Abstract: Asian Journal of Medicine and Health 18(7): 45-55, 2020; Article no.AJMAH.59198 ISSN: 2456-8414 Azithromycin and Hydroxychloroquine Accelerate Recovery of Outpatients with Mild/Moderate COVID-19 Violaine Guérin1*, Pierre Lévy2, Jean-Louis Thomas1, Thierry Lardenois1, Philippe Lacrosse1, Emmanuel Sarrazin1, Natacha Regensberg-de Andreis1 and Martine Wonner1 1 Collectif Laissons Les Médecins Prescrire, France. Département de Santé Publique, Institut Pierre-Louis de Santé Publique (INSERM UMR S 1136, EPAR Team), Sorbonne Université, Assistance Publique-Hôpitaux de Paris, Hôpital Tenon, 75020 Paris, France. 2 Authors’ contributions This work was carried out in collaboration among all authors. Authors VG and JLT designed the study and wrote the first draft of the manuscript. Authors VG, TL, ES, NRA, P. Lacrosse and MW followed the patients. Author P. Lévy performed the statistical analysis. All authors read and approved the final manuscript. Article Information DOI: 10.9734/AJMAH/2020/v18i730224 Editor(s): (1) Dr. John K. Triantafillidis, Iasi University of Medicine and Pharmacy, Romania and IASO General Hospital, Greece. (2) Darko Nozic, University of Belgrade, Serbia. Reviewers: (1) Malangori Abdulgani Parande, Byramjee Jeejeebhoy Government Medical College (BJGMC), India. (2) Olga Rukhmakova, National University of Pharmacy, Ukraine. Complete Peer review History: http://www.sdiarticle4.com/review-history/59198 Original Research Article Received 26 June 2020 Accepted 14 July 2020 Published 15 July 2020 ABSTRACT Aims: The challenge regarding COVID-19 is to prevent complications and fatal evolution. Azithromycin (AZM) and hydroxychloroquine (HCQ) have proven their antiviral effect in vitro. We aimed to assess the efficacy and safety of AZM alone or combined to HCQ, prescribed, at an early stage, in patients with Covid-19, in a primary care setting. Study Design: Retrospective observational study. Place and Duration of Study: Patients have been followed by private practitioners in France, between March and April 2020. Methodology: Eighty-eight patients received either no or a symptomatic treatment (NST) (n=34) or AZM alone (n=34) or AZM+HCQ (n=20). The efficacy end point was the time to clinical recovery _____________________________________________________________________________________________________ *Corresponding author: E-mail: guerinviolaine@gmail.com; Guérin et al.; AJMAH, 18(7): 45-55, 2020; Article no.AJMAH.59198 and the safety end point was the occurrence of cardiovascular events. To improve the evidence level, a case-control analysis was performed on a sample of 57 patients (19/group) matched for age, sex and BMI. Results: The mean (SD) times to achieve clinical recovery were respectively 25.8 days (11.1), 12.9 days (13.4) and 9.2 days (9.3), showing a statistically significant difference between NST and AZM alone (p<0.0001) or AZM+HCQ (p<0.0001). The statistical difference between NST and AZM was confirmed (p=0.0149) as well as the difference with AZM+HCQ (p=0.0002). No cardiac toxicity was recorded in any patient. No statistical difference was shown between AZM and AZM+HCQ groups, although the dual therapy tended to be more effective in patients over 50 years, based on an analysis using the cox model. Conclusion: AZM and AZM+HCQ favourably impacted the course of the disease. We need trials, ideally prospective/double blind, to show if a statistical difference can be evidenced with a broader group, and clarify the..