Evidence Hub

A multicentre surveillance study on the characteristics, bacterial aetiologies and in vitro antibiotic susceptibilities in patients with acute exacerbations of chronic bronchitis

Hui DS, Ip M, Ling T, Chang SC, Liao CH, Yoo CG, Kim DK, Yoon HI et al.

Respirology (Carlton, Vic.), 2011

447 participants

Abstract

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE: Antimicrobial resistance is a global problem and the prevalence is high in many Asian countries.

METHODS: A prospective observational study of the prevalence of bacterial pathogens and their antimicrobial susceptibilities in patients with acute exacerbations of chronic bronchitis (AECB) was conducted in Indonesia, Philippines, Korea, Thailand, Malaysia, Taiwan and Hong Kong from August 2006 to April 2008. The diagnosis of AECB was based on increased cough and worsening of two of following: dyspnoea, increased sputum volume or purulence. Patients who had taken antibiotics within 72 h of presentation were excluded. All bacterial strains were submitted to a central laboratory for re-identification and antimicrobial susceptibility testing to 16 antimicrobial agents according to Clinical and Laboratory Standards Institute.

RESULTS: Four hundred and seven isolates were identified among 447 patients of AECB. The most frequent organisms isolated were Klebsiella pneumoniae and associated species (n = 91 + 17), Haemophilus influenzae (n = 71), Pseudomonas aeruginosa (n = 63), Streptococcus pneumoniae (n = 32), Acinetobacter baumannii (n = 22) and Moraxella catarrhalis (n = 21). According to Clinical and Laboratory Standards Institute susceptibility breakpoints, 85.7% and >90% of these pathogens were susceptible to levofloxacin and cefepime respectively. Other options with overall lower susceptibilities include imipenem, ceftazidime, ceftriaxone and…

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: 447 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