尼日利亚伊鲁阿专科教学医院就诊的龋齿患者细菌分离物的药敏模式

O. O. Philips, Omoregie Timothy, Idehen I. Charlse, Iserhienrhien Osamuyimen
{"title":"尼日利亚伊鲁阿专科教学医院就诊的龋齿患者细菌分离物的药敏模式","authors":"O. O. Philips, Omoregie Timothy, Idehen I. Charlse, Iserhienrhien Osamuyimen","doi":"10.37871/jbres1311","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"This study was carried out to evaluate the antibiotic susceptibility pattern of bacterial isolates from dental caries patients attending the clinic at Irrua Specialist Teaching Hospital, Irrua, Nigeria. A total of 223 bacteria samples (Streptococcus mutans = 151; Streptococcus sobrinus = 36; Lactobacillus acidophilus = 22; Streptococcus salivarius = 10; Streptococcus mitis = 4) were collected from the patients. Antimicrobial sensitivity testing was done by single disc agar diffusion method on 24 antibiotics; selected into eight different groups of 3 according to action, community usage, and generation. The average group susceptibility of antibiotics to all bacterial isolates were 25.71%, 53.81%, 13.75%, 32.74%, 10.76%, 8.52%, 0.60% and 64.42% for group 1 to 8 respectively. Specifically, the most potent antibiotic in the different groups of antibiotics was Amoxicillin (42.60%), Unasyn (78.03%), Chloramphenicol (37.67%), Erythromycin (74.44%), Streptomycin (28.70%), Cefotaxime (18.39%), Pefloxacin (1.79%) and Clindamycin (96.41%). There was total resistance of all isolates to Cotrimoxazole, Neomycin, Ciprofloxacin, and Ofloxacin. The overall sensitivity of each isolated bacterial to the 24 antibiotics was 26.27%, 26.62%, 22.73%, 32.50%, and 28.13% for Strep. mutans, Strep. sobrinus, L. acidophilus, Strep. salivarius and Strep. mitis respectively. Considering the overall low sensitivity of dental caries isolates to the overall 24 antibiotics, there is a need for antibiotic susceptibility screening before an antibiotic prescription for the treatment of dental caries.","PeriodicalId":94067,"journal":{"name":"Journal of biomedical research & environmental sciences","volume":"59 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2021-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Susceptibility Pattern of Bacterial Isolates from Dental Caries Patients Attending Clinic at Irrua Specialist Teaching Hospital, Irrua, Nigeria\",\"authors\":\"O. O. Philips, Omoregie Timothy, Idehen I. Charlse, Iserhienrhien Osamuyimen\",\"doi\":\"10.37871/jbres1311\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"This study was carried out to evaluate the antibiotic susceptibility pattern of bacterial isolates from dental caries patients attending the clinic at Irrua Specialist Teaching Hospital, Irrua, Nigeria. A total of 223 bacteria samples (Streptococcus mutans = 151; Streptococcus sobrinus = 36; Lactobacillus acidophilus = 22; Streptococcus salivarius = 10; Streptococcus mitis = 4) were collected from the patients. Antimicrobial sensitivity testing was done by single disc agar diffusion method on 24 antibiotics; selected into eight different groups of 3 according to action, community usage, and generation. The average group susceptibility of antibiotics to all bacterial isolates were 25.71%, 53.81%, 13.75%, 32.74%, 10.76%, 8.52%, 0.60% and 64.42% for group 1 to 8 respectively. Specifically, the most potent antibiotic in the different groups of antibiotics was Amoxicillin (42.60%), Unasyn (78.03%), Chloramphenicol (37.67%), Erythromycin (74.44%), Streptomycin (28.70%), Cefotaxime (18.39%), Pefloxacin (1.79%) and Clindamycin (96.41%). There was total resistance of all isolates to Cotrimoxazole, Neomycin, Ciprofloxacin, and Ofloxacin. The overall sensitivity of each isolated bacterial to the 24 antibiotics was 26.27%, 26.62%, 22.73%, 32.50%, and 28.13% for Strep. mutans, Strep. sobrinus, L. acidophilus, Strep. salivarius and Strep. mitis respectively. Considering the overall low sensitivity of dental caries isolates to the overall 24 antibiotics, there is a need for antibiotic susceptibility screening before an antibiotic prescription for the treatment of dental caries.\",\"PeriodicalId\":94067,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of biomedical research & environmental sciences\",\"volume\":\"59 1\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2021-09-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of biomedical research & environmental sciences\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.37871/jbres1311\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of biomedical research & environmental sciences","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.37871/jbres1311","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

本研究旨在评估从尼日利亚伊鲁阿专科教学医院就诊的龋齿患者中分离出的细菌对抗生素的敏感性。共检出223份细菌样本(变形链球菌151份;sobrinus = 36;嗜酸乳杆菌= 22;唾液链球菌= 10;从患者中采集炎链球菌(4)。采用单片琼脂扩散法对24种抗生素进行药敏试验;根据行动、社区使用和生成被分为8个不同的组。各组对抗菌药物的平均敏感性分别为25.71%、53.81%、13.75%、32.74%、10.76%、8.52%、0.60%和64.42%。各组抗生素中最有效的是阿莫西林(42.60%)、Unasyn(78.03%)、氯霉素(37.67%)、红霉素(74.44%)、链霉素(28.70%)、头孢噻肟(18.39%)、培氟沙星(1.79%)和克林霉素(96.41%)。所有分离株对复方新诺明、新霉素、环丙沙星和氧氟沙星均有耐药性。链球菌对24种抗生素的总体敏感性分别为26.27%、26.62%、22.73%、32.50%和28.13%。变形链球菌,喉炎的症状。嗜酸乳杆菌,链球菌。唾液和链球菌。轻的分别。考虑到龋齿分离株对全部24种抗生素的总体敏感性较低,在使用抗生素治疗龋齿前有必要进行抗生素敏感性筛查。
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
Susceptibility Pattern of Bacterial Isolates from Dental Caries Patients Attending Clinic at Irrua Specialist Teaching Hospital, Irrua, Nigeria
This study was carried out to evaluate the antibiotic susceptibility pattern of bacterial isolates from dental caries patients attending the clinic at Irrua Specialist Teaching Hospital, Irrua, Nigeria. A total of 223 bacteria samples (Streptococcus mutans = 151; Streptococcus sobrinus = 36; Lactobacillus acidophilus = 22; Streptococcus salivarius = 10; Streptococcus mitis = 4) were collected from the patients. Antimicrobial sensitivity testing was done by single disc agar diffusion method on 24 antibiotics; selected into eight different groups of 3 according to action, community usage, and generation. The average group susceptibility of antibiotics to all bacterial isolates were 25.71%, 53.81%, 13.75%, 32.74%, 10.76%, 8.52%, 0.60% and 64.42% for group 1 to 8 respectively. Specifically, the most potent antibiotic in the different groups of antibiotics was Amoxicillin (42.60%), Unasyn (78.03%), Chloramphenicol (37.67%), Erythromycin (74.44%), Streptomycin (28.70%), Cefotaxime (18.39%), Pefloxacin (1.79%) and Clindamycin (96.41%). There was total resistance of all isolates to Cotrimoxazole, Neomycin, Ciprofloxacin, and Ofloxacin. The overall sensitivity of each isolated bacterial to the 24 antibiotics was 26.27%, 26.62%, 22.73%, 32.50%, and 28.13% for Strep. mutans, Strep. sobrinus, L. acidophilus, Strep. salivarius and Strep. mitis respectively. Considering the overall low sensitivity of dental caries isolates to the overall 24 antibiotics, there is a need for antibiotic susceptibility screening before an antibiotic prescription for the treatment of dental caries.
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
Breastfeeding among Hispanic and Black Women: Barriers and Support. Flood Prevention Raman Spectroscopic Detection of Silicone Leakage in Human Breast and Lymph Node Tissues Characterization and Selection by Optical Absorption and Emission Spectrophotometry of a Series of Red Dyes Capable of Destroying Far UV Rays by Absorption Improving Invasive Breast Cancer Care Using Machine Learning Technology.
×
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