| Literature DB >> 26245282 |
Muluwork Getahun1, Gobena Ameni2, Abebaw Kebede3, Zelalem Yaregal4, Elena Hailu5, Grimay Medihn6, Daniel Demssie7, Feven Girmachew8, Yetnebersh Fiseha9, Abyot Meaza10, Nathneal Dirse11, Mulualem Agonafir12, Feleke Dana13, Fasil Tsegaye14, Zeleke Alebachew15, Almaz Abebe16, Amha Kebede17, Eshetu Lemma18.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The identification of circulating TB strains in the community and drug sensitivity patterns is essential for the tuberculosis control program. This study was undertaken to identify M. tuberculosis strains circulating in selected communities in Ethiopia as well as to evaluate the drug sensitivity pattern of these strains.Entities:
Mesh:
Year: 2015 PMID: 26245282 PMCID: PMC4527252 DOI: 10.1186/s12889-015-2105-7
Source DB: PubMed Journal: BMC Public Health ISSN: 1471-2458 Impact factor: 3.295
Fig. 1Spatial distribution study sites at Woreda level
Culture result Vs sex, age, region and resident type
| Culture Positive | Culture Negative/NTM/Contaminated | Total | Culture Positivity Rate |
| ||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Sex | Male | 51 | 3122 | 3173 | 1.6 | 0.844 |
| Female | 45 | 2645 | 2690 | 1.7 | ||
| Age | 15–24 | 32 | 962 | 994 | 3.2 | <0.001 |
| 25–34 | 21 | 1183 | 1204 | 1.7 | ||
| 35–44 | 17 | 1084 | 1101 | 1.5 | ||
| 45–54 | 12 | 992 | 1004 | 1.2 | ||
| 55–64 | 10 | 736 | 746 | 1.3 | ||
| > = 65 | 4 | 810 | 814 | 0.5 | ||
| Region | Oromiya | 28 | 2250 | 2278 | 1.2 | <0.001 |
| SNNPR | 30 | 1191 | 1221 | 2.5 | ||
| Amhara | 10 | 948 | 958 | 1 | ||
| Tigray | 6 | 505 | 511 | 1.2 | ||
| Afar | 1 | 143 | 144 | 0.7 | ||
| Gambela | 5 | 83 | 88 | 5.7 | ||
| Somali | 7 | 388 | 395 | 1.8 | ||
| Benshangul | 0 | 25 | 25 | 0 | ||
| Dire Dawa | 0 | 45 | 45 | 0 | ||
| Addis Ababa | 9 | 189 | 198 | 4.5 | ||
| Resident | Urban | 14 | 744 | 758 | 1.8 | 0.844 |
| Rural | 72 | 4349 | 4421 | 1.6 | ||
| Pastoral | 10 | 674 | 684 | 1.5 |
Distribution of previously registered and newly identified cluster in Kebeles
| Same Kebele | Different Kebele | |
|---|---|---|
| SIT for previously registered strains | Number (%) | Number (%) |
| 53 | 4 (26.7) | 11 (73.3) |
| 149 | 4 (36.4) | 7 (63.6) |
| 37 | 4 (44.4) | 5 (55.6) |
| 26 | 0 (0.0) | 3 (100) |
| 119 | 0 (0.0) | 3 (100) |
| 910 | 0 (0.0) | 3 (100) |
| 247 | 2 (66.7) | 1 (33.3) |
| 21 | 0 (0.0) | 2 (100) |
| 289 | 0 (0.0) | 2 (100) |
| 777 | 2 (100) | 0 (0.0) |
| Sub Total | 16 (30.2) | 37 (69.8) |
| Newly identified strains | ||
| Orphan | 2 (50.0) | 2 (50.0) |
| Orphan | 3 (100) | 0 (0.0) |
| Orphan | 2 (100) | 0 (0.0) |
| Orphan | 2 (100) | 0 (0.0) |
| Sub Total | 9 (81.8) | 2 (18.2) |
| Total | 25 (39.1 %) | 39 (60.9 %) |
Fig. 2Distribution of strains in their respective collection sites at Woreda level: Both registered and orphan clustered strains were indicated in colored. Orphans were given a number according to their order of identification. Both registered and orphan single isolates is represented in red hallow circle. The numeral in the side of the circle indicates that the number of single strains identified in that specific location
Susceptibility pattern of 90 isolate for first line drugs
| Number | Percentage | |
|---|---|---|
| Susceptible | 60 | 66.6 |
| Mono-resistance | 25 | 27.7 |
| Resistant to | ||
| INH only | 1 | 1.1 |
| SM only | 24 | 26.6 |
| INH + SM | 1 | 1.1 |
| MDR | 4 | 4.4 |
| INH + SM + RIF | 1 | 1.1 |
| INH + SM + RIF + EMB | 3 | 3.3 |