Paper Details

  1. Home
  2. Paper Details

Double-blind, double-dummy comparison of azithromycin and cephalexin in the treatment of skin and skin structure infections.

Author: KianiR

Comparative StudyResearch that compares multiple groups/interventions to determine differences/similarities in outcomes/characteristics.
Journal ArticleAn article published in an academic or professional journal that reports original research or scholarly analysis.
Clinical TrialA clinical trial is a planned study conducted on humans to evaluate the efficacy and safety of pharmaceuticals, medical devices, and treatment methods. It aims to explore the possibilities of new treatments and improve the health of patients.
Multicenter StudyResearch conducted in collaboration with multiple research institutions. It aims to collect a wide range of data and obtain more generalizable results.
Randomized Controlled TrialA clinical trial that randomly assigns participants to treatment and control groups to evaluate the effects of an intervention.

Overview

This study compared azithromycin and cephalexin in treating skin and skin structure infections. Both antibiotics were effective, with comparable outcomes in terms of clinical and bacteriological response. Azithromycin's 5-day regimen proved equally effective as cephalexin's 10-day regimen, demonstrating a potential benefit in terms of treatment duration.
Paper Details　
Original Abstract of the Article :
In this double-blind, randomised trial conducted in 22 centres in the USA, azithromycin given over five days, as a once-a-day regimen, (500 mg on day 1, 250 mg on days 2-5) was compared with cephalexin (500 mg b.i.d.) given for ten days in the treatment of patients with skin and skin structure infec...See full text at original site
Dr.Camel IconDr.Camel's Paper Summary Blogラクダ博士について

ラクダ博士は、Health Journal が論文の内容を分かりやすく解説するために作成した架空のキャラクターです。
難解な医学論文を、専門知識のない方にも理解しやすいように、噛み砕いて説明することを目指しています。

* ラクダ博士による解説は、あくまで論文の要点をまとめたものであり、原論文の完全な代替となるものではありません。詳細な内容については、必ず原論文をご参照ください。
* ラクダ博士は架空のキャラクターであり、実際の医学研究者や医療従事者とは一切関係がありません。
* 解説の内容は Health Journal が独自に解釈・作成したものであり、原論文の著者または出版社の見解を反映するものではありません。


引用元：
https://doi.org/10.1007/BF01975848

データ提供：米国国立医学図書館（NLM）

Comparing Azithromycin and Cephalexin for Skin Infections: A Desert Oasis of Treatment Options

Skin infections, like a persistent desert rash, can be bothersome and sometimes debilitating. Researchers are always seeking effective and convenient treatments to manage these infections. This study, like a desert oasis offering multiple paths, compared the effectiveness of two common antibiotics, azithromycin and cephalexin, in treating skin and skin structure infections. The authors conducted a double-blind, randomized trial, carefully comparing the efficacy and tolerability of azithromycin administered over five days with cephalexin administered over ten days.

Azithromycin vs. Cephalexin: Two Paths to Relief

The study revealed that both azithromycin and cephalexin were effective in treating skin infections, with similar clinical and bacteriological response rates. However, azithromycin, with its once-a-day dosing regimen, offered the convenience of fewer doses. Both antibiotics were well-tolerated, with a similar incidence of side effects.

Choosing the Right Path: A Desert Traveler's Guide

This research offers valuable insights for healthcare providers and patients seeking treatment for skin infections. Both azithromycin and cephalexin are effective options, but the convenience of azithromycin's once-a-day dosing regimen may make it a more appealing choice for some individuals.

Dr.Camel's Conclusion

This study, like a desert oasis with multiple paths, provides valuable information for managing skin infections. Both azithromycin and cephalexin offer effective treatment options, with azithromycin's once-a-day regimen providing greater convenience. By understanding the effectiveness and side effects of each antibiotic, individuals can work with their healthcare providers to choose the best treatment path for their needs.

Date :
  1. Date Completed 1992-02-20
  2. Date Revised 2021-05-03
Further Info :

Pubmed ID

1662638

DOI: Digital Object Identifier

10.1007/BF01975848

Related Literature

Article Analysis
・Side Effects of cephalexin
SNS
PICO Info
in preparation
Languages

English

Positive IndicatorAn AI analysis index that serves as a benchmark for how positive the results of the study are. Note that it is a benchmark and requires careful interpretation and consideration of different perspectives.

This site uses cookies. Visit our privacy policy page or click the link in any footer for more information and to change your preferences.