↓ Skip to main content

Common causes of vaginal infections and antibiotic susceptibility of aerobic bacterial isolates in women of reproductive age attending at Felegehiwot referral Hospital, Ethiopia: a cross sectional…

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Women's Health, May 2015
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (89th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (88th percentile)

Mentioned by

news
1 news outlet
policy
1 policy source
twitter
4 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
74 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
249 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
Common causes of vaginal infections and antibiotic susceptibility of aerobic bacterial isolates in women of reproductive age attending at Felegehiwot referral Hospital, Ethiopia: a cross sectional study
Published in
BMC Women's Health, May 2015
DOI 10.1186/s12905-015-0197-y
Pubmed ID
Authors

Wondemagegn Mulu, Mulat Yimer, Yohannes Zenebe, Bayeh Abera

Abstract

Bacterial vaginosis, candidal, trichomonal and Gonococcal vaginal infections are a major health problems associated with gynecologic complications and increase in replication, shedding and transmission of HIV and other STIs in women of reproductive age. The study aimed at determining the prevalence of common vaginal infections and antimicrobial susceptibility profiles of aerobic bacterial isolates in women of reproductive age, attending Felegehiwot referral Hospital. A hospital based cross sectional study was conducted from May to November, 2013. Simple random sampling technique was used. Demographic variables were collected using a structured questionnaire. Clinical data were collected by physicians. Two vaginal swab specimens were collected from each participant. Wet mount and Gram staining were carried out to identify motile T.vaginalis, budding yeast and clue cells. All vaginal specimens were cultured for aerobic bacterial isolates using standard microbiology methods. Antimicrobial susceptibility was performed using disc diffusion technique as per the standard by Kirby-Bauer method. The results were analyzed using descriptive, chi-square and fisher's exact test as appropriate. A total of 409 women in reproductive age (15 - 49 years) participated in the study. The median age of the women was 28 years. Overall, 63 (15.4 %) of women had vaginal infections. The proportion of vaginal infection was higher in non-pregnant (17.3 %) than pregnant women (13.3 %) (P = 0.002). The most common identified vaginal infections were candidiasis (8.3 %) and bacterial vaginosis (2.8 %) followed by trichomoniasis (2.1 %). The isolation rate of N. gonorrhoeae and group B Streptococcus colonization was 4 (1 %) and 6 (1.2 %), respectively. Bacterial vaginosis was higher in non-pregnant (5.6 %) than pregnant women (0.5 %) (P = 0.002). Religion, age, living in rural area and having lower abdominal pain were significantly associated with bacterial vaginosis and candidiasis (P < 0.05). E.coli, Pseudomonas spp. and S.aureus were frequently isolated. Norfloxacin (75.6 %), ciprofloxacin (79.6 %) and gentamicin (77.6 %) revealed high level of sensitivity whereas high resistance rates were observed for amoxicillin (82.2 %), tetracycline (63.3 %) and cotrimoxazole (62.2 %). Bacterial vaginosis, candidiasis and trichomoniasis are a common problem in women of reproductive age. Therefore, screening of vaginal infections in women of reproductive age should be implemented. Moreover, ciprofloxacin, norfloxacin and gentamicin are the recommended drugs for empiric therapy and prophylaxis as needed.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 4 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 249 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 249 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 34 14%
Student > Bachelor 32 13%
Researcher 26 10%
Student > Postgraduate 20 8%
Student > Ph. D. Student 19 8%
Other 49 20%
Unknown 69 28%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 58 23%
Immunology and Microbiology 25 10%
Nursing and Health Professions 20 8%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 17 7%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 13 5%
Other 44 18%
Unknown 72 29%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 15. 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 12 March 2020.
All research outputs
#2,134,570
of 23,504,694 outputs
Outputs from BMC Women's Health
#190
of 1,938 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#28,272
of 265,858 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Women's Health
#3
of 17 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,504,694 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 90th percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,938 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 9.9. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 90% 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 265,858 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 89% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 17 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 88% of its contemporaries.