ClinicalTrials.gg
RecruitingNCT07841691BEACONUpdated Sep 25, 2026

Optimising Antibiotic Use for Paediatric Lower Respiratory Tract Infections in Africa

An interventional study of CRP- and PREPARE-guided Antibiotic Prescription in Lower Respiratory Tract Infection (LRTI), Pneumonia and Bronchopneumonia, sponsored by University of Witwatersrand, South Africa. Recruiting at 1 site in South Africa. Open to participants aged 2 Months to 24 Months. Per ClinicalTrials.gov, last updated 2026-09-25.

Sponsored by University of Witwatersrand, South Africa · Not applicable, Interventional, and Other

From the registry’s dates

  • Registered 3 months after the study started (first participant enrolled May 2026, registered Sep 2026).
  • Started May 2026; still recruiting 5 months later.
Updated Sep 25, 2026Newly registeredGo to Updates ↓
Phase
Not applicable
Study type
Interventional
Enrollment
400
Allocation
Randomized
Ages
2 Months to 24 Months
Sex
All
01

Study summary

Lower respiratory tract infections (LRTIs) remain a leading cause of hospitalisation and death among young children in Africa. Although viral infections account for a substantial proportion of LRTIs, antibiotics are frequently prescribed because distinguishing between viral and bacterial infections can be challenging. This contributes to unnecessary antibiotic exposure and the rising global public health challenge of antimicrobial resistance.

This pragmatic, unblinded randomised controlled study will evaluate whether the combination of point-of-care (POC) C-reactive protein (CRP) testing and the PREPARE clinical severity score can safely reduce antibiotic use among children aged 2 to 24 months hospitalised with LRTI at Chris Hani Baragwanath Academic Hospital (CHBAH), South Africa. Participants will be randomly assigned in a 1:1 ratio to either the intervention group, where antibiotic decisions are guided by serial POC CRP measurements and repeated PREPARE severity assessments, or a control group receiving routine clinical care.

The primary objective of the study is to compare antibiotic use during hospitalisation between the intervention and control groups. Secondary objectives are to evaluate the safety of this approach by comparing mortality, hospital readmission within 28 days, adverse events, need for invasive ventilation, duration of hospitalisation, and other clinical outcomes between study groups. In addition, the study will compare healthcare-related costs, including antibiotic expenditure and costs associated with hospitalisation.

A parallel mixed-methods component will explore clinician attitudes, beliefs, and determinants of antibiotic prescribing for children hospitalised with LRTI using surveys, focus groups discussions, and individual interviews informed by the Theoretical Domains Framework (TDF). Findings will help identify behavioural and system-level factors that influence antibiotic prescribing and inform future antimicrobial stewardship interventions.

This study aims to generate evidence on whether biomarker-guided and risk-stratified care can safely optimise antibiotic use among young African children hospitalised with LRTI while improving antimicrobial stewardship and reducing healthcare costs.

Read the detailed description

Antimicrobial resistance (AMR) has emerged as one of the most pressing global health threats and is driven largely by the inappropriate use of antibiotics. Strengthening antibiotic stewardship is therefore a critical public health priority to slow the emergence of resistant pathogens and preserve the effectiveness of existing therapies. Stewardship in inherently complex, particularly in the management of lower respiratory tract infections (LRTIs) in children. Optimising appropriate antibiotic use requires good clinical acumen, diagnostic accuracy, and sound clinical decision-making. This decision-making is influenced by multiple environmental, social, behavioural and psychological factors.

LRTIs remain a leading cause of mortality and morbidity in children under five years of age, particularly in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs). Despite progress in pneumococcal conjugate vaccine (PCV) and Haemophilus influenzae type b (Hib) vaccine coverage, LRTIs continue to account for a significant proportion of paediatric hospital admissions and deaths. There has been a marked shift in the aetiology of LRTIs over the last two decades, with a now greater proportion of LRTIs attributable to respiratory viruses and a reduced proportion caused by bacterial infections. Data from The Pneumonia Etiology Research for Child Health (PERCH) study demonstrated that viruses accounted for approximately two-thirds of childhood pneumonia cases, while bacteria accounted for approximately one-quarter.

The World Health Organisation (WHO) pneumonia case definition is intentionally highly sensitive in order to reduce mortality, particularly in resource-limited settings. Importantly, the WHO definition does not differentiate between viral, bacterial or mixed aetiology LRTI. Consequently, many children fulfilling the criteria for severe pneumonia receive antibiotic treatment despite the predominance of viral causes. This challenge is particularly relevant in infants and young children where bronchiolitis and bronchopneumonia frequently present with overlapping clinical features and are often difficult to distinguish clinically.

Although bronchiolitis is generally managed with supportive care alone and bronchopneumonia is treated with antibiotics, clinicians frequently struggle to differentiate between these two conditions, resulting in over-prescribing of antibiotics. Diagnostic uncertainty, concerns regarding clinical deterioration, fear of missing serious bacterial infection, and limitations in available diagnostic tools all contribute to antibiotic prescribing decisions. While this approach may reduce the risk of undertreatment, it also contributes to unnecessary antibiotic exposure, increased healthcare costs, adverse drug effects, disruptions of the microbiome, and the development of antimicrobial resistance.

Clinical severity assessment tools may help identify children at higher risk of adverse outcomes. The Pneumonia Research Partnership to Assess WHO Recommendations (PREPARE) clinical severity score was derived from data obtained from more than 20 countries and has demonstrated good external validity in predicting pneumonia-related mortality among children aged 2-59 months hospitalised with pneumonia. The PREPARE score incorporates patient age, sex, weight-for-age z-score, body temperature, respiratory rate, level of consciousness, cyanosis, and oxygen saturation to produce a risk score that can assist with clinical risk stratification.

While risk assessment tools may identify children at risk of severe disease and adverse outcomes, they do not determine disease aetiology. Point-of-care (POC) biomarkers may assist clinicians in differentiating between viral and bacterial infections. C-reactive protein (CRP) is an inflammatory biomarker that has been evaluated as a tool to guide antibiotic prescribing practices. Studies conducted in Uganda and Tanzania have demonstrated that CRP-guided management strategies can safely reduce antibiotic prescribing among children with respiratory illnesses in outpatient settings. However, evidence regarding CRP-informed risk-differentiated care among African children hospitalised with LRTI is lacking.

The implementation of a clinical severity scoring system alongside serial POC CRP testing may provide a structured strategy to support safe antibiotic prescribing while reducing unnecessary antibiotic use. To our knowledge, no studies have assessed the safety of biomarker-guided and severity-score-guided withholding or early termination of antibiotics among young African children hospitalised with LRTI.

The primary component of this study is a 12-month pragmatic, unblinded randomised controlled trial conducted at Chris Hani Baragwanath Academic Hospital (CHBAH), a large tertiary referral hospital in Soweto, South Africa. Children aged 2 to 24 months admitted with a clinician diagnoses of LRTI will be eligible for enrolment following written informed consent from a parent or legal guardian.

Participants will be randomised win a 1:1 ratio to either an intervention arm or routine care arm. Children allocated to the intervention arm will undergo a baseline assessment using a decision-making algorithm incorporating both the PREPARE clinical severity score and a POC CRP test. A conservative CRP threshold of less than 10mg/L together with a PREPARE score of 4 or less will be used to identify children who are at low risk of adverse outcomes and more likely to have viral disease. Repeat PREPARE assessments and POC CRP measurements will be performed on days 1, 2 and 3 following enrolment.

The intervention is intended to support clinical decision-making regarding antibiotic initiation, continuation and early termination. Treating clinicians will retain the authority to override the algorithm at any time based on the patient's clinical condition to ensure patient safety.

Children allocated to the control arm will receive routine clinical care according to existing hospital and unit-specific practices. A baseline PREPARE score will be recorded for research purposes, but clinical management decisions will not be guided by the study algorithm. Participants will be followed throughout hospitalisation and until 28 days following randomisation. Data collected will include antibiotic use, duration of antibiotic exposure, route of administration, clinical outcomes, need for respiratory support, adverse events, readmissions and mortality,

The primary outcome is antibiotic use during hospitalisation, including whether antibiotics were initiated or withheld, route of administration, and duration of therapy. Secondary outcomes include death within 28 days of randomisation, hospital readmission within 28 days, serious adverse events, escalation of care to invasive ventilation, hospitalisation exceeding seven days, duration of oxygen supplementation, duration of antibiotic exposure, duration of hospital stay, escalation of antibiotic therapy, post-discharge antibiotic use, and clinical complications including sepsis, lung abscess, and empyema.

In addition to the randomised trial, a mixed-methods study will explore clinician attitudes, beliefs and behaviours regarding antibiotic prescribing for children hospitalised with LRTI. Despite awareness of antimicrobial stewardship principles, clinicians continue to over-prescribe antibiotics because of diagnostic uncertainty, fear of adverse outcomes, time constraints, parental expectations, influence of colleagues and senior clinicians, and limitations in diagnostic resources.

The qualitative component will be guided by the Theoretical Domains Framework (TDF) and will involve surveys, focus group discussions and semi-structured interviews among registrars and paediatricians working at CHBAH. The study aims to identify behavioural, social and environmental determinants of prescribing practices and to better understand barriers and facilitators to appropriate antibiotic use.

A health economic analysis will also be undertaken to compare healthcare-related costs between the intervention and routine care groups, including antibiotic expenditure, duration of hospitalisation, level of care received, and costs associated with respiratory support. The study will determine whether the intervention leads to cost savings through reductions in antibiotic use and shorter hospital stays.

This study aims to determine the safety and effectiveness of combining point-of-care CRP testing with clinical severity assessment to support antibiotic prescribing decisions among children aged 2-24 months hospitalised with LRTI. In addition, it seeks to improve understanding of clinician prescribing behaviour and the contextual factors that influence antibiotic use. The findings will contribute to the evidence base for paediatric antimicrobial stewardship and may inform future implementation of biomarker-guided and severity-guided antibiotic prescribing strategies in resource-limited settings.

02

Conditions studied

  • Lower Respiratory Tract Infection (LRTI)
  • Pneumonia
  • Bronchopneumonia
  • Bronchiolitis

Keywords

  • Antimicrobial stewardship
  • Antibiotic prescribing
  • Lower respiratory tract infection
  • Antibiotic use
  • Pneumonia
  • Bronchiolitis
  • Bronchopneumonia
  • C-Reactive Protein
  • CRP
  • Point-of-care testing
  • PREPARE score
  • Clinical severity score
  • Risk stratification
  • Hospitalised children
  • Childhood pneumonia
  • Antimicrobial resistance
  • Clinician attitudes
  • Implementation science
  • South Africa
03

In context

Pneumonia

1,564 studies on the registry are indexed under Pneumonia; 265 are open to participants now.

This study's planned enrollment of 400 is above the median of 129 across 975 interventional studies indexed under Pneumonia.

Browse Pneumonia studies →

Lead sponsor

University of Witwatersrand, South Africa is the lead sponsor of 47 studies on the registry; 4 are open to participants now.

Counted across the registry records on this site, refreshed daily.

04

Who can participate

Ages eligible
2 Months to 24 Months
Sexes eligible
All
Accepts healthy volunteers
No

Go through the criteria one by one — yes, no or not sure — and take the list to your doctor or the study team. Kept in this browser only.

Inclusion criteria

  • Children between the ages of 2-24 months
  • Clinician diagnosis of lower respiratory tract infection (LRTI)

Exclusion criteria

Exclusion Criteria:

  • Transferred from other hospitals with more than 24 hours of hospitalisation
  • Hospitalisation within the preceding 30 days
05

Study design

Phase
Not applicable
Primary purpose
Other
Allocation
Randomized
Intervention model
Parallel assignment
Masking
None (open label)
Enrollment
400 participants (estimated)

Study arms

  • Experimental
    Intervention arm: CRP- and PREPARE-Guided Antibiotic Use

    Participants will receive antibiotic prescribing guidance based on serial point-of-care CRP measurements and repeated PREPARE clinical severity score assessments in addition to routine clinical care.

    Diagnostic Test: CRP- and PREPARE-guided Antibiotic Prescription

  • No intervention
    Control: Standard of Care

    Participants will receive routine clinical management according to existing hospital and unit-specific practice. Antibiotic prescribing decisions will be made by the treating clinical team without guidance from the study intervention, including point-of-care CRP testing and the PREPARE clinical severity score algorithm

Interventions

  • Diagnostic testCRP- and PREPARE-guided Antibiotic Prescription

    Antibiotic prescribing is guided by serial point-of-care CRP measurements and repeated PREPARE clinical severity score assessments. A predefined algorithm incorporating CRP results and clinical severity assessment is used to support decisions regarding antibiotic initiation, continuation, and discontinuation in children hospitalised with lower respiratory tract infections.

06

What researchers measure

Primary outcomes

  1. Antibiotic use during hospitalisation

    Antibiotic use among children hospitalised with lower respiratory tract infection, including antibiotic initiation, route of administration, duration of therapy, and early discontinuation of antibiotics during the index hospital admission.

    Time frame: From randomisation (day of admission) until hospital discharge (up to 28 days post-randomisation)

Secondary outcomes

  1. Number of participants who die within 28 days of randomisation

    Number of participants who die from any cause within 28 days after randomisation. This outcome will be compared between the intervention and routine care groups.

    Time frame: From randomisation through 28 days after randomisation

  2. Antibiotic treatment cost per participant

    Total cost of systemic antibiotic treatment received by each participant from randomisation until discharge (up to 28 days following randomisation) from the index hospitalisation. Antibiotic costs will be calculated using the antibiotics administered, duration of treatment, and applicable unit costs. Mean or median cost per participant will be compared between the intervention and routine care groups and reported in South African rand.

    Time frame: From randomisation until discharge from the index hospitalisation, up to 28 days

  3. Number of participants readmitted to hospital within 28 days of randomisation

    Number of participants who are readmitted to hospital for any cause following discharge from the index admission and within 28 days after randomisation. This outcome will be compared between the intervention and routine care groups.

    Time frame: From discharge from the index hospitalisation through 28 days after randomisation

  4. Number of Participants Experiencing at Least One Adverse Event Within 28 Days of Randomisation

    Number of participants who experience at least one adverse event within 28 days after randomisation, according to the adverse event definition specified in the study protocol. Participants experiencing more than one adverse event will be counted once for this participant-level outcome

    Time frame: From randomisation through 28 days after randomisation

  5. Number of Participants Requiring Invasive Mechanical Ventilation

    Number of participants who require escalation of care to invasive mechanical ventilation during the index hospital admission. This outcome will be compared between the intervention and routine care groups.

    Time frame: From randomisation until discharge from the index hospitalisation, up to 28 days

  6. Number of Participants Hospitalised for More Than 7 Days

    Number of participants whose index hospital admission exceeds 7 days. Duration of hospitalisation will be calculated from the date of hospital admission to the date of discharge.

    Time frame: During the index hospitalisation, assessed at discharge, up to 28 days

  7. Hospitalisation cost per participant

    Total hospitalisation cost per participant during the index hospital admission. Hospitalisation costs will be calculated using the duration and level of hospital care received and the applicable unit costs. Mean or median cost per participant will be compared between the intervention and routine care groups and reported in South African rand.

    Time frame: From randomisation until discharge from the index hospitalisation, up to 28 days

07

Study locations

1 of 1 sites recruiting
08

References and documents

Individual participant data

Plan to share: No — No plan has been established for sharing individual participant data. Participant confidentiality and privacy considerations limit the sharing of individual-level data

No publications or documents are linked to this record.

09

Timeline

1 registry update since Sep 25, 2026
ElapsedEstimatedEstimated, not yet reachedSimilar studies: half by the dot; the band is the middle halfHalf of similar studies reached it by the dot; the band is the middle half, from a quarter to three quarters

Started May 2026 (actual). Primary completion is estimated for May 2027, 11 months after the start.

Of 258 non-industry interventional studies with no phase under Pneumonia, half reached primary completion within 21 months of starting (the median), counting those still running; a quarter within 11 and three quarters within 31. This study's planned 11 months is below that.

Counting every sponsor, half of 265 studies reached it within 21 months; a quarter within 10 and three quarters within 31.

How these figures are worked out, and which studies are left out of them.

Registered
Sep 15, 2026
First posted
Sep 25, 2026
StartActual
May 27, 2026
Primary completionEst.
May 26, 2027
CompletionEst.
Jun 30, 2027
Last update
Sep 25, 2026
What these dates mean
Start.
When the first participant enrolled; while estimated, when the study expects to open to recruitment.
Primary completion.
When the last participant was examined or treated to collect data for the study's main question, its primary outcome. A study that stopped early gives the date its data collection stopped.
Completion.
When the last participant's last visit took place, for every outcome, secondary ones and side effects included: the end of the study. Often later than primary completion, sometimes the same day.
Actual and Est.
Actual means the registry says the date has happened. Est. (estimated) is a date the sponsor plans or expects. It can still move, and the sponsor is expected to change it to actual once it has passed.
Registered
First appeared on the registry. No changes since
Sep 25, 2026
Show all 1 update
  1. Sep 25, 2026
    First appeared on the registry

From the registry record's own update history. This site started tracking changes on Sep 25, 2026; for anything earlier, see the record history on ClinicalTrials.gov ↗

10

Registry details

Key details

Study ID
NCT07841691
Lead sponsor
University of Witwatersrand, South Africa
Responsible party
Lucy Wilson (Specialist Paediatrician, University of Witwatersrand, South Africa) — Principal investigator
First posted
Sep 25, 2026
Start date
May 27, 2026
Primary completion
May 26, 2027 (estimated)
Completion
Jun 30, 2027 (estimated)
Last update
Sep 25, 2026

Study contacts

Lucy N Wilson, MBBCH, MMED, FCPaed
Contact
lucy.wilson@wits-vida.org
+27 72 326 7888
Ziyaad Dangor, MBBCh
Contact
ziyaad.dangor@wits-vida.org
+27 83 471 0933
Lucy N Wilson, MBBCh, MMED, FCPaed
principal investigator · University of Witwatersrand, South Africa
David P Moore, PhD
study director · University of Witwatersrand, South Africa
Chris A Rees, PhD
study chair · Emory University
Ziyaad Dangor, PhD
study chair · University of the Witwatersrand Vaccines and Infectious Diseases Analytics (Wits VIDA) Research Unit

Oversight

Data monitoring committee
Yes
FDA-regulated drug
No
FDA-regulated device
No
View the source record on ClinicalTrials.gov ↗

Interested in this study?

Eligibility is decided by the study team. Share this record with your doctor or contact the team directly.

Contact study team

Follow this study

Get an email when the registry record changes — status, dates, results — or when someone posts here.

Sign in to follow

Discussion

Questions and observations about this study, from anyone following it. Not medical advice, and not a channel to the study team — their contact details are on the registry record.

Sign in to join the discussion. Reading takes no account; posting does. You choose a display name, and a pseudonym is the default.

Nothing here yet. If you are running this trial, taking part in it, or weighing whether to, this is the place to say so.

Start the discussion