Gágyor, Ildikó

[["dc.bibliographiccitation.firstpage","1558"],["dc.bibliographiccitation.issue","12"],["dc.bibliographiccitation.journal","Clinical Microbiology and Infection"],["dc.bibliographiccitation.lastpage","1566"],["dc.bibliographiccitation.volume","28"],["dc.contributor.author","Kaußner, Yvonne"],["dc.contributor.author","Röver, Christian"],["dc.contributor.author","Heinz, Judith"],["dc.contributor.author","Hummers, Eva"],["dc.contributor.author","Debray, Thomas P.A."],["dc.contributor.author","Hay, Alastair D."],["dc.contributor.author","Heytens, Stefan"],["dc.contributor.author","Vik, Ingvild"],["dc.contributor.author","Little, Paul"],["dc.contributor.author","Moore, Michael"],["dc.contributor.author","Gágyor, Ildikó"],["dc.date.accessioned","2022-09-01T09:49:31Z"],["dc.date.available","2022-09-01T09:49:31Z"],["dc.date.issued","2022"],["dc.description.abstract","Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) investigated analgesics, herbal formulations, delayed prescription of antibiotics, and placebo to prevent overprescription of antibiotics in women with uncomplicated urinary tract infections (uUTI)."],["dc.identifier.doi","10.1016/j.cmi.2022.06.017"],["dc.identifier.pii","S1198743X22003305"],["dc.identifier.pmid","35788049"],["dc.identifier.uri","https://resolver.sub.uni-goettingen.de/purl?gro-2/113447"],["dc.identifier.url","https://publications.goettingen-research-online.de/handle/2/113447"],["dc.language.iso","en"],["dc.notes.intern","DOI-Import GROB-597"],["dc.relation.eissn","1469-0691"],["dc.relation.issn","1198-743X"],["dc.title","Reducing antibiotic use in uncomplicated urinary tract infections in adult women: a systematic review and individual participant data meta-analysis"],["dc.type","journal_article"],["dc.type.internalPublication","yes"],["dspace.entity.type","Publication"]]

[["dc.bibliographiccitation.artnumber","30"],["dc.bibliographiccitation.journal","BMC Medicine"],["dc.bibliographiccitation.volume","8"],["dc.contributor.author","Bleidorn, Jutta"],["dc.contributor.author","Gagyor, Ildiko"],["dc.contributor.author","Kochen, Michael M."],["dc.contributor.author","Wegscheider, Karl"],["dc.contributor.author","Hummers-Pradier, Eva"],["dc.date.accessioned","2018-11-07T08:43:08Z"],["dc.date.available","2018-11-07T08:43:08Z"],["dc.date.issued","2010"],["dc.description.abstract","Background: Uncomplicated lower urinary tract infections (UTI) are usually treated with antibiotics. However, there is little evidence for alternative therapeutic options. This pilot study was set out 1) to make a rough estimate of the equivalence of ibuprofen and ciprofloxacin for uncomplicated urinary tract infection with regard to symptom resolution, and 2) to demonstrate the feasibility of a double-blind, randomized controlled drug trial in German general practices. Methods: We performed a double-blind, randomized controlled pilot trial in 29 German general practices. Eighty otherwise healthy women aged 18 to 85 years, presenting with at least one of the main UTI symptoms dysuria and frequency and without any complicating factors, were randomly assigned to receive either ibuprofen 3 x 400 mg oral or ciprofloxacin 2 x 250 mg (+1 placebo) oral, both for three days. Intensity of main symptoms-dysuria, frequency, low abdominal pain-was recorded at inclusion and after 4, 7 and 28 days, scoring each symptom from 0 (none) to 4 (very strong). The primary endpoint was symptom resolution on Day 4. Secondary outcomes were the burden of symptoms on Days 4 and 7 (based on the sum score of all symptoms), symptom resolution on Day 7 and frequency of relapses. Equivalence margins for symptom burden on Day 4 were pre-specified as +/-0.5 sum score points. Data analysis was done by intention to treat and per protocol. Randomization was carried out on patient level by computer programme in blocks of six. Results: Seventy-nine patients were analyzed (ibuprofen n = 40, ciprofloxacin n = 39). On Day 4, 21/36 (58.3%) of patients in the ibuprofen-group were symptom-free versus 17/33 (51.5%) in the ciprofloxacin-group. On Day 4, ibuprofen patients reported fewer symptoms in terms of total sum score (1; SD 1,42) than ciprofloxacin patients (1,3; SD 1,9), difference-0,33 (95% CI (-1,13 to + 0,47)), PP (per protocol) analysis. During Days 0 and 9, 12/36 (33%) of patients in the ibuprofen-group received secondary antibiotic treatment due to ongoing or worsening symptoms, compared to 6/33 (18%) in the ciprofloxacin-group (non significant). A total of 58 non-serious adverse events were reported, 32 in the ibuprofen group versus 26 in the ciprofloxacin group (non significant). Conclusions: Our results support the assumption of non-inferiority of ibuprofen compared to ciprofloxacin for treatment of symptomatic uncomplicated UTI, but need confirmation by further trials."],["dc.identifier.doi","10.1186/1741-7015-8-30"],["dc.identifier.isi","000279916700001"],["dc.identifier.pmid","20504298"],["dc.identifier.purl","https://resolver.sub.uni-goettingen.de/purl?gs-1/5676"],["dc.identifier.uri","https://resolver.sub.uni-goettingen.de/purl?gro-2/19886"],["dc.notes.intern","Merged from goescholar"],["dc.notes.status","zu prüfen"],["dc.notes.submitter","Najko"],["dc.relation.issn","1741-7015"],["dc.relation.orgunit","Institut für Allgemeinmedizin"],["dc.rights","CC BY 2.0"],["dc.rights.uri","https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.0"],["dc.title","Symptomatic treatment (ibuprofen) or antibiotics (ciprofloxacin) for uncomplicated urinary tract infection? - Results of a randomized controlled pilot trial"],["dc.type","journal_article"],["dc.type.internalPublication","yes"],["dc.type.peerReviewed","yes"],["dc.type.subtype","original_ja"],["dc.type.version","published_version"],["dspace.entity.type","Publication"]]

[["dc.bibliographiccitation.firstpage","E234"],["dc.bibliographiccitation.issue","645"],["dc.bibliographiccitation.journal","British Journal of General Practice"],["dc.bibliographiccitation.lastpage","E240"],["dc.bibliographiccitation.volume","66"],["dc.contributor.author","Gágyor, Ildikó"],["dc.contributor.author","Haasenritter, Jörg"],["dc.contributor.author","Bleidorn, Jutta"],["dc.contributor.author","McIsaac, Warren"],["dc.contributor.author","Schmiemann, Guido"],["dc.contributor.author","Hummers-Pradier, Eva"],["dc.contributor.author","Himmel, Wolfgang"],["dc.date.accessioned","2020-12-10T18:47:26Z"],["dc.date.available","2020-12-10T18:47:26Z"],["dc.date.issued","2016"],["dc.description.abstract","Background Uncomplicated urinary tract infection (UTI) is often treated with antibiotics, resulting in increasing resistance levels. A randomised controlled trial showed that two-thirds of females with UTI treated symptomatically recovered without subsequent antibiotic treatment. Aim To investigate whether there are differences between females with a UTI who were subsequently prescribed antibiotics and those who recovered with symptomatic treatment only, and to develop a model to predict those who can safely and effectively be treated symptomatically. Design and setting This is a subgroup analysis of females assigned to ibuprofen in a UTI trial in general practices. Method Multiple logistic regression analysis was used to select variables for a prediction model, The discriminative value of the model was estimated by the area under the receiver operator curve (AUC) and the effects of different thresholds were calculated within the model predicting antibiotic prescription and need for follow-up visits. Results Of the 235 females in the ibuprofen group, 79 were subsequently prescribed antibiotics within 28 days of follow-up. The final model included five predictors: urgency/frequency, impaired daily activities, and positive dipstick test results for erythrocytes, leucocytes, and nitrite. The AUC was 0.73 (95% CI = 0.67 to 0.80). A reasonable threshold for antibiotic initiation would result in 58% of females presenting with UTI being treated with antibiotics. Of the remaining females, only 6% would return to the practice because of symptomatic treatment failure. Conclusion The present model revealed moderately good accuracy and could be the basis for a decision aid for GPs and females to find the treatment option that fits best."],["dc.identifier.doi","10.3399/bjgp16X684361"],["dc.identifier.isi","000376585200002"],["dc.identifier.pmid","26965031"],["dc.identifier.purl","https://resolver.sub.uni-goettingen.de/purl?gs-1/14110"],["dc.identifier.uri","https://resolver.sub.uni-goettingen.de/purl?gro-2/78763"],["dc.language.iso","en"],["dc.notes.intern","DOI Import GROB-354"],["dc.notes.intern","Merged from goescholar"],["dc.notes.status","zu prüfen"],["dc.notes.submitter","Najko"],["dc.relation.issn","1478-5242"],["dc.relation.issn","0960-1643"],["dc.relation.orgunit","Institut für Allgemeinmedizin"],["dc.rights","CC BY-NC 3.0"],["dc.rights.uri","https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/3.0"],["dc.title","Predicting antibiotic prescription after symptomatic treatment for urinary tract infection: development of a model using data from an RCT in general practice"],["dc.type","journal_article"],["dc.type.internalPublication","yes"],["dc.type.peerReviewed","yes"],["dc.type.subtype","original_ja"],["dc.type.version","published_version"],["dspace.entity.type","Publication"]]

[["dc.bibliographiccitation.firstpage","e035883"],["dc.bibliographiccitation.issue","10"],["dc.bibliographiccitation.journal","BMJ Open"],["dc.bibliographiccitation.volume","10"],["dc.contributor.author","Heinz, Judith"],["dc.contributor.author","Röver, Christian"],["dc.contributor.author","Furaijat, Ghefar"],["dc.contributor.author","Kaußner, Yvonne"],["dc.contributor.author","Hummers, Eva"],["dc.contributor.author","Debray, Thomas"],["dc.contributor.author","Hay, Alastair D"],["dc.contributor.author","Heytens, Stefan"],["dc.contributor.author","Vik, Ingvild"],["dc.contributor.author","Little, Paul"],["dc.contributor.author","Moore, Michael"],["dc.contributor.author","Stuart, Beth"],["dc.contributor.author","Wagenlehner, Florian"],["dc.contributor.author","Kronenberg, Andreas"],["dc.contributor.author","Ferry, Sven"],["dc.contributor.author","Monsen, Tor"],["dc.contributor.author","Lindbaek, Morten"],["dc.contributor.author","Friede, Tim"],["dc.contributor.author","Gagyor, Ildiko"],["dc.date.accessioned","2021-04-14T08:27:27Z"],["dc.date.available","2021-04-14T08:27:27Z"],["dc.date.issued","2020"],["dc.identifier.doi","10.1136/bmjopen-2019-035883"],["dc.identifier.purl","https://resolver.sub.uni-goettingen.de/purl?gs-1/17636"],["dc.identifier.uri","https://resolver.sub.uni-goettingen.de/purl?gro-2/82291"],["dc.language.iso","en"],["dc.notes.intern","DOI Import GROB-399"],["dc.notes.intern","Merged from goescholar"],["dc.relation.eissn","2044-6055"],["dc.relation.issn","2044-6055"],["dc.relation.orgunit","Institut für Allgemeinmedizin"],["dc.rights","CC BY 4.0"],["dc.rights.uri","https://goescholar.uni-goettingen.de/licenses"],["dc.title","Strategies to reduce antibiotic use in women with uncomplicated urinary tract infection in primary care: protocol of a systematic review and meta-analysis including individual patient data"],["dc.type","journal_article"],["dc.type.internalPublication","yes"],["dc.type.subtype","original_ja"],["dc.type.version","published_version"],["dspace.entity.type","Publication"]]

[["dc.bibliographiccitation.issue","2"],["dc.bibliographiccitation.journal","Family medicine & medical science research"],["dc.bibliographiccitation.volume","3"],["dc.contributor.author","Bleidorn, Jutta"],["dc.contributor.author","Költzsch, C."],["dc.contributor.author","Hummers-Pradier, Eva"],["dc.contributor.author","Gágyor, Ildikó"],["dc.contributor.author","Theile, G."],["dc.date.accessioned","2021-09-07T13:12:45Z"],["dc.date.available","2021-09-07T13:12:45Z"],["dc.date.issued","2014"],["dc.identifier.doi","10.4172/2327-4972.1000122"],["dc.identifier.uri","https://resolver.sub.uni-goettingen.de/purl?gro-2/89304"],["dc.relation.orgunit","Institut für Allgemeinmedizin"],["dc.title","Family Physicians as Clinical Trial Investigators? - A Qualitative Study of Physicians’ Experiences with a Double-Blind Clinical Trial"],["dc.type","journal_article"],["dc.type.internalPublication","yes"],["dc.type.subtype","original_ja"],["dspace.entity.type","Publication"]]

[["dc.bibliographiccitation.firstpage","1441"],["dc.bibliographiccitation.issue","10"],["dc.bibliographiccitation.journal","Clinical Microbiology and Infection"],["dc.bibliographiccitation.lastpage","1447"],["dc.bibliographiccitation.volume","27"],["dc.contributor.author","Gágyor, Ildikó"],["dc.contributor.author","Hummers, Eva"],["dc.contributor.author","Schmiemann, Guido"],["dc.contributor.author","Friede, Tim"],["dc.contributor.author","Pfeiffer, Sebastian"],["dc.contributor.author","Afshar, Kambiz"],["dc.contributor.author","Bleidorn, Jutta"],["dc.date.accessioned","2021-08-16T09:08:13Z"],["dc.date.available","2021-08-16T09:08:13Z"],["dc.date.issued","2021-10"],["dc.description.abstract","Objective\r\n\r\nWe explored whether initial treatment with the herbal drug uva ursi (UU) reduces antibiotic use in women with uncomplicated urinary tract infection (UTI) without increasing symptom burden and complication frequency compared with antibiotic treatment.\r\nMethods\r\n\r\nA double-blind randomized controlled trial was conducted in 42 family practices in Germany. The participants were adult women with suspected uncomplicated UTIs receiving either UU 105 mg 3 × 2 tablets for 5 days (intervention) or fosfomycin a 3-g single dose (control), and their respective placebos. Participants and investigators were blinded. The primary outcome included (1) antibiotic courses day 0–28 as superiority, and (2) symptom burden (sum of daily symptom scores) day 0–7, as non-inferiority outcome (margin 125%). Clinicaltrials.gov: NCT03151603.\r\nResults\r\n\r\nOverall, 398 patients were randomly allocated to groups receiving UU (n = 207) and fosfomycin (n = 191). The number of antibiotic courses was 63.6% lower (95% CI 53.6%–71.4%; p < 0.0001) in the UU group than in the fosfomycin group. The ratio of total symptom burden in the UU group compared with control was 136.5% (95% CI 122.7–151.9; p 0.95), failing non-inferiority. Eight women developed pyelonephritis in the UU group compared with two in the fosfomycin group (mean difference 2.8; 95% CI 0.2–5.9; p 0.067). Adverse events were similar between the groups.\r\nDiscussion\r\n\r\nIn women with uncomplicated UTIs, initial treatment with UU reduced antibiotic use but led to a higher symptom burden and more safety concerns than fosfomycin."],["dc.identifier.doi","10.1016/j.cmi.2021.05.032"],["dc.identifier.pmid","34111592"],["dc.identifier.uri","https://resolver.sub.uni-goettingen.de/purl?gro-2/88709"],["dc.language.iso","en"],["dc.relation.eissn","1469-0691"],["dc.relation.issn","1198-743X"],["dc.relation.orgunit","Institut für Allgemeinmedizin"],["dc.relation.orgunit","Institut für Medizinische Statistik"],["dc.title","Herbal treatment with uva ursi extract versus fosfomycin in women with uncomplicated urinary tract infection in primary care: a randomized controlled trial"],["dc.type","journal_article"],["dc.type.internalPublication","yes"],["dc.type.subtype","original_ja"],["dc.type.version","published_version"],["dspace.entity.type","Publication"]]

[["dc.bibliographiccitation.artnumber","33"],["dc.bibliographiccitation.journal","BMC Urology"],["dc.bibliographiccitation.volume","12"],["dc.contributor.author","Schmiemann, Guido"],["dc.contributor.author","Gágyor, Ildikó"],["dc.contributor.author","Hummers-Pradier, Eva"],["dc.contributor.author","Bleidorn, Jutta"],["dc.date.accessioned","2018-11-07T09:03:17Z"],["dc.date.available","2018-11-07T09:03:17Z"],["dc.date.issued","2012"],["dc.description.abstract","Background: Guideline recommendations on therapy in urinary tract infections are based on antibiotic resistance rates. Due to a lack of surveillance data, little is known about resistance rates in uncomplicated urinary tract infection (UTI) in general practice in Germany. In a prospective observational study, urine cultures of all women presenting with urinary tract infections in general practice were analysed. Resistance rates against antibiotics recommended in German guidelines on UTI are presented. Methods: In a prospective, multi-center observational study general practitioner included all female patients >= 18 years with clinically suspected urinary tract infection. Only patients receiving an antibiotic therapy within the last two weeks were excluded. Results: 40 practices recruited 191 female patients (mean age 52 years; range 18-96) with urinary tract infections. Main causative agent was Escherichia coli (79%) followed by Enterococcus faecalis (14%) and Klebsiella pneumoniae (7.3%). Susceptibiliy of E. coli as the main causative agent was highest against fosfomycin and nitrofurantoin, with low resistance rates of 4,5%; 2,2%. In 17,5%, E. coli was resistant to trimethoprim and in 8,5% to ciprofloxacin. Conclusions: Resistance rates of uropathogens from unselected patients in general practice differ from routinely collected laboratory data. These results can have an impact on antibiotic prescribing and treatment recommendations."],["dc.identifier.doi","10.1186/1471-2490-12-33"],["dc.identifier.isi","000313245000001"],["dc.identifier.pmid","23171154"],["dc.identifier.purl","https://resolver.sub.uni-goettingen.de/purl?gs-1/8468"],["dc.identifier.uri","https://resolver.sub.uni-goettingen.de/purl?gro-2/24875"],["dc.notes.intern","Merged from goescholar"],["dc.notes.status","zu prüfen"],["dc.notes.submitter","Najko"],["dc.relation.issn","1471-2490"],["dc.relation.orgunit","Institut für Allgemeinmedizin"],["dc.rights","CC BY 2.0"],["dc.rights.uri","https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.0"],["dc.title","Resistance profiles of urinary tract infections in general practice - an observational study"],["dc.type","journal_article"],["dc.type.internalPublication","yes"],["dc.type.peerReviewed","yes"],["dc.type.subtype","original_ja"],["dc.type.version","published_version"],["dspace.entity.type","Publication"]]

[["dc.bibliographiccitation.firstpage","423"],["dc.bibliographiccitation.lastpage","427"],["dc.contributor.author","Schmiemann, Guido"],["dc.contributor.author","Bleidorn, Jutta"],["dc.contributor.author","Gágyor, Ildikó"],["dc.contributor.author","Hummers-Pradier, Eva"],["dc.contributor.editor","Kochen, Michael M."],["dc.date.accessioned","2021-09-10T10:24:17Z"],["dc.date.available","2021-09-10T10:24:17Z"],["dc.date.issued","2012"],["dc.description.edition","4"],["dc.identifier.uri","https://resolver.sub.uni-goettingen.de/purl?gro-2/89329"],["dc.publisher","Thieme"],["dc.publisher.place","Stuttgart"],["dc.relation.isbn","978-3-13-141384-0"],["dc.relation.ispartof","Allgemeinmedizin und Familienmedizin"],["dc.relation.orgunit","Institut für Allgemeinmedizin"],["dc.title","Schmerzen beim Wasserlassen"],["dc.type","book_chapter"],["dc.type.internalPublication","yes"],["dspace.entity.type","Publication"]]

[["dc.bibliographiccitation.artnumber","91"],["dc.bibliographiccitation.journal","Trials"],["dc.bibliographiccitation.volume","12"],["dc.contributor.author","Gágyor, Ildikó"],["dc.contributor.author","Bleidorn, Jutta"],["dc.contributor.author","Wegscheider, Karl"],["dc.contributor.author","Hummers-Pradier, Eva"],["dc.contributor.author","Kochen, Michael M."],["dc.date.accessioned","2018-11-07T08:57:23Z"],["dc.date.available","2018-11-07T08:57:23Z"],["dc.date.issued","2011"],["dc.description.abstract","Background: Randomised controlled clinical (drug) trials supply high quality evidence for therapeutic strategies in primary care. Until now, experience with drug trials in German general practice has been sparse. In 2007/2008, the authors conducted an investigator-initiated, non-commercial, double-blind, randomised controlled pilot trial (HWI-01) to assess the clinical equivalence of ibuprofen and ciprofloxacin in the treatment of uncomplicated urinary tract infection (UTI). Here, we report the feasibility of this trial in German general practices and the implementation of Good Clinical Practice (GCP) standards as defined by the International Conference on Harmonisation (ICH) in mainly inexperienced general practices. Methods: This report is based on the experience of the HWI-01 study conducted in 29 German general practices. Feasibility was defined by 1) successful practice recruitment, 2) sufficient patient recruitment, 3) complete and accurate data collection and 4) appropriate protection of patient safety. Results: The final practice recruitment rate was 18%. In these practices, 79 of 195 screened UTI patients were enrolled. Recruitment differed strongly between practices (range 0-12, mean 2.8 patients per practice) and was below the recruitment goal of approximately 100 patients. As anticipated, practice nurses became the key figures in the screening und recruitment of patients. Clinical trial demands, in particular for completing symptom questionnaires, documentation of source data and reporting of adverse events, did not agree well with GPs' documentation habits and required support from study nurses. In many cases, GPs and practice staff seemed to be overwhelmed by the amount of information and regulations. No sudden unexpected serious adverse reactions (SUSARs) were observed during the trial. Conclusions: To enable drug trials in general practice, it is necessary to adapt the setup of clinical research infrastructure to the needs of GPs and their practice staff. Risk adaption of clinical trial regulations is necessary to facilitate non-commercial comparative effectiveness trials in primary health care."],["dc.description.sponsorship","German Ministry of Research and Technology [01GK 0501]"],["dc.identifier.doi","10.1186/1745-6215-12-91"],["dc.identifier.isi","000289695600001"],["dc.identifier.pmid","21457558"],["dc.identifier.purl","https://resolver.sub.uni-goettingen.de/purl?gs-1/6216"],["dc.identifier.uri","https://resolver.sub.uni-goettingen.de/purl?gro-2/23390"],["dc.notes.intern","Merged from goescholar"],["dc.notes.status","zu prüfen"],["dc.notes.submitter","Najko"],["dc.relation.issn","1745-6215"],["dc.relation.orgunit","Institut für Allgemeinmedizin"],["dc.rights","CC BY 2.0"],["dc.rights.uri","https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.0"],["dc.title","Practices, patients and (im)perfect data - feasibility of a randomised controlled clinical drug trial in German general practices"],["dc.type","journal_article"],["dc.type.internalPublication","yes"],["dc.type.peerReviewed","yes"],["dc.type.subtype","original_ja"],["dc.type.version","published_version"],["dspace.entity.type","Publication"]]

[["dc.bibliographiccitation.firstpage","134"],["dc.bibliographiccitation.issue","3"],["dc.bibliographiccitation.journal","Zeitschrift für Allgemeinmedizin"],["dc.bibliographiccitation.lastpage","140"],["dc.bibliographiccitation.volume","90"],["dc.contributor.author","Bleidorn, Jutta"],["dc.contributor.author","Schmiemann, G."],["dc.contributor.author","Hummers-Pradier, Eva"],["dc.contributor.author","Gágyor, Ildikó"],["dc.date.accessioned","2021-09-07T13:15:38Z"],["dc.date.available","2021-09-07T13:15:38Z"],["dc.date.issued","2014"],["dc.identifier.doi","10.3238/zfa.2014.0134–0140"],["dc.identifier.uri","https://resolver.sub.uni-goettingen.de/purl?gro-2/89305"],["dc.relation.orgunit","Institut für Allgemeinmedizin"],["dc.title","Hausarzt und Prüfarzt? – Grundlagen und Entscheidungshilfen zu Arzneimittelstudien in der Allgemeinmedizin"],["dc.title.alternative","Family Doctor and Trial Investigator? Basics and Decision Aids for Drug Trials in Family Practice"],["dc.type","journal_article"],["dc.type.internalPublication","yes"],["dc.type.subtype","original_ja"],["dspace.entity.type","Publication"]]