Hospital Visitors' Awareness and Adaptation of Preventive Measures for Middle East Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus.

OBJECTIVE: This study aims to assess the knowledge and awareness, and to identify the practice reflection of knowledge concerning Middle East Respiratory Syndrome (MERS) on hospital visitor's daily life. METHODS: A cross-sectional study, conducted in 2 tertiary referral hospitals in Riyadh Saudi Arabia, from February 2015 to February 2016. A total random sample of 305 hospital visitors consented to participate. Data were collected through a self-administered questionnaire consisting of questions regarding awareness and practice of measures to prevent the spread of infection. RESULTS: Study showed that participants have a fair knowledge regarding the cause of MERS (N = 228; 74.8%). Nearly half of them (47%) stated that camels are the source of the spread of MERS. Approximately 70% of the participants preferred both sanitization and wearing facemasks as preventive measures for MERS. However, only 3.95% practiced not eating camel products, such as milk and meat. CONCLUSIONS: Although hospital visitors showed some knowledge and positive awareness in several aspects of MERS awareness, there are weak areas where knowledge and awareness were not up to recommended guidelines. Continued educational programs are needed to improve awareness and knowledge of all the public toward MERS-coronavirus infection. This study may assist in the development of future strategies on preventive measures of the disease.

Correction to: Microbial spectrum, antibiotic susceptibility profile, and biofilm formation of diabetic foot infections (2014-18): a retrospective multicenter analysis.

[This corrects the article DOI: 10.1007/s13205-020-02318-x.].

Microbial spectrum, antibiotic susceptibility profile, and biofilm formation of diabetic foot infections (2014-18): a retrospective multicenter analysis.

This study identifies the risk factors, microbiological properties, antimicrobial susceptibility patterns, mortality, and clinical complications associated with organisms causing diabetic foot infections (DFIs) with or without antibiotic treatment using data from a retrospective multicenter surveillance. Specimens collected from different hospitals were cultured and the extended-spectrum ß-lactamase (ESBL) excretion was estimated. The antibacterial susceptibility pattern and biofilm formation were completed along with the recommended standard methods. Overall, 792 diabetic foot patients (DFPs) were enrolled and a total of 1803 causative organisms were isolated. Polymicrobial infection was identified in 48.5% of the patients. The isolated Gram-positive pathogens (46.7%) were higher than Gram-negative (38.6%) or anaerobes (7.9%). The predominant pathogens were S. aureus (22.2%), methicillin-resistant S. aureus (7.7%), Enterococcus spp. (12.8%), Pseudomonas aeruginosa (9.4%), E. coli (7.9%), Klebsiella spp. (7.5%), Proteus mirabilis (8.9%), coagulase negative staphylococci (CoNS) (6.6%), anaerobic organisms (5.9%), and fungi (2.3%). Vancomycin and clindamycin exhibited no activity against Gram-positive bacteria. However, meropenem and imipenem displayed high activity against the Gram-negative isolates. Out of the 765 tested strains, 251 showed moderate (15.8%) to high (34%) level biofilm-producing phenotype. DFIs were widespread among the diabetic patients with different microbial etiology and the major organisms were aerobic organisms. Our findings may provide an insight into the development of appropriate therapeutic strategies for the management of DFIs.

Conventional and alternative treatment approaches for Clostridium difficile infection.

Clostridium difficile-associated disease continues to be one of the leading health concerns worldwide. C. difficile is considered as a causative agent of nosocomial diarrhea that causes serious infection, which may result in death. The incidences of C. difficile infection (CDI) in developed countries have become increasingly high which may be attributed to the emergence of newer epidemic strains, extensive use of antibiotics, and limited alternative therapies. The available treatment options against CDI are expensive and promote resistance. Therefore, there is urgent need for new approaches to meet these challenges. This review discusses the current understanding of CDI, the existing clinical treatment strategies and future potential options as antidifficile agents based on the available published works.