Active clinical trials for "Infections"

This study is designed to evaluate the safety and efficacy of cαStx1 and cαStx2 administered concomitantly in children presenting early signs of Shiga Toxin-Producing Bacterial (STPB) Infection.

Neonatal sepsis (serious infection) continues to be one of the major causes of morbidity and mortality in the newborn period around the world. India, with one of the world's largest populations, continues to struggle with extremely high infant and neonatal mortality rates. Sepsis accounts for 50% of deaths among community born (and 20% of mortality among hospital-born) infants. Closely linked with this is a burgeoning problem of antimicrobial resistance, which is increasingly restricting the therapeutic options for medical care providers. Friendly bacteria called "Probiotics" have been used in multiple infectious and inflammatory disease states in humans. Fructooligosaccharides are sugars found naturally in many fruits and vegetables and also in human breast milk. These sugars reach the colon undigested and serve as food for the friendly bacteria. The current study uses a probiotic preparation containing Lactobacillus plantarum and fructooligosaccharides as an attempt to prevent neonatal infections. Currently no conclusive data are available on the utility of probiotics in such conditions. If successful, such inexpensive preventive therapy can be made available to general public in resource poor countries. Similar preparations can also be used in the western world to prevent similar infectious conditions of the neonatal period, especially in preterm infants where sepsis continues to be a major cause of hospital stay and death.

The purpose of this study is to evaluate the change in signs of inflammation/local infection when Mepilex Border Ag is used in normal clinical practice when used on chronic ulcers (venous leg, diabetic foot and pressure ulcers) and partial thickness burns in need* of topical antimicrobial treatment according to the physician.

Patients with Cystic Fibrosis have multiple pulmonary infections and repeated antibiotic treatment. These factors taken together with high sputum viscosity and slow motility of the gastrointestinal tract-may change the pathogenicity and consistency of the intestinal pathogens. Part of the pulmonary infections in CF patients are due to intestinal pathogens. A pilot study performed by the researchers using probiotics in CF patients showed a decrease in the rate of pulmonary infections. Therefore,we planned a double-blind placebo-controlled trial to examine the effect of probiotics on pulmonary infections, sputum bacteria and sputum inflammatory markers in CF patients.

This study aims to evaluate the safety, tolerability and effectiveness of BTA798 on shortening the length and reducing the symptoms of human rhinovirus infection (also known as the common cold), controlling asthma symptoms, and lowering the risk of asthma symptoms worsening in subjects with asthma.

This is a Phase 2, randomized, double-blind, double-dummy, multicenter, prospective study to assess the efficacy, safety, and pharmacokinetics of two dose regimens of TP-434 compared with ertapenem in the treatment of adult community-acquired complicated intra-abdominal infections (cIAIs).

This study compared ertapenem sodium to piperacillin/tazobactam sodium for the treatment of moderate to severe diabetic foot infections. The primary hypothesis was that treatment with ertapenem sodium is non-inferior to treatment with piperacillin/tazobactam sodium, in achieving clinical improvement or cure.

Infection remains one of the most difficult-to-treat complications of total hip arthroplasty. The gold standard treatment is two-stage removal of the prosthesis with later replacement of permanent implants.The first stage consists of removal of the infected arthroplasty components and the surrounding devitalized tissue, copious pulsed irrigation, and placement of a temporary antibiotic-impregnated cement spacer. This spacer is typically left in place six weeks, during which time the patient receives intravenous antibiotics. After the surgeon feels that the infection has been eradicated, or if a second debridement is required, a second operative procedure is performed. While the use of an antibiotic spacer is well accepted, whether the spacer should immobilize the hip (a so-called "static" spacer) or allow for range of motion (a so-called "articulating" spacer) is controversial. Proponents of static spacers argue that immobilization of the periarticular soft tissues aids in clearance of the infection and that these spacers are simpler to fashion intraoperatively. Proponents of articulating spacers argue that they improve hip function, prevent damage to the musculature surrounding the hip, allow easier reimplantation, improve hip function, and prevent dislocation following hip reimplantation. While good results have been described with both methods, comparative trials have been conflicting as to whether spacer design alters hip function, operative time, and dislocation rates. Equipoise exists within the literature, and no randomized clinical trial has been conducted to evaluate this issue. The purpose of this study is to compare articulating and static antibiotic-impregnated spacers for the treatment of chronic periprosthetic infection complicating total hip arthroplasty through a prospective, randomized clinical trial. The goals of this trial are to determine the effect of spacer design upon eradication of infection, hip function, ease of reimplantation, and dislocation rates. The investigators hypothesize that articulating spacers will provide shorter operative times at replantation while improving hip function and hip dislocation rates following hip reimplantation.

Infection remains a difficult-to-treat complication of total knee arthroplasty. The gold standard treatment is two-stage removal of the prosthesis with later replacement of permanent implants. The first stage consists of removal of the infected arthroplasty components and the surrounding devitalized tissue, copious pulsed irrigation, and placement of a temporary antibiotic-impregnated cement spacer. This spacer typically is left in place six weeks, during which time the patient receives intravenous antibiotics. After the surgeon feels that the infection has been eradicated, or if the patient requires repeat debridement, a second operative procedure is performed. While the use of an antibiotic-loaded spacer is well accepted, whether the spacer should immobilize the knee (a so-called "static" spacer) or allow for range of motion (a so-called "articulating" spacer) is controversial. Proponents of articulating spacers argue that they prevent scarring of the musculature surrounding the knee resulting in easier reimplantation, improved long-term knee function, and improved range of motion. Proponents of static spacers argue that immobilization of the periarticular soft tissues aids in clearance of the infection and is simpler to fashion intraoperatively. While good results have been described with both methods, comparative trials have been conflicting as to whether spacer design alters knee function, operative time, and range of motion. Equipoise exists within the literature, and no randomized clinical trial has been conducted to evaluate this issue. The purpose of this study is to compare articulating and static antibiotic-impregnated spacers for the treatment of chronic periprosthetic infection complicating total knee arthroplasty through a prospective, randomized clinical trial. The goals of this trial are to determine the effect of spacer design upon eradication of infection, knee function, ease of reimplantation, and range of motion. The investigators hypothesize that articulating spacers will provide shorter operative times at reimplantation, while improving knee function and range of motion.

Bacteria resistant to antibiotic therapy are a major public health problem. The evolution of multi-drug resistant pathogens may be encouraged by provider prescribing behavior. Inappropriate use of antibiotics for nonbacterial infections and overuse of broad spectrum antibiotics can lead to the development of resistant strains. Though providers are adequately trained to know when antibiotics are and are not comparatively effective, this has not been sufficient to affect critical provider practices. The intent of this study is to apply behavioral economic theory to reduce the rate of antibiotic prescriptions for acute respiratory diagnoses for which guidelines do not call for antibiotics. Specifically targeted are infections that are likely to be viral. The objective of this study is to improve provider decisions around treatment of acute respiratory infections. The participants are practicing attending physicians or advanced practice nurses (i.e. providers) at participating clinics who see acute respiratory infection patients. A maximum of 550 participants will be recruited for this study. Providers consenting to participate will fill out a baseline questionnaire online. Subsequent to baseline data collection and enrollment, participating clinic sites will be randomized to the study arms, as described below. There will be a control arm, with clinic sites randomized in a multifactorial design to up to three interventions that leverage the electronic medical record: Order Sets that are triggered by EHR workflow containing exclusively guideline concordant choices (SA, for Suggested Alternatives); Accountable Justification (AJ) triggered by discordant prescriptions that populate the note with provider's rationale for guideline exceptions ; and performance feedback that benchmarks providers' own performance to that of their peers (PC, for Peer Comparison). The outcomes of interest are antibiotic prescribing patterns, including prescribing rates and changes in prescribing rates over time. The intervention period will be over one year, with a one-year follow up period to measure persistence of the effect after EHR features are returned to the original state and providers no longer receive email alerts.