agents in pediatrics”, Infect Dis Clin Nort Am, 2009, 23: 865-888.

5. Gutiérrez, O.S., Saltigeral, S.P., Reyes, B.M., Granja, B.V. y Alcalá, P.M., “Comparación del olor, cuerpo, sabor y sensación posterior a la ingesta que producen cinco ampicilinas y dos trimetropín sulfametoxazol en presentación líquida con sabor distinto”, Rev Mex Puer Ped, 2002, 10 (55): 7-24.

6. Naranjo, L.Y., Loperena, A.L. y Adell, G.A., “Respuesta de niños escolares ante una experiencia gustativa con una suspensión de ampicilina de nuevo sabor cereza”, Rev Mex Ped, 1996, 63: 78-79.

7. González, S.N., Torales, T.N. y Gómez, B.D., Infectología clínica pediátrica, 8ª ed., Medilibros, disponible en: https://es.slideshare.net/GilbertoLS1/infectologia-clinicapediatricanapoleon- gonzalez-saldaa-8ed-medilibroscom.

8. González, S.N. y Saltigeral, S.P., Guía de antimicrobianos, antiparasitarios, antimicóticos e inmunomoduladores, 10ª ed., Trillas, México, 2016.

9. Reyes, G.U., Reyes, H.U., López, C.G., Sánchez, C.H.N., Reyes, H.D., Colón, C.F. y García, G.J., “Aceptación del sabor de antiinflamatorios de presentación líquida en un grupo de adolescentes”, Bol Clin Hosp Infant Son, 2009, 26 (1): 3-7.