Evidence Hub

Risk analysis of antimicrobial resistance in outpatient urinary tract infections of young healthy adults

Brosh-Nissimov T, Navon-Venezia S, Keller N, Amit S

The Journal of antimicrobial chemotherapy, 2019

Abstract

OBJECTIVES: Most studies addressing community-acquired urinary tract infections (UTIs) pertain to mixed cohorts, in which young healthy adults are under-represented. We aimed to dissect the intricate interrelation between exposures and subsequent antimicrobial resistance (AMR) patterns in a unique setting of young healthy adults, allowing further guidance in this group.

METHODS: We carried out a retrospective cross-sectional study of all Enterobacteriaceae-associated outpatient UTIs during 2014-16 in soldiers, representing the young fit population in Israel. Electronic medical records were reviewed for demographic and clinical data, antimicrobial exposures and prescriptions. Risk factors for AMR were analysed by multivariate logistic regression.

RESULTS: Of 1207 cases, 1144 (94.8%) were females, with a median age of 20.2 years. Escherichia coli was the predominant species (83.2%). Only 686 (56.8%) isolates were fully susceptible. AMR rates were as follows: trimethoprim/sulfamethoxazole, 19.6%; oral cephalosporins, 9.7%-16.7%; amoxicillin/clavulanate, 12.1%; ciprofloxacin, 11.1%; and nitrofurantoin, 12.6%. Predictors of AMR were recurrent UTIs, past-year hospitalization, male gender and non E. coli strains. Antimicrobials prescribed >6 months preceding the culprit infection were not related to AMR. Fluoroquinolone and cephalosporin exposures were highly predictive of further AMR, yet nitrofurantoin and, to a lesser extent, amoxicillin/clavulanate had fewer associations with…

How strong is the evidence?

Evidence Hub reads this as a cross-sectional, done in people. Its evidence level is 4 of 5 (Low · observational). Observational designs can show an association but not prove cause.

How the five levels of evidence work. The level is assigned automatically from the abstract and can be wrong, so check the paper.

Read the paper

Related studies

Go deeper in Evidence Hub

Evidence Hub adds a study data sheet (design, sample size, evidence level, key numbers), an AI summary and a chat grounded in the paper's text.

Open this study Sign up free