TY  - JOUR
T1  - PAlatability of oral antibiotics among children in an urban primary care center
AU  - Angelilli ML, Toscani M, Matsui DM, Rieder MJ
Y1  - 2000/03/01
N1  - 10.1001/archpedi.154.3.267
JO  - Archives of Pediatrics & Adolescent Medicine
SP  - 267
EP  - 270
VL  - 154
IS  - 3
N2  - Objective 
    To evaluate the palatability of antimicrobial agents effective against β-lactamase–producing bacteria in American children.Design 
    In a taste test of 4 antimicrobial agents, azithromycin (cherry flavored), cefprozil (bubble gum flavored), cefixime (strawberry flavored), and amoxicillin–clavulanic acid (banana flavored) were compared.Setting 
    An urban inner-city primary care clinic.Subjects 
    A volunteer sample of 30 healthy children (aged 5-8 years).Intervention 
    Palatability was determined using a single-blind taste test of 4 flavored antimicrobial agents. The 4 antimicrobial agents used were azithromycin, cefprozil, cefixime, and amoxicillin–clavulanic acid.Main Outcome Measures 
    After each antimicrobial test dose, subjects rated the taste on a 10-cm visual analog scale incorporating a facial hedonic scale. Preference assessments for the best-tasting and worst-tasting agent were also conducted.Results 
    Of the 20 children who expressed a preference, significantly more children (9 [45%], P<.05) selected the cefixime preparation as the best-tasting formulation compared with the other preparations. The cefixime preparation was also significantly the least likely to be selected as the worst-tasting preparation (2 [10%], P<.05). There were no significant differences between the other 3 preparations with respect to being selected as either the best or worst tasting. The mean (±SD) visual analog scale score for cefixime was highest (8.53 [2.49]) compared with the scores for azithromycin (6.78 [3.45]), cefprozil (6.26 [4.04]), and amoxicillin–clavulanic acid (6.24 [4.01]).Conclusion 
    The cefixime preparation was most commonly rated as best tasting by children.
SN  - 1072-4710
M3  - doi: 10.1001/archpedi.154.3.267
UR  - http://dx.doi.org/10.1001/archpedi.154.3.267
ER  -