Official documents, adverse reaction reporting, and safety monitoring
Report a side effect
Submit a Yellow Card report to the MHRA
Safety monitoring data
Yellow Card reports
The MHRA Yellow Card scheme collects reports of suspected side effects from healthcare professionals and patients. View the Drug Analysis Profile (iDAP) for real-world adverse reaction data.
View Drug Analysis Profile
Browse all Drug Analysis Profiles A–Z
Browse all iDAP reports
Interactive Drug Analysis Profiles for all medicines
Report a side effect
Submit a Yellow Card report to the MHRA
Data from the MHRA Yellow Card scheme. A reported reaction does not necessarily mean the medicine caused it. Contains public sector information licensed under the Open Government Licence v3.0.
EudraVigilance
The European Medicines Agency (EMA) collects suspected adverse reaction reports from across the EU/EEA through the EudraVigilance system. Search for safety data on this medicine.
Search EudraVigilance database
Browse substances A–Z in the European adverse reaction database
About EudraVigilance
Learn about EU pharmacovigilance and safety monitoring
EudraVigilance data is published by the European Medicines Agency (EMA). A suspected adverse reaction is not necessarily caused by the medicine.
2 branded products available
Therapeutically similar medicines
Similarity is based on WHO Anatomical Therapeutic Chemical (ATC) classification and on a factual NHS dm+d therapeutic-grouping code prefix. Source data: NHS dm+d via TRUD (OGL v3.0), WHO ATC/DDD Index.
NHS prescribing volume and spending trends
Check stock at pharmacies and supply information
Pharmacy stock checkers
Search for this medicine at major UK pharmacy chains. These links open the retailer's own website — results depend on their current online catalogue.
Supply & safety information
Official UK regulator monitoring and safety alerts
Pharmacy links redirect to the retailer's own search and do not represent real-time stock levels. Shortage and safety information sourced from MHRA drug safety updates (gov.uk, Crown Copyright under OGL v3.0).
Codes for healthcare professionals and prescribing systems
These codes are used by healthcare IT systems and prescribers to identify this medicine.
NHS UK identifiers
SNOMED CT and dm+d codes from NHS TRUD (Technology Reference data Update Distribution), licensed under the Open Government Licence v3.0. BNF code shown is the factual mapping value distributed by NHS Business Services Authority (NHSBSA) in the dm+d supplementary file under OGL v3.0; it is not affiliated with, nor licensed from, the publishers of the British National Formulary.
Active and completed clinical studies from ClinicalTrials.gov
Source: ClinicalTrials.gov, a database of the U.S. National Library of Medicine (NLM), National Institutes of Health (NIH). Data accessed via ClinicalTrials.gov API v2. Trial information is provided for research purposes and does not constitute medical advice.
Academic studies and reviews for this medicine's active substance
Showing the 50 most relevant studies.
Reviews & meta-analyses: 5 · Randomised trials: 9 · 2015–2025
Showing the 50 most relevant studies, sorted by most relevant.
Essack S, Bell J, Burgoyne DS, et al.
2019
- Respiratory Tract Infections
- Pharyngitis
- Anti-Bacterial Agents
What is known and objectiveThe overuse and misuse of antibiotics, especially for viral, and self-limiting, respiratory tract infections such as sore throat, increases the risk of the development and spread of antimicrobial resistance within communities. Up to 80% of sore throat cases have a viral aetiology, and even when the infection is bacterial, most cases resolve without antibiotics. However, antibiotics are still frequently and often inappropriately prescribed for the treatment of sore throat. Furthermore, topical (local) antibiotics for treatment of sore throat are widely available over the counter. The objective of this systematic review was to establish the evidence for the benefits, risk of harm and antimicrobial resistance associated with topical (local) antibiotics used for patients with sore throat.MethodsEligible studies included those in patients with sore throat of any aetiology receiving the topical (local) antibiotics tyrothricin, bacitracin, gramicidin or neomycin where the antibiotic was topically/locally applied via the nasal cavity or throat. Nasal applications were included as these are occasionally used to treat upper respiratory tract infections that may involve sore throat. There was no restriction or requirement regarding comparator. The outcomes of interest included efficacy, safety, and in vitro culture and antimicrobial resistance data.Results and discussionThis systematic review found sparse and mainly poor-quality evidence relating to the use of topical (local) antibiotics for sore throat, and it was not possible to establish the benefits, risk of harm or impact of use on antimicrobial resistance.What is new and conclusionsFurther research is necessary to ascertain the risks and benefits of topical (local) antibiotics, their contribution to antimicrobial resistance and the risk of harm. We do, however, question whether it is appropriate and rational to use topical (local) antibiotics for the treatment of sore throat caused by respiratory tract infections in the absence of robust evidence.
Abstract licence: CC BY-NC
V. Naik, Deepak Sharma, Ashish K. Jain, et al.
Cureus, 2024
Aim The aim of this study was to evaluate the effectiveness of 5% eutectic mixture of local anesthetics (EMLA) cream and 20% benzocaine gel in reduction of pain during rubber dam clamp placement in the treatment of non-carious cervical lesions (NCCLs). Methodology In this split-mouth single-blind randomized clinical trial, 50 adult participants were selected from the outpatient department. The test group was treated using 5% EMLA cream for three minutes, and visual analog scale (VAS) scores were recorded. The comparison group was treated using 20% benzocaine gel and procedure was repeated as that in the test group. After recording the VAS scores, NCCLs in both the groups were restored using composite restoration. Results In the included 50 participants, 70% were males, with an age group of 31-67 years. The mean VAS score at 3 minutes in EMLA group was significantly lower than that in benzocaine group. Conclusion Application of 5% EMLA cream for 3 minutes showed greater pain reduction during rubber dam clamp placement as compared to 20% benzocaine gel in adult patients with NCCLs.
Abstract licence: CC BY
Manisha Nair, D. Gurunathan
Journal of Anaesthesiology, Clinical Pharmacology, 2019
L. Eslamian, A. Borzabadi-Farahani, H. Gholami
Australasian Orthodontic Journal, 2016
Stephan Warnke, Jongcheol Seo, J. Boschmans, et al.
Journal of the American Chemical Society, 2015
Nurain Rehman, S. R. Qazi
Anesthesia progress, 2019
Rita El Feghali, Karen Tatarian, C. Zogheib, et al.
Photonics, 2022
L. Eslamian, H. Gholami, S. Mortazavi, et al.
Orthodontics & craniofacial research, 2016
Huda Ibrahim, Amina M. Abdelrahman
2020
Guilherme Camponogara de Freiras, R. T. Pozzobon, D. Blaya, et al.
Anesthesia progress, 2015
Sources: aggregated from Europe PMC (EMBL-EBI), OpenAlex, Crossref, PubMed and other open scholarly databases. Retracted articles are excluded. Study information is provided for research purposes and does not constitute medical advice.
Scientific data (pharmacology, interactions, ADME) is not yet available for this medicine. Clinical sections are sourced from the NHS dm+d database.