Evidence Hub

Prevalence and antibiotic utilization pattern of uropathogens causing community-acquired urinary tract infection in Kerala, India

Chandrasekhar D, Dollychan A, Roy BM, Cholamughath S, Parambil JC

Journal of basic and clinical physiology and pharmacology, 2018

74 participants

Abstract

BACKGROUND: A prospective observational study was carried out over a period of 6 months among the inpatients and outpatients in the departments of general medicine, urology, obstetrics, and gynecology of a tertiary level referral hospital in south Malabar region of Kerala to assess the prevalence of various bacterial isolates and their changing susceptibility to antimicrobial agents and to evaluate the pattern of antibiotic utilization in urinary tract infection (UTI).

METHODS: A total of 680 samples were analyzed from December 2015 to May 2016; among them, only 74 patients met the inclusion criteria. Of the 74 patients, 53 were female and 21 were male. Female patients were found to be significantly higher in number in the age group of 61-70years. The maximum number of UTI cases was reported from the general medicine department.

RESULTS: The disease was more significantly portrayed in suburbans (47%) and rural (38%) population compared with urbans (15%). Fever (60.81%) and dysuria (48.64%) were the most common symptoms. Diabetes (34%) was found to be the major predisposing factor followed by postmenopausal factors (24%), previous UTI (14%), renal disease (9%), benign prostatic hypertrophy (8%), smoking (7%), and oral contraceptives (4%). Escherichia coli was the major isolate (n=36) followed by Klebsiella (n=13), Citrobacter (n=8), Enterococcus (n=7), Enterobacter (n=4), Pseudomonas (n=3), coagulase-negative Staphylococcus (n=2), and Proteus (n=1). Majority of patients were…

How strong is the evidence?

Evidence Hub reads this as a cohort study, done in people. Its evidence level is 3 of 5 (Moderate · trial / cohort / secondary analysis). Trials without a large randomized design, cohorts and secondary analyses give moderate evidence. Reported size: 74 participants or records.

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