| Literature DB >> 26238248 |
Mark Fagan1, Morten Lindbæk2,3, Nils Grude4, Harald Reiso5, Maria Romøren6, Dagfinn Skaare7, Dag Berild8.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Antibiotic resistance is a problem in nursing homes. Presumed urinary tract infections (UTI) are the most common infection. This study examines urine culture results from elderly patients to see if specific guidelines based on gender or whether the patient resides in a nursing home (NH) are warranted.Entities:
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2015 PMID: 26238248 PMCID: PMC4523906 DOI: 10.1186/s12877-015-0097-x
Source DB: PubMed Journal: BMC Geriatr ISSN: 1471-2318 Impact factor: 3.921
Urine culture results from patients living in a nursing home (NH) compared to community dwelling elderly (CD) in Vestfold County, Norway 2010
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| NH | Female | n (%) | 133 (72.7) | 11 (6.0) | 5 (2.7) | 8 (4.4) | 4 (2.2) | 22 (12.0) |
| Male | n (%) | 15 (30.6) | 8 (16.3) | 6 (12.2) | 4 (8.2) | 2 (4.1) | 14 (28.6) | |
| p-value | < 0.01b | 0.47 | 0.28 | 0.61 | 0.55 | 0.21 | ||
| CD | Female | n (%) | 1987 (70.1) | 212 (7.5) | 165 (5.8) | 93 (3.3) | 32 (1.1) | 344 (12.1) |
| Male | n (%) | 288 (39.9) | 129 (17.9) | 43 (6.0) | 38 (5.3) | 25 (3.5) | 198 (27.5) | |
| p-value | < 0.01c | < 0.01c | 0.96 | 0.59 | 0.54 | < 0.01c | ||
| NH | n (%) | 148 (63.8) | 19 (8.2) | 11 (4.7) | 12 (5.2) | 6 (2.6) | 36 (15.5) | |
| CD | n (%) | 2275 (64.0) | 341 (9.6) | 208 (5.9) | 131 (3.7) | 57 (1.6) | 542 (15.3) | |
| Total | n | 2423 | 360 | 219 | 143 | 63 | 578 | |
| p-value | 0.48 | 0.42 | 0.43 | 0.6 | 0.86 | 0.49 |
aOther was comprised of 18 different microbes in the NH group and 24 different microbes in the CD group
bComparison between females and males in the NH > 65 years old
cComparison between CD females and males > 65 years old
Resistance rates of the five most commonly isolated uropathogens from patients living in nursing homes (NH) compared to community dwelling elderly (CD) in Vestfold County, Norway 2010
|
|
|
|
|
| |||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| NH | CD | NH | CD | NH | CD | NH | CD | NH | CD | ||||||
| n (%) | n (%) | p-value | n (%) | n (%) | p-value | n (%) | n (%) | p-value | n (%) | n (%) | p-value | n (%) | n (%) | p-value | |
| Ampicillinb | 48 (32) | 732 (32) | 0.95 | 0 | 0 | Resc | Res | 2 (17) | 14 (11) | 0.63 | Res | Res | |||
| Ciprofloxacind | 14 (10) | 175 (8) | 0.08 | NAe | NAe | 2 (18) | 7 (3) | 0.07 | 3 (25) | 7 (5) | 0.04h | 0 (0) | 5 (9) | 0.6 | |
| Mecillinam | 4 (3) | 83 (3.6) | 0.82 | NAf | NAf | 1 (9) | 16 (8) | 0.62 | 1 (8) | 6 (5) | 0.51 | Res | Res | ||
| Nitrofurantoin | 3 (2) | 39 (2) | 0.76 | 0 | 0 | Res | Res | Res | Res | Res | Res | ||||
| Trimethoprimg | 36 (24) | 513 (23) | 0.1 | 6 (32) | 93 (27) | 0.69 | 1 (9) | 39 (19) | 0.46 | 3 (25) | 23 (18) | 0.79 | Res | Res | |
aResistance rate for Vancomycin was 0 % in both groups
bFor E coli, and P mirabilis intermediate (I) is classified as sensitive (S) according to recommendations from Norwegian Working Group on Antibiotics
cRes: Resistant
d(S) classified as (I) if the microbe in question is resistant (R) for nalidixic acid
eNA: not applicable. Minimum inhibitory concentrations are so high that ciprofloxacin is not recommended for infections due to E Faecalis
fNA: not applicable. Mecillinam is ineffective against E Faecalis in vitro
gFor E faecalis intermediate (I) is classified as sensitive (S)
hSignificant at α = 5 %
Resistance rates of the five most commonly isolated uropathogens from patients 65 years old or older in Vestfold County, Norway 2010: females compared to males (irrespective of residence)
|
|
|
|
|
| |||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| NH | CD | NH | CD | NH | CD | NH | CD | NH | CD | ||||||
| n (%) | n (%) | p-value | n (%) | n (%) | p-value | n (%) | n (%) | p-value | n (%) | n (%) | p-value | n (%) | n (%) | p-value | |
| Ampicillinb | 680 (32) | 100 (33) | 0.74 | 0 | 0 | Resc | Res | 11 (11) | 5 (12) | 0.99 | Res | Res | |||
| Ciprofloxacind | 153 (7) | 36 (12) | 0.03h | NAe | NAe | 5 (3) | 4 (8) | 0.12 | 8 (8) | 2 (5) | 0.72 | 4 (11) | 1 (4) | 0.38 | |
| Mecillinam | 74 (4) | 13 (4) | 0.51 | NAf | NAf | 13 (8) | 4 (8) | 0.32 | 2 (2) | 5 (12) | 0.02h | Res | Res | ||
| Nitrofurantoin | 39 (2) | 3 (1) | 0.54 | 0 | 0 | Res | Res | Res | Res | Res | Res | ||||
| Trimethoprimg | 490 (23) | 59 (20) | 0.36 | 65 (29) | 34 (25) | 0.1 | 27 (16) | 13 (27) | 0.1 | 22 (22) | 4 (10) | 0.4 | Res | Res | |
aResistance rate for Vancomycin was 0 % in both groups
bFor E coli, and P mirabilis intermediate (I) is classified as sensitive (S) according to recommendations from Norwegian Working Group on Antibiotics
cRes: Resistant
d(S) classified as (I) if the microbe in question is resistant (R) for nalidixic acid
eNA: not applicable. Minimum inhibitory concentrations are so high that ciprofloxacin is not recommended for infections due to E Faecalis
fNA: not applicable. Mecillinam is ineffective against E Faecalis in vitro
gFor E faecalis intermediate (I) is classified as sensitive (S)
hSignificant at α = 5 %
Theoretic risk of failure with empiric antibiotic therapy (%) due to resistance rates in urine cultures from elderly patients (both NH and CD) in Vestfold County Norway 2010a
| Empiric antibiotic | Female | Male |
|---|---|---|
| Ampicillin | 29.7 | 23.6 |
| Ciprofloxacin | 13.0 | 23.4 |
| Mecillinam | 11.5 | 24.2 |
| Nitrofurantoin | 11.4 | 15.9 |
| Trimethoprim | 21.2 | 17.8 |
aBased on the five most commonly cultured bacteria; E coli, E faecalis, K pneumoniae, P mirabilis, and P aeruginosa. The percentages are calculated by multiplying the percentage each microbe was responsible for by the resistance rate for that microbe