Evidence map›Paper›PMID 23875886›Full record

ArticleBMC research notes2013

Bacterial profile and antimicrobial susceptibility pattern in septicemia suspected patients attending Gondar University Hospital, Northwest Ethiopia.

Mulat Dagnew, Gizachew Yismaw, Mucheye Gizachew, Alemayehu Gadisa, Tigist Abebe, Tinebeb Tadesse, Agersew Alemu, Biniam Mathewos

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMC research notes, 2013. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 49 papers, 6 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
49citing papers in PubMed, 6 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

49 citing papers in PubMed, 6 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Antibiotic regimens for late-onset neonatal sepsis.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2021
    Pooled it
  5. Pooled it
  6. Pooled it
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

8 authors.

Mulat DagnewDepartment of Medical Microbiology, College of Medicine and Health Sciences, Gondar teaching Hospital, Gondar University, Gondar, Ethiopia. dagnewmulat@gmail.com
Gizachew Yismaw
Mucheye Gizachew
Alemayehu Gadisa
Tigist Abebe
Tinebeb Tadesse
Agersew Alemu
Biniam Mathewos

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundBacterial blood stream infection constitutes a significant public health problem and it is an important cause of morbidity and mortality in hospitalized patients. The aim of this study was to assess the prevalence of bacterial isolates from septicemia suspected patients and their antimicrobial susceptibility pattern in Gondar University Hospital.

methodsThis laboratory based retrospective study of 390 blood culture and susceptibility tests was conducted in Bacteriology Laboratory of the University of Gondar Teaching Hospital. The samples were collected and processed following standard microbiological techniques as part of the routine clinical management of the patient. Antibiotic susceptibility testing was done on pure culture isolates employing disc-diffusion method for the commonly used antibiotics. The data were analyzed by using SPSS version 16 and the results were summarized by using tables and graphs.

resultsOut of 390 blood culture results, 71 (18.2%) were culture positive. The predominant bacteria isolated from blood culture were Coagulase negative staphylococci 30 (42.3%), followed by S. aureus 17 (23.9%) and Klebiesella spp 9 (12.9%), E. coli 5 (7.0%), Pseudomonas aeroginosa 4 (5.6%) and Salmonella spp. 3 (4.2%). The gram positive and gram negative bacteria constituted 49 (69%) and 22 (31%) of the culture isolates; respectively. The isolates showed high rates of resistance to most antibiotics tested. The range of resistance for Gram positive and Gram negative were from 23.5% - 58.8%, and 20%- 100% respectively.

conclusionsIn the present study most of the pathogens isolated from blood culture showed high rate of resistance to most commonly used antibiotics used to treat bacterial infections. Therefore, rational use of antibiotics should be practiced.

Indexed as

Hospitals, UniversityMicrobial Sensitivity TestsAdolescentAdultBacteriaChildChild, PreschoolCross-Sectional StudiesEthiopiaFemaleHumansInfantInfant, NewbornMaleMiddle AgedRetrospective Studies

Identifiers

PMID23875886
PMCPMC3723433

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.