Virulence and Antimicrobial Resistance in Enterococci Isolated from Urinary Tract Infections

Purpose: Urinary tract infection (UTI) is the most common nosocomial infection among hospitalized patients. Meanwhile, most frequent infections involving enterococci affect the urinary tract. The aims of this study were to investigate the susceptibility pattern of isolated enterococci from UTI and the prevalence of virulence genes. Methods: The study used enterococci isolated from urinary tract infections obtained from 3 university teaching hospitals in Northwest Iran. The antimicrobial susceptibility of the strains was determined using the disc diffusion method. Multiplex PCR was performed for the detection of genus- species specific targets, and potential virulence genes. Results: Of 188 enterococcal isolates, 138 (73.4%) and 50 (26.6%) were Enterococcus faecalis and E. faecium, respectively. Antibiotic susceptibility testing showed high resistance to amikacin (86.2%), rifampicin (86.2%) and erythromycin (73.9%), irrespective of species. In total, 68.1% were positive for gelE, and 57.4%, 53.2%, 56.4%, and 52.1% of isolates were positive for cpd, asa1, ace, and esp, respectively. Conclusion: The study revealed that most of UTI isolates were multidrug resistance against the antibiotics tested and antibiotic resistance was more common among E. faecium isolates than E. faecalis. A significant correlation was found between UTI and the presence of gelE among E. faecalis strains (p < 0.001)

Health workers readiness and practice in malaria case detection and appropriate treatment: a meta-analysis and meta-regression

BACKGROUND: Health workers (HWs) appropriate malaria case management includes early detection and prompt treatment with appropriate anti-malarial drugs. Subsequently, HWs readiness and practice are considered authentic evidence to measure the health system performance regarding malaria control programme milestones and to issue malaria elimination certification. There is no comprehensive evidence based on meta-analysis, to measure the performance of HWs in case management of malaria. This study aimed to evaluate HWs performance in early malaria case detection (testing) and the appropriate treatment. METHODS: The published literature in English was systematically searched from Medline, Scopus, Embase, and Malaria Journal up to 30th December 2020. The inclusion criteria were any studies that assessed HWs practice in early case detection by malaria testing and appropriate treatment. Eligibility assessment of records was performed independently in a blinded, standardized way by two reviewers. Pooled prevalence estimates were stratified by HWs cadre type. Meta-regression analysis was performed to explore the impact of the appropriateness of the method and risk of bias as potential sources of the heterogeneity in the presence of effective factors. RESULTS: The study pooled data of 9245 HWs obtained from 15 included studies. No study has been found in eliminating settings. The pooled estimate for appropriate malaria treatment and malaria testing were 60%; 95% CI: 53-67% and 57%; 95% CI: 49-65%, respectively. In the final multivariable meta-regression, HWs cadre and numbers, appropriateness of study methods, malaria morbidity and mortality, total admissions of malaria suspected cases, gross domestic product, availability of anti-malarial drugs, and year of the publication were explained 85 and 83% of the total variance between studies and potential sources of the heterogeneity for malaria testing and treating, respectively. CONCLUSION: HWs adherence to appropriate malaria case management guidelines were generally low while no study has been found in eliminating countries. Studies with the inappropriateness methods and risk of bias could be overestimating the actual proportion of malaria appropriate testing and treating. Strategies that focus on improving readiness and early identification of acute febrile diseases especially in the countries that progress to malaria elimination should be highly promoted

Self-reported antibiotic stewardship and infection control measures from 57 intensive care units: An international ID-IRI survey

We explored the self-reported antibiotic stewardship (AS), and infection prevention and control (IPC) activities in intensive care units (ICUs) of different income settings. A cross-sectional study was conducted using an online questionnaire to collect data about IPC and AS measures in participating ICUs. The study participants were Infectious Diseases-International Research Initiative (IDI-IR) members, committed as per their institutional agreement form. We analyzed responses from 57 ICUs in 24 countries (Lower-middle income (LMI), n = 13; Upper-middle income (UMI), n = 33; High-income (HI), n = 11). This represented (similar to 5%) of centers represented in the ID-IRI. Surveillance programs were implemented in (76.9%-90.9%) of ICUs with fewer contact precaution measures in LMI ones (p = 0.02); (LMI:69.2%, UMI:97%, HI:100%). Participation in regional antimicrobial resistance programs was more significantly applied in HI (p = 0.02) (LMI:38.4%,UMI:81.8%,HI:72.2%). AS programs are implemented in 77.2% of institutions with AS champions in 66.7%. Infectious diseases physicians and microbiologists are members of many AS teams (59%&amp;50%) respectively. Unqualified healthcare professionals(42.1%), and deficient incentives(28.1%) are the main barriers to implementing AS. We underscore the existing differences in IPC and AS programs' implementation, team composition, and faced barriers. Continuous collaboration and sharing best practices on APM is needed. The role of regional and international organizations should be encouraged. Global support for capacity building of healthcare practitioners is warranted. (C) 2022 Published by Elsevier Ltd on behalf of King Saud Bin Abdulaziz University for Health Sciences

Profiles of multidrug-resistant organisms among patients with bacteremia in intensive care units: an international ID-IRI survey

info:eu-repo/semantics/publishe

Managing adult patients with infectious diseases in emergency departments: international ID-IRI study

We aimed to explore factors for optimizing antimicrobial treatment in emergency departments. A single-day point prevalence survey was conducted on January 18, 2020, in 53 referral/tertiary hospitals in 22 countries. 1957 (17%) of 11557 patients presenting to EDs had infections. The mean qSOFA score was 0.37 +/- 0.74. Sepsis (qSOFA >= 2) was recorded in 218 (11.1%) patients. The mean qSOFA score was significantly higher in low-middle (1.48 +/- 0.963) compared to upper-middle (0.17 +/- 0.482) and high-income (0.36 +/- 0.714) countries ( P < 0.001). Eight (3.7%) patients with sepsis were treated as outpatients. The most common diagnoses were upper-respiratory (n = 877, 43.3%), lower-respiratory (n = 316, 16.1%), and lower-urinary (n = 201, 10.3%) infections. 1085 (55.4%) patients received antibiotics. The most-commonly used antibiotics were beta-lactam (BL) and BL inhibitors (n = 307, 15.7%), third-generation cephalosporins (n = 251, 12.8%), and quinolones (n = 204, 10.5%). Irrational antibiotic use and inappropriate hospitalization decisions seemed possible. Patients were more septic in countries with limited resources. Hence, a better organizational scheme is required