↓ Skip to main content

Antibiotic resistance and biofilm production among the strains of Staphylococcus aureus isolated from pus/wound swab samples in a tertiary care hospital in Nepal

Overview of attention for article published in Annals of Clinical Microbiology and Antimicrobials, March 2017
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age
  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (60th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
6 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
44 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
106 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Antibiotic resistance and biofilm production among the strains of Staphylococcus aureus isolated from pus/wound swab samples in a tertiary care hospital in Nepal
Published in
Annals of Clinical Microbiology and Antimicrobials, March 2017
DOI 10.1186/s12941-017-0194-0
Pubmed ID
Authors

Ankit Belbase, Narayan Dutt Pant, Krishus Nepal, Bibhusan Neupane, Rikesh Baidhya, Reena Baidya, Binod Lekhak

Abstract

The increasing drug resistance along with inducible clindamycin resistance, methicillin resistance and biofilm production among the strains of Staphylococcus aureus are present as the serious problems to the successful treatment of the infections caused by S. aureus. So, the main objectives of this study were to determine the antimicrobial susceptibility patterns along with the rates of inducible clindamycin resistance, methicillin resistance and biofilm production among the strains of S. aureus isolated from pus/wound swab samples. A total of 830 non-repeated pus/wound swab samples were processed using standard microbiological techniques. The colonies grown were identified on the basis of colony morphology, Gram's stain and biochemical tests. Antimicrobial susceptibility testing was performed by Kirby-Bauer disc diffusion technique. Detection of inducible clindamycin resistance was performed by D test, while detection of methicillin resistant S. aureus (MRSA) was performed by determination of minimum inhibitory concentration of oxacillin by agar dilution method. Similarly, detection of biofilm formation was performed by microtiter plate method. Strains showing resistance to three or more than three different classes of antibiotics were considered multidrug resistant. Total 76 samples showed the growth of S. aureus, among which 36 (47.4%) contained MRSA and 17 (22.4%) samples were found to have S. aureus showing inducible clindamycin resistance. Among the S. aureus isolated from outpatients, 41.9% were MRSA. Highest rates of susceptibility of S. aureus were seen toward linezolid (100%) and vancomycin (100%). Similarly, S. aureus isolated from 35 (46.1%) samples were found to be biofilm producers. Higher rate of inducible clindamycin resistance was seen among MRSA in comparison to methicillin susceptible S. aureus (MSSA). Similarly, higher rates of multidrug resistance and methicillin resistance were found among biofilm producing strains in comparison to biofilm non producing strains. The rate of isolation of MRSA from community acquired infections was found to be high in Nepal. Increased rate of inducible clindamycin resistance as compared to previous studies in Nepal was noted. So for the proper management of the infections caused by S. aureus, D test for the detection of inducible clindamycin resistance should be included in the routine laboratory diagnosis. Further, detection of biofilm production should also be included in the routine tests. Linezolid and vancomycin can be used for the preliminary treatment of the serious infections caused by S. aureus.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 6 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 106 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 106 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Bachelor 14 13%
Student > Postgraduate 11 10%
Student > Master 11 10%
Student > Ph. D. Student 9 8%
Student > Doctoral Student 7 7%
Other 16 15%
Unknown 38 36%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 17 16%
Immunology and Microbiology 15 14%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 13 12%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 5 5%
Nursing and Health Professions 4 4%
Other 13 12%
Unknown 39 37%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 3. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 27 March 2017.
All research outputs
#13,311,299
of 22,961,203 outputs
Outputs from Annals of Clinical Microbiology and Antimicrobials
#221
of 610 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#154,810
of 309,217 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Annals of Clinical Microbiology and Antimicrobials
#11
of 28 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,961,203 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 41st percentile – i.e., 41% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 610 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 5.3. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 61% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 309,217 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 49th percentile – i.e., 49% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 28 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 60% of its contemporaries.