ArticleJundishapur journal of microbiology2014
Incidence and susceptibility pattern of methicillin resistant coagulase-negative staphylococci isolated from a tertiary care hospital of pakistan.
Article in Jundishapur journal of microbiology, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- The species distribution, antimicrobial resistance and risk factors for poor outcome of coagulase-negative staphylococci bacteraemia in China.Antimicrobial resistance and infection control · 2019Article
- Number of positive blood cultures, biofilm formation, and adhesin genes in differentiating true coagulase-negative staphylococci bacteremia from contamination.European journal of clinical microbiology & infectious diseases : official publication of the European Society of Clinical Microbiology · 2016Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundMethicillin resistant coagulase-negative Staphylococci are resistant organisms causing infections associated with high morbidity and mortality. Methicillin resistant Staphylococcus epidermidis (MRSE), is especially important with respect to admitted patients with indwelling catheters and other installed invasive devices where these organisms are known to be found. As a result, such lifesaving measures may prove fatal from subsequent infection and sepsis by these pathogens. Therefore, to limit such conditions in patients, the spread of MRSE and related organisms in the hospitals have to be effectively controlled.
objectivesThis study was carried out to determine the frequency of methicillin resistant organisms among all isolated coagulase negative Staphylococci (CoNS) and to find effective antibiotics against these microorganisms. PATIENTS AND
methodsAll samples sent to the lab were routinely processed according to standard microbiological procedures and the cultures yielding growth of CoNS were selected for the study. All samples containing CoNS collected over a 2 year-period, were included irrespective of patients' age and gender. The antibiogram of the organisms was recorded according to CLSI guidelines and the ratio of methicillin resistant organisms determined.
resultsFrom a total of 299 isolated coagulase negative Staphylococci (CoNS), 40.1% were methicillin resistant. A high proportion of these organisms (more than 50%) were resistant to cephalosporins, aminoglycosides and quinolones while only a small number were found to show resistance to linezolid, minocycline, chloramphenicol and rifampicin. There were no resistant organisms against vancomycin.
conclusionsA considerable amount of methicillin resistant organisms found among CoNS in our region. The above stated antibiotics would prove effective in limiting these infections. Clinicians should keep these facts in mind while treating their patients.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.