Evidence Hub

Antimicrobial resistance patterns among critical priority pathogens in an intensive care unit at a tertiary hospital in Egypt: a descriptive analysis comparing pre- and COVID-19 eras

Zafer MM, Bassiouny DM, Ghosh S, Bornman C, Hussein AFA

Journal of medical microbiology, 2024

950 participants

Abstract

Background. The intensified global challenge of antimicrobial resistance, set against the backdrop of the COVID-19 pandemic, is a cause for major concern. Within healthcare settings, intensive care units are recognized as focal points for Gram-negative infections. The study pursued to assess the prevalence and antimicrobial resistance patterns of critical priority pathogens (Acinetobacter baumannii, Pseudomonas aeruginosa, Enterobacteriaceae, comprising Klebsiella pneumoniae and Escherichia coli) during both pre- and COVID-19 periods.Gap Statement. The decision to explore this topic stemmed from the urgent need to understand how the exceptional healthcare crisis of COVID-19 affected AMR patterns.Methods. This was an observational retrospective analysis of 1056 clinical specimens obtained from 950 patients who were admitted to the Medical Intensive Care Unit at Kasr Al-Aini Hospital, Cairo University, Egypt.Results. In the period before COVID-19, 342 pathogenic isolates (135 K. pneumoniae, 83 P. aeruginosa, 76 A. baumannii and 48 E. coli) were obtained from samples collected from 450 patients. Conversely, during the COVID-19 period, 714 isolates (237 K. pneumoniae, 205 A. baumannii, 199 P. aeruginosa and 73 E. coli) were collected from the same number of patients. In the course of the pandemic, there is a slight increase in A. baumannii and P. aeruginosa infections, whereas E. coli and K. pneumoniae exhibit a distinct trend with a noticeable reduction in infection rates…

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: 950 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