Journals / Journal of critical and intensive care (Online) / 2021 / Cilt: 12 - Sayı: 3

The Effect of Infection Agents Obtained From Intensive Care Patients on the Resistance Pattern and Patient Outcomes

Pages
64–68
Publication Date
2022-10-19
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)

When the microorganisms evaluated according their antibiotic susceptibility it was found that, A. baumanii strains were sensitive to colistin, and K. pneumonia, E.coli, and Pseudomonas aeruginosa (P. aeruginosa) strains were sensitive to aminoglycosides and colistin.

📌 3 Key Takeaways

🎯
Objective & Hypothesis:Objective: Infection is a significant problem associated with increased morbidity and mortality in intensive care units (ICU).
📊
Key Findings & Data:This study aimed to examine the effect of infectious agents obtained from Medical ICU on the resistance pattern and the patient outcomes in a 3 year period retrospectively.
💡
Conclusion & Impact:When the microorganisms evaluated according their antibiotic susceptibility it was found that, A. baumanii strains were sensitive to colistin, and K. pneumonia, E.coli, and Pseudomonas aeruginosa (P. aeruginosa) strains were sensitive to aminoglycosides and colistin.
🔬Design:Research Article
📍Scope:2016 · 212 samples
⚙️Variables:Domain Parameters

Abstract

Objective: Infection is a significant problem associated with increased morbidity and mortality in intensive care units (ICU). This study aimed to examine the effect of infectious agents obtained from Medical ICU on the resistance pattern and the patient outcomes in a 3 year period retrospectively. Material and Method: The patients with positive culture results while hospitalized in a tertiary level medical ICU between January 2016 and April 2019 were included in the study. The patients were grouped as survivors and non-survivors. These groups were compared for infection foci, infectious agents, mortality, and the sensitivity of the infectious pathogens to the antibiotics. Results: From a total of 426 patients admitted to ICU with the diagnosis of infection, culture positivity was determined in 212 samples. The highest rates of positivity were determined from the urinary tract specimens (n:90, 42.4%), followed by bloodstream specimens (n:62, 29.2%) and then lower respiratory tract specimens (n:47, 22.1%). The most frequently isolated micro-organisms were gram-negative bacteria (n.152, 70.6%) and within these, the most common micro-organism was Escherichia coli (n:59, 27.8%). When the microorganisms evaluated according their antibiotic susceptibility it was found that, A. baumanii strains were sensitive to colistin, and K. pneumonia, E.coli, and Pseudomonas aeruginosa (P. aeruginosa) strains were sensitive to aminoglycosides and colistin. The mortality rate of the hospitalized patients because of infection was found to be 51.8% (n:112). Conclusion: When selecting empirical antibiotics in the treatment of infection in critically ill patients, the intensive care unit flora and the antibiotic resistance patterns must be known. Therefore, it is important to periodically determine the infectious agents and antibiotic sensitivity.

🔖

Cite This Article

GÖNDEREN, K., SIMAVLIOĞLU, G., İBİL, D. (2022). The Effect of Infection Agents Obtained From Intensive Care Patients on the Resistance Pattern and Patient Outcomes. Journal of critical and intensive care (Online), Cilt: 12 - Sayı: 3, 64–68. https://ajindex.com/articles/562268

📄 Full Text PDF Viewer

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

References (13)

  1. Jarvis WR, Edwards JR, Culver DH, et al. Nosocomial infection rates in adult and pediatric intensive care units in the United States. Am J Med 1991
  2. 185S–91S. [CrossRef] 2. Sjoding MW, Prescott HC, Wunsch H, et al. Longitudinal changes in ICU admissions among elderly patients in the United States. Crit Care Med 2016
  3. 1353–60. [CrossRef] 3. MacVane SH. Antimicrobial resistance in the intensive care unit: A Focus on Gram-negative bacterial infections. J Intensive Care Med 2017
  4. 25–37. [CrossRef] 4. Vincent JL, Sakr Y, Singer M, et al. Prevalence and Outcomes of Infection Among Patients in Intensive Care Units in 2017. JAMA 2020
  5. 1478–87. [CrossRef] 5. Vincent JL, Rello J, Marshall J, et al. International study of the prevalence and outcomes of infection in intensive care units. JAMA 2009
  6. 2323–9. [CrossRef] 6. Agodi A, Barchitta M, Auxilia F, et al. Collaborators Epidemiology of intensive care unit-acquired sepsis in Italy: results of the SPINUTI network. Ann Ig 2018
  7. 15–21. [CrossRef] 7. Sader HS, Farrell DJ, Flamm RK, et al. Antimicrobial susceptibility of gram-negative organisms isolated from patients hos-pitalized in intensive care units in United States and European hospitals (2009– 2011). Diagn Microbiol Infect Dis 2014
  8. 443–448. [CrossRef] 8. Bouchillon SK, Badal RE, Hoban DJ, et al. Antimicrobial susceptibility of inpatient urinary tract isolates of gram-negative bacilli in the United States: results from the Study for Monitoring Antimicrobial Resistance Trends (SMART) program: 2009–2011. Clin Ther 2013
  9. 872–7. [CrossRef] 9. Rosenthal VD, Bijie H, Maki DG, et al. International Nosocomial Infection Control Consortium (INICC) report, data summary of 36 countries, for 2004–2009. Am J Infect Control 20 12
  10. 396–407. [CrossRef] 10. European Centre for Disease Prevention and Control (ECDC). Carbapenem-resistant Acinetobacter baumannii in healthcare settings. European Centre for Disease Prevention and Control
  11. https://www.ecdc.europa.eu/sites/default/files/media/en/ publications/Publications/8-Dec-2016-RRA-Acinetobacter%20 baumannii-Europe.pdf 11. Đekić MJ, Dugandžija T, Dragovac G, et al. Risk factors and clinical outcomes for intensive care unit patients with multidrug-resistant Acinetobacter spp. Bacteremia. Hippokratia 2020
  12. 21–26. https:// pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/33364735/ 12. Krause KM, Serio AW, Kane TR, et al. Aminoglycosides: An Overview. Cold Spring Harb Perspect Med 2016
  13. a027029. [CrossRef] 13. Yüksek A, Turan BC,