Evidence Hub

Distribution and antibiotic resistance analysis of Gram positive cocci in bloodstream infections in a hospital in Inner Mongolia

Tian LL, Xing BB, Zhang YM, Zhao JP

Zhonghua yu fang yi xue za zhi [Chinese journal of preventive medicine], 2024

Abstract

To investigate the strain composition and drug resistance characteristics of G+(Gram positive cocci) cocci causing bloodstream infections in the People's Hospital of Inner Mongolia Autonomous Region in recent years and provide a basis for the empirical and rational use of drugs for the prevention and treatment of bloodstream infections caused by G+cocci. The strain composition and drug-resistant characteristics of G+cocci isolated from positive blood culture specimens sent to various departments of the Inner Mongolia Autonomous Region People's Hospital from January 2015 to December 2022 were retrospectively analyzed, and the higher detection rates of Staphylococcus hominis and Staphylococcus epidermidis, Enterococcus faecium and Enterococcus faecalis, and methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA) and methicillin-sensitive Staphylococcus aureus (MSSA) were examined. MRSA and methicillin-sensitive Staphylococcus aureus (MSSA) were comparatively analyzed for resistance. The resistance data were analyzed by Whonet 5.6 statistical software, the significance of difference was analyzed by SPSS 22.0 software, and the resistance rate was compared by χ2 test. The results showed that 1 209 strains of G+cocci, in terms of the composition ratio, from high to low, were mainly human staphylococci (32.5%,393/1 209), Staphylococcus epidermidis (27.8%, 336/1 209), Staphylococcus aureus (14.9%,180/1 209) and Enterococcus faecalis (10.6%, 128/1 209). Among them, the detection rate of…

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.

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