Evaluation of urinalysis parameters and antimicrobial susceptibility of uropathogens among out-patients at University of Cape Coast Hospital.
Administration, Oral
Adolescent
Adult
Aged
Aged, 80 and over
Anti-Bacterial Agents
/ therapeutic use
Bacteriuria
/ diagnosis
Child
Child, Preschool
Ciprofloxacin
/ therapeutic use
Cross-Sectional Studies
Escherichia coli
/ isolation & purification
Female
Ghana
/ epidemiology
Humans
Infant
Infant, Newborn
Male
Microbial Sensitivity Tests
Middle Aged
Outpatients
Urinalysis
/ methods
Urinary Tract Infections
/ diagnosis
Young Adult
Cape Coast
urinalysis
urine tract infection
uropathogens
Journal
Ghana medical journal
ISSN: 2616-163X
Titre abrégé: Ghana Med J
Pays: Ghana
ID NLM: 0073210
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
Mar 2019
Mar 2019
Historique:
entrez:
30
5
2019
pubmed:
30
5
2019
medline:
18
12
2019
Statut:
ppublish
Résumé
Urinary tract infection (UTI) is a major global public health issue. The gold standard for diagnosing UTI is urine culture. This is however labour intensive and time consuming. Many prescribers therefore rely on urinalysis in diagnosing UTI. This study sought to evaluate the performance of some parameters of urinalysis as predictors of urine culture positivity. The common causative agents and their antibiotic susceptibility patterns were also determined. A cross sectional study was carried out at the University of Cape Coast Hospital from July 2017 - December 2017 among out-patients. The performance characteristics of leukocyte esterase (3+) and nitrite reactions were estimated and compared with urine culture. Antimicrobial susceptibility tests were done using disc diffusion technique described by Kirby-Bauer. Prevalence of UTI in this study was 30.0% (64/213). The most prevalent pathogen was E. coli (20, 31.2%), followed by S. saprophyticus (9, 14.1%). Most of the bacteria (52, 94.5%) were sensitive to amikacin, followed by ciprofloxacin (42, 76.3%). The most sensitive (94.4%) of the parameters was pus cells [>5 white blood cells (WBC) per high power field (HPF)] and the least sensitive was the nitrite test (21.0%). The leukocyte esterase test showed the highest accuracy of 91.1%. The study supports the recommendation of the use of oral ciprofloxacin as the first line treatment of uncomplicated UTI by the Ghana Standard Treatment Guidelines (2017). No funding was provided for this study.
Sections du résumé
BACKGROUND
BACKGROUND
Urinary tract infection (UTI) is a major global public health issue. The gold standard for diagnosing UTI is urine culture. This is however labour intensive and time consuming. Many prescribers therefore rely on urinalysis in diagnosing UTI. This study sought to evaluate the performance of some parameters of urinalysis as predictors of urine culture positivity. The common causative agents and their antibiotic susceptibility patterns were also determined.
METHODS
METHODS
A cross sectional study was carried out at the University of Cape Coast Hospital from July 2017 - December 2017 among out-patients. The performance characteristics of leukocyte esterase (3+) and nitrite reactions were estimated and compared with urine culture. Antimicrobial susceptibility tests were done using disc diffusion technique described by Kirby-Bauer.
RESULTS
RESULTS
Prevalence of UTI in this study was 30.0% (64/213). The most prevalent pathogen was E. coli (20, 31.2%), followed by S. saprophyticus (9, 14.1%). Most of the bacteria (52, 94.5%) were sensitive to amikacin, followed by ciprofloxacin (42, 76.3%). The most sensitive (94.4%) of the parameters was pus cells [>5 white blood cells (WBC) per high power field (HPF)] and the least sensitive was the nitrite test (21.0%). The leukocyte esterase test showed the highest accuracy of 91.1%.
CONCLUSION
CONCLUSIONS
The study supports the recommendation of the use of oral ciprofloxacin as the first line treatment of uncomplicated UTI by the Ghana Standard Treatment Guidelines (2017).
FUNDING
BACKGROUND
No funding was provided for this study.
Identifiants
pubmed: 31138943
doi: 10.4314/gmj.v53i1.7
pii: jGMJ.v53.i1.pg44
pmc: PMC6527828
doi:
Substances chimiques
Anti-Bacterial Agents
0
Ciprofloxacin
5E8K9I0O4U
Types de publication
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
44-51Déclaration de conflit d'intérêts
Conflict of interest: None declared
Références
J Infect Dev Ctries. 2010 May 01;4(4):202-6
pubmed: 20440056
Scand J Infect Dis. 2005;37(4):256-61
pubmed: 15871164
J Clin Microbiol. 1987 Mar;25(3):467-70
pubmed: 3571450
Am J Med. 2002 Jul 8;113 Suppl 1A:20S-28S
pubmed: 12113868
J Clin Microbiol. 1992 Nov;30(11):2975-9
pubmed: 1452668
Med Sci Monit. 2007 Jun;13(6):BR136-44
pubmed: 17534228
Pan Afr Med J. 2015 Oct 01;22:87
pubmed: 26848334
Braz J Infect Dis. 2007 Oct;11(5):479-81
pubmed: 17962874
Ethiop J Health Sci. 2012 Jul;22(2):121-8
pubmed: 22876076
Clin Infect Dis. 2004 Apr 15;38(8):1150-8
pubmed: 15095222
J Clin Diagn Res. 2012 Nov;6(9):1518-22
pubmed: 23285444
Dtsch Arztebl Int. 2010 May;107(21):361-7
pubmed: 20539810
J Clin Pathol. 2005 Aug;58(8):786-7
pubmed: 16049274
World J Urol. 1999 Dec;17(6):410-4
pubmed: 10654372
Am Fam Physician. 2005 Mar 15;71(6):1153-62
pubmed: 15791892
Natl Health Stat Report. 2008 Aug 6;(8):1-29
pubmed: 18958997
Int J Pediatr. 2014;2014:126142
pubmed: 24959183
Pediatr Infect Dis J. 1991 Oct;10(10):742-6
pubmed: 1945576
J Med Assoc Thai. 2013 Jul;96(7):849-53
pubmed: 24319857
Med Clin North Am. 1991 Mar;75(2):313-25
pubmed: 1996036