Evidence Hub

Bacterial bloodstream infections in a pediatric population: A 7-year experience at a tertiary care center in Saudi Arabia

Basnawi F, Essa RA, Alosaimi A, Alrshaid B, Alshuhri S, Almazrua A, Alyabes O, Alsuhaibani M et al.

Infection, disease & health, 2025

Abstract

OBJECTIVES: This study explored the epidemiological trends and antimicrobial susceptibility patterns of bloodstream pathogens among pediatric patients over a 7-year period at a tertiary care facility in Saudi Arabia.

METHODS: This retrospective single-center longitudinal descriptive study was conducted from 2015 to 2021. Blood culture and susceptibility data of pathogens isolated from patients aged <15 years were extracted from the hospital's laboratory information system. The trends observed over the 7-year period were graphically illustrated.

RESULTS: Among the 83,605 pediatric blood cultures analyzed, 2945 (3.5 %) tested positive. Approximately 65 % of the positive cultures were confirmed as true bloodstream infections (BSIs), with an average BSI rate of 3 per 1000 inpatient days. Gram-negative bacterial infections accounted for 61 % of BSIs, with Klebsiella spp. being the most prevalent. Susceptibility testing revealed reduced sensitivity to meropenem, imipenem, ciprofloxacin, and levofloxacin among gram-negative bacteria. Gram-positive pathogens represented 39 % of infections, with the most common being Staphylococcus spp. (21 %) and Streptococcus spp. (7 %). Methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus exhibited 100 % sensitivity to vancomycin, quinupristin/dalfopristin, tigecycline, and linezolid. However, Streptococcus pneumoniae showed decreasing sensitivity to penicillin and ceftriaxone for meningitis (33 % and 55 % susceptibility, respectively). Furthermore,…

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