Journals / MN Oftalmoloji / 2014 / Cilt: 21 - Sayı: 1

Conjunctival flora in health care workers and in non health care worker subjects

Sağlık çalışanlarında ve sağlık çalışanı olmayan kişilerde konjunktiva florası ve stafilokok taşıyıcılığı

Pages
41–46
DOI
—
🏛️Bibliographic metadata and full text access for this article are provided via DergiPark.
DergiPark Record ↗
✨

AI Summary & Key Takeaways

AI Insight
⚡ TL;DR(Too Long; Didn't Read)

Conclusion: The health-care workers and non-health care workers in the sample were similar regarding the staphylococcal carriage and methicilline-resistant staphylococcal carriage.

📌 3 Key Takeaways

🎯
Objective & Hypothesis:Aim: The aim of this study was to evaluate the conjunctival flora and the frequency of methicillin-resistant Staphyccocus carriage.
📊
Key Findings & Data:Material and Method: A total of 155 cases (310 eyes) including 69 non-health-care workers (138 eyes) and 86 health care workers (172 eyes) were included in the study.
💡
Conclusion & Impact:Conclusion: The health-care workers and non-health care workers in the sample were similar regarding the staphylococcal carriage and methicilline-resistant staphylococcal carriage.
🔬Design:Research Article
📍Scope:Comprehensive Sample
⚙️Variables:Domain Parameters

Abstract

Aim: The aim of this study was to evaluate the conjunctival flora and the frequency of methicillin-resistant Staphyccocus carriage. Material and Method: A total of 155 cases (310 eyes) including 69 non-health-care workers (138 eyes) and 86 health care workers (172 eyes) were included in the study. The samples were obtained from the inferior conjunctival fornix by sterile cotton-tipped applicator and transferred to the transport medium and inoculated into blood, EMB and chocolate agar. The types of Staphylicoccus species were identified by Gram staining, catalase and coagulase tests from suspected colonies. In order to identify methicillin resistance, the bacterial suspension were inoculated into Mueller Hinton agar, and cefoxitin discs were used. The bacteriae which were cefoxitin resistant were accepted as methicillin resistant. The antibiograms for the iso- lated microorganisms were performed by disc diffusion method. Novobiocin, moxifloxacin, cefazolin, gentamicin, vancomycin and ceftazidime discs were used for the antibiograms. Results: The conjunctival cultures were positive in 30.4% cases among non-health-care workers and 32.6% cases among health care workers (p=0.77). All of the Staphylococcus species were coagulase negative. The groups were similar regarding the Staphyloccocus carriage and methicillin-resistant staphylococcus carriage (p=0.80, p=0.79 respectively). Methicilline resistance demonstrated a rate of 27.1% among the coagulase-negative Staphylococcus species. The 2/8 of the methicillin-resistant coagulase-negative Staphylococcus species which were isolated from health-care workers and 6/8 from non-health-care workers were ceftazidime resistant. Conclusion: The health-care workers and non-health care workers in the sample were similar regarding the staphylococcal carriage and methicilline-resistant staphylococcal carriage.

Özet

Amaç: Çalışmanın amacı sağlık çalışanlarında ve sağlık çalışanı olmayan bireylerdeki oküler florayı ve metisiline dirençli stafilokok sıklığını araştırmaktır. Gereç ve Yöntem: Sağlık çalışanı olmayan 69 kişi (138 göz) ve 86 sağlık çalışanı (172 göz) olmak üzere toplam 155 olgu (310 göz) çalışmaya dahil edildi. Numuneler alt konjunktiva forniksinden steril eküvyon yardımıyla transport besiyerine alındı ve kanlı, EMB ve çukulata agara ekildi. Üreyen şüpheli kolonilerden Gram boyama, katalaz ve koagülaz testleri yapılarak stafilokoklar tiplendirildi. Metisilin direnci saptamak için, bakteri süspansiyonları, Mueller Hinton agara ekildi ve sefoksitin diski kullanıldı. Sefoksitine dirençli olan bakteriler metisilin dirençli olarak kabul edildi. İzole edilen mikroorganizmalar için antibiyogram, disk difüzyon yöntemi ile yapıldı. Antibiyogramda novobiosin, moksifloksasin, sefazolin, gentamisin, vankomisin ve seftazidim diskleri kullanıldı. Bulgular: Konjunktiva kültürleri sağlık çalışanı olmayanların %30,4’ünde ve sağlık çalışanlarının %32,6’sında pozitifti (p=0,77). Üretilen stafilokokların tümü koagülaz negatif stafilokok idi. Stafilokok taşıyıcılığı ve metisiline dirençli stafilokok taşıyıcılığı bakımından gruplar benzer bulundu (sırasıyla p=0,80, p=0,79). İzole edilen koagülaz negatif stafilokokların %27,1’i metisiline dirençliydi. Sağlık çalışanlarından izole edilen metisiline dirençli koagülaz negatif stafilokokların 2/8’i, sağlık çalışanı olmayanlardan izole edilenlerin 6/8’i seftazidime de dirençliydi. Sonuç: Sağlık çalışanları ile sağlık çalışanı olmayanlar stafilokok taşıyıcılığı ve metisilin dirençli stafilokok taşıyıcılığı bakımından benzer bulundu.

🔖

Cite This Article

YALNIZ, Z. A., ULUDAĞ, H. A., KOÇAK, Z. T., ÖZKAN, G. Ü., YAĞCI, S., ÖRNEK, F., DEMİRÖZ, A. P. (2014). Conjunctival flora in health care workers and in non health care worker subjects. MN Oftalmoloji, Cilt: 21 - Sayı: 1, 41–46. https://ajindex.com/articles/295686

📄 Full Text PDF Viewer

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

References (1)

  1. Ermis SS, Aktepe OC, Inan UU, Ozturk F, Altindis M. Effect of topical dexamethasone and ciprofloxacin on bacterial flora of healthy conjunctiva. Eye (Lond). 2004;18:249-52. 2.de Kaspar HM, Kreidl KO, Singh K, Ta CN. Comparison of pre- operative conjunctival bacterial flora in patients undergoing glaucoma or cataract surgery. J Glaucoma 2004;13:507-9. 3.Yamauchi Y, Minoda H, Yokoi K et al. Conjunctival flora in pa- tients with human immunodeficiency virus infection. Ocul Immunol Inflamm 2005;13:301-4. 4.Isenberg SJ, Apt L, Yoshimori R, Alvarez SR. Bacterial flora of the conjunctiva at birth. J Pediatr Ophthalmol Strabismus 1986;23:284-6. 5.National Nosocomial Infections Surveillance (NNIS) System Report, data summary from January 1992 through June 2004, issued October 2004. Am J Infect Control 2004; 32:470-85. 6.Ariyasu RG, Nakamura T, Trousdale MD, Smith RE. Intraoperative bacterial contamination of the aqueous humor. Ophthalmic Surg 1993;24:367-74. 7.Bannerman TL, Rhoden DL, McAllister SK, Miller JM, Wilson LA. The source of coagulase-negative staphylococci in the Endophthalmitis Vitrectomy Study. A comparison of eyelid and intraocular isolates using pulsed-field gel electrophore- sis. Arch Ophthalmol 1997;115:357-61. 8.The definition and Classification of Dry Eye Disease: Report of the Definition and Classification Subcommittee of the International Dry Eye WorkShop (2007). Ocul Surf 2007;75-92. 9.Institute CaLS. Performance standards for antimicrobial disk susceptibility tests. Approved Standard M2-A9. Wayne, PA2010. 10.Martins EN, Alvarenga LS, Hofling-Lima AL et al. Aerobic bac- terial conjunctival flora in diabetic patients. Cornea 2004; 23:136-42. 11.Munoz-Price LS, Arheart KL, Mills JP et al. Associations be- tween bacterial contamination of health care workers' hands and contamination of white coats and scrubs. Am J Infect Control 2012;40:e245-8. 12.Sen EM, Yilmaz MB, Dansuk Z et al. Effect of chronic topical glaucoma medications on aerobic conjunctival bacterial flora. Cornea 2009;28:266-70. 13.Kusbeci T, Kusbeci OY, Aktepe OC, Yavas G, Ermis SS. Conjunctival flora in patients with Parkinson's disease. Curr Eye Res 2009;34:251-6. 14.Honda R, Toshida H, Suto C et al. Effect of long-term treat- ment with eyedrops for glaucoma on conjunctival bacterial flora. Infect Drug Resist 2011;4:191-6. 15.Bilen H, Ates O, Astam N, Uslu H, Akcay G, Baykal O. Conjunctival flora in patients with type 1 or type 2 diabetes mellitus. Adv Ther 2007;24:1028-35. 16.Gu