Comparison of statistical methods of antimicrobial resistance based on clinically isolated bacteria and infection-related non-repetitive bacteria / 中国感染控制杂志
Chinese Journal of Infection Control
; (4): 654-657, 2015.
Article
en Zh
| WPRIM
| ID: wpr-482230
Biblioteca responsable:
WPRO
ABSTRACT
Objective To compare the differences between two statistical methods for evaluating non-sensitivity of pathogenic bacteria to antimicrobial agents,and explore effect of non-consideration of clinical background on evalua-ting extent of bacterial resistance.Methods Data of Staphylococcus aureus and Acinetobacter spp .in a hospital in the first half year of 2008,2010 and 2013 were collected and conducted statistical analysis with two methods (me-thod 1 :based on all clinically isolated bacteria;method 2 :based on infection-related non-repetitive bacteria),two methods for evaluating bacterial non-sensitive rates to antimicrobial agents were compared.Results The non-sensi-tive rates of Acinetobacter spp .to various antimicrobial agents :statistical results by using method 1 were generally higher than those using method 2,absolute difference between two statistical methods was 10.46%-33.77%;the non-sensitive rates of Staphylococcus aureus to various antimicrobial agents :except compound sulfamethoxazole in 2010 and 2013(difference were 6.17% and 10.21 % respectively),penicillin G (difference was 3.86%),erythromy-cin (difference was 2.71 %),and azithromycin in 2013 (difference was 2.43%),statistical results by using method 1 were generally higher than those using method 2,absolute difference between two statistical methods was 0-18.04%.Conclusion There are deviation in the non-sensitive rates of bacterial strains to antimicrobial agents by using two different statistical methods,deviation is larger in Acinetobacter spp ..The resistance level might be incorrectly higher when evaluating the resistance status without considering clinical background of bacteria.
Texto completo:
1
Base de datos:
WPRIM
Idioma:
Zh
Revista:
Chinese Journal of Infection Control
Año:
2015
Tipo del documento:
Article