评价头孢唑林和头孢曲松对不同病原菌的敏感性和耐药模式——体外比较分析。

Feroza Perveen, Syed Baqir Shyum Naqvi, A. Khaliq
{"title":"评价头孢唑林和头孢曲松对不同病原菌的敏感性和耐药模式——体外比较分析。","authors":"Feroza Perveen, Syed Baqir Shyum Naqvi, A. Khaliq","doi":"10.58397/ashkmdc.v26i3.267","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Objectives: To evaluate the zone of inhibition and sensitivity pattern of cefazolin and ceftriaxone against selected pathogenic organisms. \nMethodology: This was an invitro experimental study that was conducted on clinical isolates of Escherichia coli, Klebsiella spp., Proteus spp., Pseudomonas aeruginosa and Staphlococcus aureus from urine and pus samples. These samples were collected from four pathological laboratories in Karachi and tested against two commonly used cephalosporins, cefazolin and ceftriaxone from the period of 1st January –27th February 2011. The resistant pattern was determined by disc diffusion method (Kirby-Bauer test).The data was analyzed by Statistical Package for Social Sciences version 19. Mean ± SD used for continuous measurements whereas frequencies and percentages were used for categorical variables. Independent sample t-test applied to see antibiotic sensitivity pattern in urine and pus samples. \nResults:  The result of this study reveal that Escherichia coli is the most common uropathogen that is present in more than 35% of samples. The zone of inhibition of Ceftriaxone is greater than Cefazolin for all types of clinical isolates. Moreover the sensitivity pattern of Ceftriaxone for all the clinical isolates is greater 90.25%, 85.72%,100%,75% and 85% to  Escherichia coli, Klebsiella spp., Proteus spp., Pseudomonas aeruginosa, Staphlococcus aureus  respectively than does Cefazolin. The pathogenic organisms present in urine are more susceptible to ceftriaxone. The p-value obtained after apply independent sample t-test for ceftriaxone was 0.012. Therefore, there is a significant difference in the sensitivity pattern of ceftriaxone for pathogens present in urine and pus samples. \nConclusion: Ceftriaxone is more effective than cefazolin in most of the cases and there is clear difference in their zone of inhibition. Moreover, resistance to cefazolin develops more easily than does Ceftriaxone. Continuous surveillance, public awareness and health care education can decreases the irrational use of these antibiotics. \nKeywords: Pathogenic organisms, Resistance, Sensitivity, Zone of Inhibition, Cefazolin, Ceftriaxone, efficacy.","PeriodicalId":53838,"journal":{"name":"Annals Abbasi Shaheed Hospital & Karachi Medical & Dental College","volume":"21 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2021-12-09","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Evaluating Sensitivity and Resistance Pattern of Cefazolin and Ceftriaxone Against Different Pathogenic Organisms- A Comparative In-Vitro Analysis.\",\"authors\":\"Feroza Perveen, Syed Baqir Shyum Naqvi, A. Khaliq\",\"doi\":\"10.58397/ashkmdc.v26i3.267\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Objectives: To evaluate the zone of inhibition and sensitivity pattern of cefazolin and ceftriaxone against selected pathogenic organisms. \\nMethodology: This was an invitro experimental study that was conducted on clinical isolates of Escherichia coli, Klebsiella spp., Proteus spp., Pseudomonas aeruginosa and Staphlococcus aureus from urine and pus samples. These samples were collected from four pathological laboratories in Karachi and tested against two commonly used cephalosporins, cefazolin and ceftriaxone from the period of 1st January –27th February 2011. The resistant pattern was determined by disc diffusion method (Kirby-Bauer test).The data was analyzed by Statistical Package for Social Sciences version 19. Mean ± SD used for continuous measurements whereas frequencies and percentages were used for categorical variables. Independent sample t-test applied to see antibiotic sensitivity pattern in urine and pus samples. \\nResults:  The result of this study reveal that Escherichia coli is the most common uropathogen that is present in more than 35% of samples. The zone of inhibition of Ceftriaxone is greater than Cefazolin for all types of clinical isolates. Moreover the sensitivity pattern of Ceftriaxone for all the clinical isolates is greater 90.25%, 85.72%,100%,75% and 85% to  Escherichia coli, Klebsiella spp., Proteus spp., Pseudomonas aeruginosa, Staphlococcus aureus  respectively than does Cefazolin. The pathogenic organisms present in urine are more susceptible to ceftriaxone. The p-value obtained after apply independent sample t-test for ceftriaxone was 0.012. Therefore, there is a significant difference in the sensitivity pattern of ceftriaxone for pathogens present in urine and pus samples. \\nConclusion: Ceftriaxone is more effective than cefazolin in most of the cases and there is clear difference in their zone of inhibition. Moreover, resistance to cefazolin develops more easily than does Ceftriaxone. Continuous surveillance, public awareness and health care education can decreases the irrational use of these antibiotics. \\nKeywords: Pathogenic organisms, Resistance, Sensitivity, Zone of Inhibition, Cefazolin, Ceftriaxone, efficacy.\",\"PeriodicalId\":53838,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Annals Abbasi Shaheed Hospital & Karachi Medical & Dental College\",\"volume\":\"21 1\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2021-12-09\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Annals Abbasi Shaheed Hospital & Karachi Medical & Dental College\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.58397/ashkmdc.v26i3.267\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Annals Abbasi Shaheed Hospital & Karachi Medical & Dental College","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.58397/ashkmdc.v26i3.267","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

目的:评价头孢唑林和头孢曲松对选定病原菌的抑菌区及敏感性。方法:采用体外实验方法,对临床从尿液和脓液中分离出的大肠杆菌、克雷伯氏菌、变形杆菌、铜绿假单胞菌和金黄色葡萄球菌进行研究。这些样本采集自卡拉奇的四个病理实验室,并于2011年1月1日至2月27日期间对头孢唑林和头孢曲松两种常用头孢菌素进行检测。采用圆盘扩散法(Kirby-Bauer试验)测定抗性模式。数据分析采用社会科学统计软件包第19版。连续测量采用均数±标准差,分类变量采用频率和百分比。应用独立样本t检验观察尿液和脓液样本的抗生素敏感性模式。结果:本研究结果显示大肠杆菌是最常见的尿路病原体,存在于超过35%的样本中。头孢曲松对各类临床分离株的抑制区均大于头孢唑林。头孢曲松对大肠埃希菌、克雷伯氏菌、变形杆菌、铜绿假单胞菌、金黄色葡萄球菌的敏感性分别高于头孢唑林90.25%、85.72%、100%、75%和85%。尿液中存在的致病微生物对头孢曲松更敏感。头孢曲松应用独立样本t检验的p值为0.012。因此,头孢曲松对尿液和脓样本中存在的病原体的敏感性模式有显著差异。结论:头孢曲松在大多数情况下均优于头孢唑林,其抑制区有明显差异。此外,对头孢唑林的耐药性比头孢曲松更容易产生。持续监测、公众意识和卫生保健教育可减少这些抗生素的不合理使用。关键词:病原菌,耐药性,敏感性,抑制区,头孢唑林,头孢曲松,疗效。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Evaluating Sensitivity and Resistance Pattern of Cefazolin and Ceftriaxone Against Different Pathogenic Organisms- A Comparative In-Vitro Analysis.
Objectives: To evaluate the zone of inhibition and sensitivity pattern of cefazolin and ceftriaxone against selected pathogenic organisms. Methodology: This was an invitro experimental study that was conducted on clinical isolates of Escherichia coli, Klebsiella spp., Proteus spp., Pseudomonas aeruginosa and Staphlococcus aureus from urine and pus samples. These samples were collected from four pathological laboratories in Karachi and tested against two commonly used cephalosporins, cefazolin and ceftriaxone from the period of 1st January –27th February 2011. The resistant pattern was determined by disc diffusion method (Kirby-Bauer test).The data was analyzed by Statistical Package for Social Sciences version 19. Mean ± SD used for continuous measurements whereas frequencies and percentages were used for categorical variables. Independent sample t-test applied to see antibiotic sensitivity pattern in urine and pus samples. Results:  The result of this study reveal that Escherichia coli is the most common uropathogen that is present in more than 35% of samples. The zone of inhibition of Ceftriaxone is greater than Cefazolin for all types of clinical isolates. Moreover the sensitivity pattern of Ceftriaxone for all the clinical isolates is greater 90.25%, 85.72%,100%,75% and 85% to  Escherichia coli, Klebsiella spp., Proteus spp., Pseudomonas aeruginosa, Staphlococcus aureus  respectively than does Cefazolin. The pathogenic organisms present in urine are more susceptible to ceftriaxone. The p-value obtained after apply independent sample t-test for ceftriaxone was 0.012. Therefore, there is a significant difference in the sensitivity pattern of ceftriaxone for pathogens present in urine and pus samples. Conclusion: Ceftriaxone is more effective than cefazolin in most of the cases and there is clear difference in their zone of inhibition. Moreover, resistance to cefazolin develops more easily than does Ceftriaxone. Continuous surveillance, public awareness and health care education can decreases the irrational use of these antibiotics. Keywords: Pathogenic organisms, Resistance, Sensitivity, Zone of Inhibition, Cefazolin, Ceftriaxone, efficacy.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Knowledge and Practice of Breast Self-Examination (BSE) Among Urban Women of a Low-Resource Country A Scale Development for Assessing the Drive for Muscularity Among Pakistani Bodybuilders Association of Educational Status of Mothers and Incomplete Immunization in Children Unveiling the Syndemics in Pakistan: Navigating the Challenges of Emerging Diseases like Monkeypox Forensic Dentistry – An Important Core Subject Missing From Dental Curricula in Pakistan
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1