RESUMO
BACKGROUND: Carbapenem-resistant gram-negative bacteria are an emergent source of both community-acquired and healthcare-associated infection that poses a substantial hazard to public health. This study aimed to conclude the magnitude of carbapenem resistance gram-negative bacteria from a clinical specimen at Hawassa University Comprehensive Specialized Hospital. METHODS: A hospital-based cross-sectional study was accompanied from February 13 to June 7, 2020, in which consecutive patients with 103 gram-negative bacteria were encompassed. The isolates included were 54 urine, 17 blood, 17 pusses, 4 cerebrospinal fluid (CSF), 3 aspirates, 3 effusions, 2 stools, 2 ear discharges, and 1 nasal swab. A semi-structured questionnaire was used to gather socio-demographic data from the attendant and clinical data from the patient's chart. Patients admitted in any wards and visited outpatients department were included for the study if gram-negative bacteria was identified for those who accepted the consent. A routine manual culture, Gram's staining and biochemical tests used to identify the bacteria. Antibiotic susceptibility was determined for twelve antibiotics including cotrimoxazole, ceftazidime, meropenem, gentamycin, chloramphenicol, ampicillin, ciprofloxacin, cefotaxime, cefuroxime, nitrofurantoin, piperacillin-tazobactam, and amikacin using the Kirby-Bauer disc diffusion method. Modified carbapenem inactivation (mCIM) method was used to determine carbapenem resistance using meropenem disk as per the recommendation of Clinical and Laboratory Standards Institute guideline. Statistical package for social science software version 21 was used for data entry and analysis. The odds ratio at 95% confidence interval (CI) and p-value <0.05 were taken as a statistically significant association. RESULTS: Generally, 111 gram-negative bacteria were identified from 103 patients. Of 111 isolates, thirteen isolates (nine resistance and four intermediates) were identified in disk diffusion testing for meropenem. Of this, 10 isolates were carbapenemases producer with the overall rates of 9% in the Modified carbapenem inactivation method (mCIM). Pseudomonas spp. 3 (30.0%), E. coli, K. pneumonia, Acinetobacter spp. each two (20.0%), and K. oxytoca 1 (10.0%) were identified as carbapenemases positive. The rates of the multidrug, extensive, pan drug were 86.5, 43.3, and 1.8, respectively. Ampicillin 94 (97.9%), followed by cefuroxime 52 (91.2%), cefotaxime 94 (88.7%), cotrimoxazole 58 (88.1%), ceftazidime 40 (83.3%), ciprofloxacin 47 (77.1%), nitrofurantoin 35 (70.0%), gentamycin 71 (65.7%), with high level of resistance. However, piperacillin-tazobactam 41 (48.8%), chloramphenicol 25 (47.2%), meropenem 13 (11.7%), and amikacin 9 (8.5%) were with low rates of resistance. In this study, there were no variables statically associated with carbapenem resistance that is p > 0.05. CONCLUSION: Our study showed that carbapenem-resistant gram-negative bacilli are 9% in the study area. Our finding signposts that ampicillin, cefuroxime, cefotaxime, cotrimoxazole, ceftazidime, ciprofloxacin, nitrofurantoin, and gentamycin with a high rate of resistance >50%. However, piperacillin-tazobactam, chloramphenicol, meropenem, and amikacin were at low rates of resistance. Therefore, a measure should be taken to contain carbapenem resistance gram-negative bacteria in the study area. Further, study with better method needs to be conducted to conclude the real scenario of carbapenem resistance.
RESUMO
How should eLearning be implemented in resource-constrained settings? The introduction of eLearning at four African medical schools and one school of pharmacy, all part of the Medical Education Partnership Initiative (MEPI) eLearning Technical Working Group, highlighted the need for five factors essential for successful and sustainable implementation: institutional support; faculty engagement; student engagement; technical expertise; and infrastructure and support systems. All five MEPI schools reported strengthening technical expertise, infrastructure, and support systems; four schools indicated that they were also successful in developing student engagement; and three reported making good progress in building institutional support. Faculty engagement was the one core component that all five schools needed to enhance.
