ABSTRACT
INTRODUCTION: Approximately, 33% patients with diabetes are afflicted with onychomycosis. In the past, nondermatophyte molds have been regarded as opportunistic pathogens; recently, Aspergillus species are considered as emerging pathogens of toenail infections. In Sri Lanka, the prevalence of Aspergillus species in onychomycosis among diabetics is not well documented. OBJECTIVE: To determine the proportion of Aspergillus onychomycosis, risk factors and knowledge among diabetics. MATERIALS AND METHODS: This was descriptive cross-sectional study. Three hundred diabetic patients were included. Clinical examinations of patients' toenails were performed by a clinical microbiologist. Laboratory identification was done, and pathogens were identified to the species level by morpho-physiological methods. All inferential statistics were tested at P < 0.05. RESULTS: Among clinically suspected patients, 85% (255/300) were mycologically confirmed to have onychomycosis. Aspergillus species were most commonly isolated n = 180 (71%) followed by dermatophytes, yeasts, and other molds n = 75 (29%). Of the patients having Aspergillus onychomycosis, 149 (83%) were in the > age group. In men, Aspergillus onycomycosis was seen in 82%. Among patients who had Aspergillus nail infection, 114 (63%) had diabetes for a period of > years. Among patients who were engaged in agricultural activities, 77% were confirmed to have infected nails due to Aspergillus species. CONCLUSION: Aspergillus niger was the most common pathogen isolated from toenail infection. Aspergillus species should be considered as an important pathogen in toenail onychomycosis in diabetic patients. Risk factors associated with Aspergillus onychomycosis were age, gender, duration of diabetes, length of exposure to fungi, and occupation.
ABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: Superficial fungal foot infection (SFFI) in diabetic patients increases the risk of developing diabetic foot syndrome. Sixteen percent of urban population is suffering from diabetes in Sri Lanka. As the diabetes patients are more prone to get fungal foot infections, early intervention is advisable owing to the progressive nature of the infection. There is no data on the prevalence of SFFIs in diabetic patients in Sri Lanka. OBJECTIVE: To determine the etiological agents causing SFFI in patients with type 2 diabetes. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Three hundred eighty five diabetic patients were included. Nail clippings and swabs were collected from the infected sites using the standard protocol. Laboratory identification was done and pathogens were identified to the species level by morpho physiological methods. RESULTS: Clinically 295 patients showed SFFI, of which 255 (86%) were mycologically confirmed for infection. Out of 236 direct microscopy (KOH) positives, 227 (96%) were culture positive. Two hundred and fifty one patients (98%) with SFFI had diabetes for more than 10 years. Of the patients with SFFIs 92% had >100 mg/dl FBS and 81% had >140 mg/dl PPBS levels and 80% had both elevated FBS and PPBS. Non-dermatophyte fungal species were the commonest pathogens followed by yeast and dermatophytes. CONCLUSION: Aspergillus niger was the commonest pathogen followed by Candida albicans. SFFIs were seen significantly with the increasing age, gender, duration of diabetes and with less controlled glycaemic level.
ABSTRACT
Due to a longstanding comprehensive "search and destroy policy", methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA) is not endemic in Western Australian (WA) acute care hospitals. As the prevalence of MRSA in the community has increased, healthcare workers (HCW) are at risk of importing MRSA into hospitals. We aimed to determine the prevalence of and risk factors for nasal MRSA colonization in our HCW population. A period prevalence study was conducted at an 850-bed tertiary hospital. Basic demographics and a nasal swab were obtained. A total of 1,542 HCWs employed in our centre were screened for MRSA, of whom 3.4% (n = 52) were colonized. MRSA colonization was more common in patient care assistants (6.8%) and nurses (5.2%) than in allied health professionals (1.7%) and doctors (0.7%) (p < 0.01). Working in "high-risk" wards that cared for MRSA colonized/infected patients was the strongest risk factor for HCW MRSA colonization (p < 0.001). ST1-IV and ST78-IV (the most common community clones in the region) were the most frequently identified clones. In conclusion, MRSA colonization of HCWs occurs primarily in HCWs caring for patients colonized or infected with MRSA. Surveillance screening of HCWs should be regularly performed on wards with patients with high MRSA colonization prevalence to prevent further spread in the hospital.
