跳至主要内容
临床试验/NCT00352612
NCT00352612已完成4 期

Comparison of Cephalexin Versus Clindamycin in the Empiric, Outpatient Treatment of Suspected Staphylococcal Cutaneous Infections in the Era of Community-associated Methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus Aureus (CA-MRSA)

Aaron Chen1 个研究点 分布在 1 个国家目标入组 200 人开始时间: 2006年9月最近更新:
适应症
干预措施
相关药物

试验速览

阶段
4 期
状态
已完成
发起方
入组人数
200
试验地点
1
主要终点
Clinical Improvement at the 48-72 Hour Clinical Follow-up

研究概览

简要总结

The purpose of this study is to help define the role of antibiotics in the treatment of pediatric skin infections caused by community-associated methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (CA-MRSA). The investigators hypothesize that treatment with cephalexin, a penicillin-like antibiotic to which CA-MRSA would be expected to be resistant, does not result in poorer outcomes than treatment with clindamycin, an antibiotic to which CA-MRSA is most often susceptible.

详细描述

Community-associated methicillin resistant Staphylococcus Aureus (CA-MRSA) infections have increased significantly over the past decade. Nearly every major region of the country has reported infections with this organism, with some areas reporting a prevalence as high as 80%. Epidemiologic evidence points to the emergence of a new strain of MRSA within the community, with unique genetic and clinical characteristics that differentiate it from traditional hospital-associated MRSA (HA-MRSA). Unlike HA-MRSA, these CA-MRSA are often susceptible in vitro to multiple antibiotic classes (other than penicillins and cephalosporins), and often cause significant, deep-seated abscesses in healthy individuals without any known risk factors for healthcare contact. Prior to awareness of this disease, many clinicians were using penicillin and cephalosporin antibiotics for empiric treatment of cutaneous abscesses, yet widespread treatment failures in the face of increasing CA-MRSA infections did NOT occur. During a one-year retrospective study in pediatric patients at our institution, we found that nearly 50% of CA-MRSA abscesses were treated with "inappropriate" antibiotics by susceptibility profiles without any significant adverse outcomes. Many clinicians are now confronted with the dilemma of whether to change empiric antibiotic therapy to other classes to which CA-MRSA would be expected to be susceptible; the most common choices including clindamycin, trimethoprim-sulfamethoxazole (TMP-SMX), or vancomycin. Unfortunately, each of these antibiotics has problems of its own in terms of increased cost, poor palatability of pediatric liquid formulation, poorer side effect profile, or necessity of IV infusion, and at this time the optimal, empiric antibiotic treatment for presumed CA-MRSA skin and soft tissue infections is unclear.

The purpose of this study is to help define the role of antibiotics in the treatment of pediatric skin infections caused by CA-MRSA. We hypothesize that treatment with cephalexin, a penicillin-like antibiotic to which CA-MRSA would be expected to be resistant, does not result in poorer outcomes than treatment with clindamycin, an antibiotic to which CA-MRSA is most often susceptible.

研究设计

研究类型
Interventional
分配方式
Randomized
干预模型
Parallel
主要目的
Treatment
盲法
Double (Participant, Care Provider)

入排标准

年龄范围
6 Months 至 18 Years(Child, Adult)
性别
All
接受健康志愿者

入选标准

  • Children between the ages of 6 months and 18 years of age (inclusive)
  • Suspected purulent staphylococcal skin or soft tissue infection
  • No hospitalization within the previous 14 days
  • Must have reliable means of follow-up contact (e.g. working phone)
  • Outpatient management in the judgement of treating physician

排除标准

  • Hospitalization on initial visit
  • Voluntary withdrawal by the treating physician in order to dictate the antibiotic being used
  • Patients with a history of hypersensitivity to or intolerance of cephalexin (or other beta lactams) or clindamycin.
  • Patients with altered immunity (inherited or acquired)
  • Patients with skin infections related to surgical wounds or hardware.
  • Patients currently on antibiotic therapy

研究组 & 干预措施

cephalexin

Placebo Comparator

干预措施: cephalexin (Drug)

clindamycin

Active Comparator

干预措施: clindamycin (Drug)

结局指标

主要结局

Clinical Improvement at the 48-72 Hour Clinical Follow-up

时间窗: 48-72 hour clinical follow-up

Clinical improvement was defined as improvement in at least one of the following four measures without regression in any: (1) erythema (2) pain (3) induration (4) patient or families self report of improvement.

次要结局

未报告次要终点

研究者

发起方
Aaron Chen
申办方类型
Other
责任方
Sponsor Investigator
主要研究者

Aaron Chen

MD

Johns Hopkins University

研究点 (1)

Loading locations...

相似试验