ArticleQatar medical journal2026
Antimicrobial resistance patterns in a Qatari tertiary care center in 2024: A retrospective study.
Article in Qatar medical journal, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Antimicrobial resistance (AMR) is a critical global health threat. Local, real-time epidemiological data are the cornerstone of effective antimicrobial stewardship. This study aimed to establish a 2024 baseline for AMR patterns at a major tertiary care center in Qatar to directly guide empirical therapy and stewardship interventions. Methods: We conducted a retrospective, cross-sectional analysis of 1,656 positive bacterial cultures from blood, urine, and wound samples collected from 1,218 patients between January 1 and December 31, 2024. Antibiotic susceptibility testing was interpreted per European Committee on Antimicrobial Susceptibility Testing (EUCAST) 2024 guidelines. Statistical analysis utilized descriptive statistics and Chi-square tests. Results: The most common pathogens were Escherichia coli (30.0%), Staphylococcus aureus (25.0%), and Pseudomonas aeruginosa (15.0%). High resistance rates were observed, with E. coli exhibiting resistance to ceftriaxone (45.0%, 95% CI 40.5-49.5) and ciprofloxacin (50.0%, 95% CI 45.5-54.5). Methicillin-resistant S. aureus (MRSA) prevalence was 30.0% (95% CI 25.6-34.7). Carbapenem-resistant Klebsiella pneumoniae (CRKP) accounted for 5.5% (95% CI 4.4-6.7) of all isolates. Multidrug-resistant organisms (MDROs) were identified in 35.0% (95% CI 32.7-37.3) of samples, with a significantly higher prevalence in intensive care units (ICUs) (45.0%) compared to other wards (p < 0.001). Conclusion: This study documents a high burden of AMR, dominated by Gram-negative pathogens in critical care settings. These findings necessitate a multi-pronged response, including the revision of empirical antibiotic guidelines, enhanced stewardship focused on high-risk agents, and intensified infection control in ICUs. Integrating molecular epidemiology into future prospective surveillance is essential to combat this escalating crisis.
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.