When three-year-old Grace Hyatt's swollen legs began oozing pus after a camping trip, she was prescribed oral antibiotics to treat the skin condition. But the drugs didn't do the trick.
Two days later her condition worsened and she went to hospital where she was treated intravenously before being given oral antibiotics, leading to her full recovery.
Confusion over whether to use oral or intravenous antibiotics to treat childhood skin infections will hopefully be eased by a Melbourne-made test.
Researchers at Murdoch Children's Research Institute and University of Melbourne developed the test - called the Melbourne ASSET Risk Score - to aid doctors.
"Using IV antibiotics when they're not needed means unnecessary hospitalisations, risk of complications and a financial burden on families and hospitals," lead author Laila Ibrahim said.
"Using oral antibiotics when IV is required risks children becoming more unwell, hence the need to standardise the decision between the two when treating childhood infections."
The test checks a child's risk of sepsis, hand size in comparison to the infection, swelling, eyes and muscle tenderness. The result determines which treatment method is likely to be most effective.
The risk score was developed with 285 children aged six months to 18 years presenting to the Royal Children's Hospital with the common skin condition of cellulitis.
The study was published in Pediatrics on Thursday and funded by the RCH Foundation, MCRI and state government.
