Talk:Nitrofurantoin

Pharmacology High‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Pharmacology, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Pharmacology on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.PharmacologyWikipedia:WikiProject PharmacologyTemplate:WikiProject Pharmacologypharmacology articles
High	This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.

Medicine: Translation Mid‑importance

	Medicine portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Medicine, which recommends that medicine-related articles follow the Manual of Style for medicine-related articles and that biomedical information in any article use high-quality medical sources. Please visit the project page for details or ask questions at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Medicine.MedicineWikipedia:WikiProject MedicineTemplate:WikiProject Medicinemedicine articles
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article is supported by the Translation task force (assessed as High-importance).

Ideal sources for Wikipedia's health content are defined in the guideline Wikipedia:Identifying reliable sources (medicine) and are typically review articles. Here are links to possibly useful sources of information about Nitrofurantoin.

PubMed provides review articles from the past five years (limit to free review articles)
The TRIP database provides clinical publications about evidence-based medicine.
Other potential sources include: Centre for Reviews and Dissemination and CDC

Heading

Klebsiella is listed under "effective against" and "not active against", this is impossible. Pls fix. Ty - studying medical student — Preceding unsigned comment added by 110.174.104.63 (talk) 01:30, 14 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Ummm....why is this a very fishy sounding drug? I couldn't find a bigname pharm company who makes it or the official site.

I'm (temporarily) doing admin work for the NHS in a microbiology department. Part of my job involves reading request forms for specimin analysis and reading antibiotic sensitivities to hospital staff and GPs. I can tell you with absolute certainty that nitrofurantoin is quite real, and is in fact one of the most common antibiotics I've encountered (it is indeed "it is commonly used to fight urinary tract infections": "?UTI" and "nitrofurantoin" are two of the things I see most commonly scrawled on urine microscopy request forms). Unfortunately my boss, who has worked there much longer than I have, is completely incapable of pronouncing the word correctly, and has even gone so far as to mock me for my correct pronunciation. Thankfully I'm leaving soon. TheJames 20:12, 28 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

this is a very well-known, antibiotic commonly prescribed in the United States (at least) for chronic urinary tract infections. I am somewhat perplexed by the second sentence "It is only useful in the treatment of cystitis" but I am not a Doctor...

Similar comments from me, a non-doctor with chronic prostate problem. In my case, none of the antibiotics seem to work but the Macrobid.

Macrobid, not Marcobid--needs correction.

I have been taking Macrobid since the 1990s for UTIs. It works. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.23.206.145 (talk) 22:53, 13 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I have been prescribed the drug as well. Ill see if it works :S 69.157.52.198 (talk) 16:40, 15 May 2009 (UTC) I'm interested in this drugs' ability to treat staph "type" infections. I have been struggling with staph infections ranging from small infections to severe flesh eating disease for several years now. Not exactly sure at all where on earth I might have picked up this infection but it's be taxing, to say the least, trying to cure this ailment. I got a bottle of this particular Antibiotic from my mother, she had a UTI. So let's see if this stuff works. Staph is resistant to most kinds of over-the-counter antibiotics because it's genetic line evolves extremely fast. In the course of a just a year, Staph infections have plagued hospitals-and even evolved to be resistant to the use of Alcohols, natural onion antiseptics, Bacitracin (zinc), Neomycin (sulfate), and Polymyxin B (sulfate). As well as over the counter acne products such as "Clean and Clear" and "Proactive". It's proven difficult to solve this flesh eating affliction. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.223.202.227 (talk) 02:22, 25 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

staph infections aren't the only bacteria which "eat flesh". flesh eating infections (necrotizing fasciits) is often caused by streptococcus pyogenes or staphylococcus sp. i don't think this is the appropriate forum for a discussion on treatment options, but nitrofurantoin does not get absorbed very well and doesn't penetrate most of the tissues associated with staph infections. that said, it could be used to treat lower urinary tract infections associated with staph, though even that seems unlikely.

Linking similar sounding name

The brand name nitrofur is very different from the term Nitro-Dur and thus linking is not needed such as this [1] IMO. Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 01:20, 14 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Kidney infections?

I am a long way from being a medic, but the article says, right at the top, "It is not effective for kidney infections.", giving this as a source, but as far as I can see that page has nothing to say about kidney infections specifically, only that the drug is used to treat UTIs. Can someone who knows what they're talking about look at this? I note that the NHS does seem to use the drug for kidney infections.

~~ I also second this statement, not only is the source not great (if good at all), but the wording seems very vague. The article really need to be looked over to make sure it flows nicely. ---- Paul K. | MechE | MSY-2 | Chemist | Let's talk 17:51, 20 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Misleading Comparison Between Developing World & USA

I think it is an inaccurate, if not outright dishonest, to represent the drug prices with different units for the developing world vs. USA. It exaggerates the differences to seem far greater than they actually are. It could be important to have those comparisons in these articles for the purpose of health care cost considerations & discussions, but the info should at least be represented accurately so that the reader is given the right impression.

Original:

> The wholesale cost in the developing world is between 0.005 and 0.46 USD a dose. In the United States it is about 60 USD for 10 days of treatment. [$0.50 vs $60], ~100x different.

More accurate: (since 10 days of treatment are actually 20-40 doses)

> The wholesale cost in the developing world is between 0.005 and 0.46 USD a dose. In the United States it is about 2 USD a dose. [$0.50 vs $2], ~4x different

It would only satisfy the narrative that USA health care costs are outrageously expensive, which, though it carries some truth, isn't so extreme as to be 2 orders of magnitude different. ~4x different is more in line with what the USA drug price offset tends to be, when compared to the developing world. IamtheStudent (talk) 10:35, 26 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Sure agree. Have ajdusted both to a course of treatment and added a new ref for the US price. Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 18:11, 26 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]