Journal of Clinical and Diagnostic Research, ISSN - 0973 - 709X

Users Online : 8733

AbstractMaterial and MethodsResultsDiscussionAcknowledgementReferences
Article in PDF How to Cite Citation Manager Readers' Comments (0) Audio Visual Article Statistics Link to PUBMED Print this Article Send to a Friend
Advertisers Access Statistics Resources

Dr Mohan Z Mani

"Thank you very much for having published my article in record time.I would like to compliment you and your entire staff for your promptness, courtesy, and willingness to be customer friendly, which is quite unusual.I was given your reference by a colleague in pathology,and was able to directly phone your editorial office for clarifications.I would particularly like to thank the publication managers and the Assistant Editor who were following up my article. I would also like to thank you for adjusting the money I paid initially into payment for my modified article,and refunding the balance.
I wish all success to your journal and look forward to sending you any suitable similar article in future"



Dr Mohan Z Mani,
Professor & Head,
Department of Dermatolgy,
Believers Church Medical College,
Thiruvalla, Kerala
On Sep 2018




Prof. Somashekhar Nimbalkar

"Over the last few years, we have published our research regularly in Journal of Clinical and Diagnostic Research. Having published in more than 20 high impact journals over the last five years including several high impact ones and reviewing articles for even more journals across my fields of interest, we value our published work in JCDR for their high standards in publishing scientific articles. The ease of submission, the rapid reviews in under a month, the high quality of their reviewers and keen attention to the final process of proofs and publication, ensure that there are no mistakes in the final article. We have been asked clarifications on several occasions and have been happy to provide them and it exemplifies the commitment to quality of the team at JCDR."



Prof. Somashekhar Nimbalkar
Head, Department of Pediatrics, Pramukhswami Medical College, Karamsad
Chairman, Research Group, Charutar Arogya Mandal, Karamsad
National Joint Coordinator - Advanced IAP NNF NRP Program
Ex-Member, Governing Body, National Neonatology Forum, New Delhi
Ex-President - National Neonatology Forum Gujarat State Chapter
Department of Pediatrics, Pramukhswami Medical College, Karamsad, Anand, Gujarat.
On Sep 2018




Dr. Kalyani R

"Journal of Clinical and Diagnostic Research is at present a well-known Indian originated scientific journal which started with a humble beginning. I have been associated with this journal since many years. I appreciate the Editor, Dr. Hemant Jain, for his constant effort in bringing up this journal to the present status right from the scratch. The journal is multidisciplinary. It encourages in publishing the scientific articles from postgraduates and also the beginners who start their career. At the same time the journal also caters for the high quality articles from specialty and super-specialty researchers. Hence it provides a platform for the scientist and researchers to publish. The other aspect of it is, the readers get the information regarding the most recent developments in science which can be used for teaching, research, treating patients and to some extent take preventive measures against certain diseases. The journal is contributing immensely to the society at national and international level."



Dr Kalyani R
Professor and Head
Department of Pathology
Sri Devaraj Urs Medical College
Sri Devaraj Urs Academy of Higher Education and Research , Kolar, Karnataka
On Sep 2018




Dr. Saumya Navit

"As a peer-reviewed journal, the Journal of Clinical and Diagnostic Research provides an opportunity to researchers, scientists and budding professionals to explore the developments in the field of medicine and dentistry and their varied specialities, thus extending our view on biological diversities of living species in relation to medicine.
‘Knowledge is treasure of a wise man.’ The free access of this journal provides an immense scope of learning for the both the old and the young in field of medicine and dentistry as well. The multidisciplinary nature of the journal makes it a better platform to absorb all that is being researched and developed. The publication process is systematic and professional. Online submission, publication and peer reviewing makes it a user-friendly journal.
As an experienced dentist and an academician, I proudly recommend this journal to the dental fraternity as a good quality open access platform for rapid communication of their cutting-edge research progress and discovery.
I wish JCDR a great success and I hope that journal will soar higher with the passing time."



Dr Saumya Navit
Professor and Head
Department of Pediatric Dentistry
Saraswati Dental College
Lucknow
On Sep 2018




Dr. Arunava Biswas

"My sincere attachment with JCDR as an author as well as reviewer is a learning experience . Their systematic approach in publication of article in various categories is really praiseworthy.
Their prompt and timely response to review's query and the manner in which they have set the reviewing process helps in extracting the best possible scientific writings for publication.
It's a honour and pride to be a part of the JCDR team. My very best wishes to JCDR and hope it will sparkle up above the sky as a high indexed journal in near future."



Dr. Arunava Biswas
MD, DM (Clinical Pharmacology)
Assistant Professor
Department of Pharmacology
Calcutta National Medical College & Hospital , Kolkata




Dr. C.S. Ramesh Babu
" Journal of Clinical and Diagnostic Research (JCDR) is a multi-specialty medical and dental journal publishing high quality research articles in almost all branches of medicine. The quality of printing of figures and tables is excellent and comparable to any International journal. An added advantage is nominal publication charges and monthly issue of the journal and more chances of an article being accepted for publication. Moreover being a multi-specialty journal an article concerning a particular specialty has a wider reach of readers of other related specialties also. As an author and reviewer for several years I find this Journal most suitable and highly recommend this Journal."
Best regards,
C.S. Ramesh Babu,
Associate Professor of Anatomy,
Muzaffarnagar Medical College,
Muzaffarnagar.
On Aug 2018




Dr. Arundhathi. S
"Journal of Clinical and Diagnostic Research (JCDR) is a reputed peer reviewed journal and is constantly involved in publishing high quality research articles related to medicine. Its been a great pleasure to be associated with this esteemed journal as a reviewer and as an author for a couple of years. The editorial board consists of many dedicated and reputed experts as its members and they are doing an appreciable work in guiding budding researchers. JCDR is doing a commendable job in scientific research by promoting excellent quality research & review articles and case reports & series. The reviewers provide appropriate suggestions that improve the quality of articles. I strongly recommend my fraternity to encourage JCDR by contributing their valuable research work in this widely accepted, user friendly journal. I hope my collaboration with JCDR will continue for a long time".



Dr. Arundhathi. S
MBBS, MD (Pathology),
Sanjay Gandhi institute of trauma and orthopedics,
Bengaluru.
On Aug 2018




Dr. Mamta Gupta,
"It gives me great pleasure to be associated with JCDR, since last 2-3 years. Since then I have authored, co-authored and reviewed about 25 articles in JCDR. I thank JCDR for giving me an opportunity to improve my own skills as an author and a reviewer.
It 's a multispecialty journal, publishing high quality articles. It gives a platform to the authors to publish their research work which can be available for everyone across the globe to read. The best thing about JCDR is that the full articles of all medical specialties are available as pdf/html for reading free of cost or without institutional subscription, which is not there for other journals. For those who have problem in writing manuscript or do statistical work, JCDR comes for their rescue.
The journal has a monthly publication and the articles are published quite fast. In time compared to other journals. The on-line first publication is also a great advantage and facility to review one's own articles before going to print. The response to any query and permission if required, is quite fast; this is quite commendable. I have a very good experience about seeking quick permission for quoting a photograph (Fig.) from a JCDR article for my chapter authored in an E book. I never thought it would be so easy. No hassles.
Reviewing articles is no less a pain staking process and requires in depth perception, knowledge about the topic for review. It requires time and concentration, yet I enjoy doing it. The JCDR website especially for the reviewers is quite user friendly. My suggestions for improving the journal is, more strict review process, so that only high quality articles are published. I find a a good number of articles in Obst. Gynae, hence, a new journal for this specialty titled JCDR-OG can be started. May be a bimonthly or quarterly publication to begin with. Only selected articles should find a place in it.
An yearly reward for the best article authored can also incentivize the authors. Though the process of finding the best article will be not be very easy. I do not know how reviewing process can be improved. If an article is being reviewed by two reviewers, then opinion of one can be communicated to the other or the final opinion of the editor can be communicated to the reviewer if requested for. This will help one’s reviewing skills.
My best wishes to Dr. Hemant Jain and all the editorial staff of JCDR for their untiring efforts to bring out this journal. I strongly recommend medical fraternity to publish their valuable research work in this esteemed journal, JCDR".



Dr. Mamta Gupta
Consultant
(Ex HOD Obs &Gynae, Hindu Rao Hospital and associated NDMC Medical College, Delhi)
Aug 2018




Dr. Rajendra Kumar Ghritlaharey

"I wish to thank Dr. Hemant Jain, Editor-in-Chief Journal of Clinical and Diagnostic Research (JCDR), for asking me to write up few words.
Writing is the representation of language in a textual medium i e; into the words and sentences on paper. Quality medical manuscript writing in particular, demands not only a high-quality research, but also requires accurate and concise communication of findings and conclusions, with adherence to particular journal guidelines. In medical field whether working in teaching, private, or in corporate institution, everyone wants to excel in his / her own field and get recognised by making manuscripts publication.


Authors are the souls of any journal, and deserve much respect. To publish a journal manuscripts are needed from authors. Authors have a great responsibility for producing facts of their work in terms of number and results truthfully and an individual honesty is expected from authors in this regards. Both ways its true "No authors-No manuscripts-No journals" and "No journals–No manuscripts–No authors". Reviewing a manuscript is also a very responsible and important task of any peer-reviewed journal and to be taken seriously. It needs knowledge on the subject, sincerity, honesty and determination. Although the process of reviewing a manuscript is a time consuming task butit is expected to give one's best remarks within the time frame of the journal.
Salient features of the JCDR: It is a biomedical, multidisciplinary (including all medical and dental specialities), e-journal, with wide scope and extensive author support. At the same time, a free text of manuscript is available in HTML and PDF format. There is fast growing authorship and readership with JCDR as this can be judged by the number of articles published in it i e; in Feb 2007 of its first issue, it contained 5 articles only, and now in its recent volume published in April 2011, it contained 67 manuscripts. This e-journal is fulfilling the commitments and objectives sincerely, (as stated by Editor-in-chief in his preface to first edition) i e; to encourage physicians through the internet, especially from the developing countries who witness a spectrum of disease and acquire a wealth of knowledge to publish their experiences to benefit the medical community in patients care. I also feel that many of us have work of substance, newer ideas, adequate clinical materials but poor in medical writing and hesitation to submit the work and need help. JCDR provides authors help in this regards.
Timely publication of journal: Publication of manuscripts and bringing out the issue in time is one of the positive aspects of JCDR and is possible with strong support team in terms of peer reviewers, proof reading, language check, computer operators, etc. This is one of the great reasons for authors to submit their work with JCDR. Another best part of JCDR is "Online first Publications" facilities available for the authors. This facility not only provides the prompt publications of the manuscripts but at the same time also early availability of the manuscripts for the readers.
Indexation and online availability: Indexation transforms the journal in some sense from its local ownership to the worldwide professional community and to the public.JCDR is indexed with Embase & EMbiology, Google Scholar, Index Copernicus, Chemical Abstracts Service, Journal seek Database, Indian Science Abstracts, to name few of them. Manuscriptspublished in JCDR are available on major search engines ie; google, yahoo, msn.
In the era of fast growing newer technologies, and in computer and internet friendly environment the manuscripts preparation, submission, review, revision, etc and all can be done and checked with a click from all corer of the world, at any time. Of course there is always a scope for improvement in every field and none is perfect. To progress, one needs to identify the areas of one's weakness and to strengthen them.
It is well said that "happy beginning is half done" and it fits perfectly with JCDR. It has grown considerably and I feel it has already grown up from its infancy to adolescence, achieving the status of standard online e-journal form Indian continent since its inception in Feb 2007. This had been made possible due to the efforts and the hard work put in it. The way the JCDR is improving with every new volume, with good quality original manuscripts, makes it a quality journal for readers. I must thank and congratulate Dr Hemant Jain, Editor-in-Chief JCDR and his team for their sincere efforts, dedication, and determination for making JCDR a fast growing journal.
Every one of us: authors, reviewers, editors, and publisher are responsible for enhancing the stature of the journal. I wish for a great success for JCDR."



Thanking you
With sincere regards
Dr. Rajendra Kumar Ghritlaharey, M.S., M. Ch., FAIS
Associate Professor,
Department of Paediatric Surgery, Gandhi Medical College & Associated
Kamla Nehru & Hamidia Hospitals Bhopal, Madhya Pradesh 462 001 (India)
E-mail: drrajendrak1@rediffmail.com
On May 11,2011




Dr. Shankar P.R.

"On looking back through my Gmail archives after being requested by the journal to write a short editorial about my experiences of publishing with the Journal of Clinical and Diagnostic Research (JCDR), I came across an e-mail from Dr. Hemant Jain, Editor, in March 2007, which introduced the new electronic journal. The main features of the journal which were outlined in the e-mail were extensive author support, cash rewards, the peer review process, and other salient features of the journal.
Over a span of over four years, we (I and my colleagues) have published around 25 articles in the journal. In this editorial, I plan to briefly discuss my experiences of publishing with JCDR and the strengths of the journal and to finally address the areas for improvement.
My experiences of publishing with JCDR: Overall, my experiences of publishing withJCDR have been positive. The best point about the journal is that it responds to queries from the author. This may seem to be simple and not too much to ask for, but unfortunately, many journals in the subcontinent and from many developing countries do not respond or they respond with a long delay to the queries from the authors 1. The reasons could be many, including lack of optimal secretarial and other support. Another problem with many journals is the slowness of the review process. Editorial processing and peer review can take anywhere between a year to two years with some journals. Also, some journals do not keep the contributors informed about the progress of the review process. Due to the long review process, the articles can lose their relevance and topicality. A major benefit with JCDR is the timeliness and promptness of its response. In Dr Jain's e-mail which was sent to me in 2007, before the introduction of the Pre-publishing system, he had stated that he had received my submission and that he would get back to me within seven days and he did!
Most of the manuscripts are published within 3 to 4 months of their submission if they are found to be suitable after the review process. JCDR is published bimonthly and the accepted articles were usually published in the next issue. Recently, due to the increased volume of the submissions, the review process has become slower and it ?? Section can take from 4 to 6 months for the articles to be reviewed. The journal has an extensive author support system and it has recently introduced a paid expedited review process. The journal also mentions the average time for processing the manuscript under different submission systems - regular submission and expedited review.
Strengths of the journal: The journal has an online first facility in which the accepted manuscripts may be published on the website before being included in a regular issue of the journal. This cuts down the time between their acceptance and the publication. The journal is indexed in many databases, though not in PubMed. The editorial board should now take steps to index the journal in PubMed. The journal has a system of notifying readers through e-mail when a new issue is released. Also, the articles are available in both the HTML and the PDF formats. I especially like the new and colorful page format of the journal. Also, the access statistics of the articles are available. The prepublication and the manuscript tracking system are also helpful for the authors.
Areas for improvement: In certain cases, I felt that the peer review process of the manuscripts was not up to international standards and that it should be strengthened. Also, the number of manuscripts in an issue is high and it may be difficult for readers to go through all of them. The journal can consider tightening of the peer review process and increasing the quality standards for the acceptance of the manuscripts. I faced occasional problems with the online manuscript submission (Pre-publishing) system, which have to be addressed.
Overall, the publishing process with JCDR has been smooth, quick and relatively hassle free and I can recommend other authors to consider the journal as an outlet for their work."



Dr. P. Ravi Shankar
KIST Medical College, P.O. Box 14142, Kathmandu, Nepal.
E-mail: ravi.dr.shankar@gmail.com
On April 2011
Anuradha

Dear team JCDR, I would like to thank you for the very professional and polite service provided by everyone at JCDR. While i have been in the field of writing and editing for sometime, this has been my first attempt in publishing a scientific paper.Thank you for hand-holding me through the process.


Dr. Anuradha
E-mail: anuradha2nittur@gmail.com
On Jan 2020

Important Notice

Original article / research
Year : 2012 | Month : August | Volume : 6 | Issue : 6 | Page : 978 - 981 Full Version

Fluoroquinolone Resistant Escherichia Coli and Klebsiella Spp. in Community-Acquired Urinary Tract Infections in Rural Kanpur, India


Published: August 1, 2012 | DOI: https://doi.org/10.7860/JCDR/2012/.2300
Devjyoti Majumdar, Hariom Sharan, Desh Nidhi Singh

1. Professor, Department of Microbiology. 2. Assistant Professor, RMCHRC. 3. Demonstrator, RMCH, Rama Medical College Hospital and Research Center, Mandhana, Kanpur, UP, India.

Correspondence Address :
Dr. Devjyoti Majumdar,
Professor, Department of Microbiology,
Rama Medical College Hospital and Research Center
Mandhana GT Road Kanpur- 209217 UP, India.
Phone: 919458979755
E-mail:dmsmims@gmail.com

Abstract

Introduction: In the community, most of the patients are treated by the local physicians with empirically chosen antimicrobials, without any laboratory confirmation. The aim of the present study was to determine the aetiology and the antimicrobial susceptibility of the uropathogens in culture-positive, community-acquired urinary tract infections in the rural areas around Mandhana, Kanpur, over a period of 14 months.

Materials and Methods: The patients who presented with the symptoms of Urinary Tract Infection (UTI) were included in this study. The samples were inoculated in the camp on MacConkey’s agar (MAC) and Sheep Blood Agar (SBA). The incubation, identification and the Antimicrobial Susceptibility Tests (AST) for the organisms which were done in the hospital laboratory.

Results: The most common bacteria which were isolated in all the age and gender groups were Escherichia coli (54%) and Klebsiella spp (11.3%). Among the oral antimicrobials which were usually prescribed by the local physicians in Kanpur, lomefloxacin, amoxicillin/sulbactum and nitrofurantoin were the ones to which the Enterobacteriaceae family was the most susceptible to. The resistance rate of Klebsiella to most of the antimicrobials was high (>20%). The resistance to the antimicrobials did not vary significantly with age, sex or any demographic factors.

Conclusion: The empirical treatment of the Community Acquired Urinary Tract Infections (CAUTIs) in the rural areas of Kanpur with co-trimoxazole, chloramphenicol, ciprofloxacin or norfloxacin is inadequate. Amoxicillin/sulbactum, nitrofurantoin or lomefloxacin should be the drugs of choice.

Keywords

Antimicrobial, Community, Infection, Urinary

Introduction
Community-Acquired Urinary Tract Infections (CAUTIs) are empirically treated in the rural areas of Kanpur (Population -4.5 million). However, the antibiotic resistance among the uropathogens that cause Urinary Tract Infections (UTIs) is increasing worldwide (1). Most of the cases of UTIs are uncomplicated and the general practitioners in the rural areas usually prescribe antimicrobials to these patients without doing urine cultures. The guidelines for the management of UTIs and the appropriate empirical therapies rely on the knowledge of the prevailing bacteria which cause the infections and their antimicrobial susceptibility patterns (2). No study has been done on the prevalence of the local uropathogens and their antibiograms in the rural population in Kanpur. A periodic surveillance is necessary as an increasing resistance to the antimicrobials among bacteria has been reported (3). The ready availability of broad-spectrum antimicrobials, particularly quinolones, has changed the prescribing habits of the general practitioners in the treatment of community-acquired UTIs. Quinolones inhibit bacteria by interacting with the DNA topoisomerases (gyrases) thus, inhibiting the bacterial DNA synthesis.The aim of this study was to determine the aetiology and the antimicrobial susceptibility of the uropathogens in the culture-positive CAUTI cases which presented to us from August 2010 to October 2011.

Material and Methods

Samples were collected from the patients after taking an informed written consent from them. The subjects with one or more symptoms of UTIs (frequency, dysuria, urgency, haematuria, fever, suprapubic pain and flank pain), who attended the free health campsSectionwhich were organized by the Rama Medical College Hospital, Kanpur, India, in the adjoining villages which were included in the study. The subjects with a history of hospitalization or antibiotic therapy during the previous one year or those with indwelling catheterization were excluded from the study, to rule out the possibility of hospital acquired infections. The urine cultures which yielded ≥ 103 colony forming units/ml of growth of a single bacterial species from freshly voided, mid-stream, clean catch urine specimens were considered to be culture positive. A contaminated sample was defined as a urine culture with < 103cfu/ml or a yielding mixed growth of more than one bacterial species. MacConkey’s agar and 7% sheep blood agar were streaked at the bedside of the patients with a 0.01 ml inoculation loop and they were brought to the laboratory for incubation at 37°C for 18hours. The isolates were processed and identified by the standard methods and Antimicrobial Susceptibility Tests (AST) were done according to the CSLI guidelines (4). The results were analyzed by using descriptive statistics. The Chi-square and the Fisher’s exact tests were applied for the categorical variables. All the statistical tests were two-tailed, and a p-value < 0.05 was considered to be statistically significant.

Results

A total of 500 patients showed the symptoms of UTIs. 230 (46%) of the 500 patients had culture-positive isolates. There was no growth in 47.4% samples. In 6.6% samples, there was a growth of contaminants. From these, 12 different types of bacteria were isolated. Among these 230 patients, 47 were males and 183 were females (Table/Fig 1). A majority of the isolates (n=173) were from patients who were aged ≤60 years, while 57 isolates were fromthose who were aged >60 years. Escherichia coli was the most frequently isolated bacteria (n=125) from both the genders and age groups, followed by Klebsiella spp. (n=26). E. coli, Klebsiella, Citrobacter, Enterobacter or Staphylococcus saprophyticus were isolated from 82% of the female patients, while E. coli, Klebsiella spp. or Pseudomonas aeruginosa were isolated from 76.6% of the male patients. E. coli, Klebsiella, S. saprophyticus and Citrobaocter koseri were isolated from 80% of the patients who were aged ≤ 60 years, whereas E. coli and Klebsiella spp. were isolated from 81% of those that were aged > 60 years. The organisms who belonged to the Enterobacteriaceae family accounted for 76.9% of the isolates, gram-positive organisms accounted for 14.8 % of the isolates and gram-negative non-fermenters accounted for 8.3% of all the isolates (Table/Fig 2).

There were no significant differences in the prevalence of the organisms between the male and the female groups, as well as between the two age groups (≤ 60 years and > 60 years) for all the organisms. For the gram negative bacterial isolates, the antibiotic testing panels which were used were ampicillin-sulbactum, co-trimoxazole, ceftizoxime, ciprofloxacin, nitrofurantoin, sparfloxacin, amikacin and lomefloxacin. of the 125 E. coli isolates, 92% were resistant to ciprofloxacin.

Most of the E. coli isolates were moderately resistant to ampicillin-sulbactam, nitrofurantoin and sparfloxacin (r=11.2%,11.2% and 16% respectively) but those which were highly resistant to other antimicrobials were also detected (co-trimoxazole- 89.6%, amikacin- 80.8% and ceftizoxime 50.4%). Most of the E. coli (96%) isolates were sensitive to lomefloxacin. Of the 26 Klebsiella isolates, 92.3% were resistant to ciprofloxacin, 80.7% to co-trimoxazole, 76.9% to ceftizoxime, 61.8% to sparfloxacin and amikacin, 57.7% to lomefloxacin, 38.5% to ampicillin-sulbactam and 26.9% to nitrofurantoin (Table/Fig 3).

Fifty percent or more of the P. aeruginosa (n=10) and the Acinetobacter baumannii (n=9) isolates were resistant to all the antimicrobials except lomefloxacin, to which all the Acinetobacter isolates were sensitive. The resistance to the antimicrobials did not vary significantly with the age, sex or any demographic factors (p>0.05)(Table/Fig 4).

Discussion

The present study analyzed the aetiological agents, the distribution of the patients and the antibiotic susceptibility patterns of the bacterial species which were isolated from patients with CAUTIs from the rural areas of Kanpur during August 2010 to October2011. Many of the patients are treated by quacks/unqualified practitioners who indiscriminately prescribe a wide range of oral and injectable antimicrobials.

The patients in the present study were symptomatic for UTIs and therefore the samples of the patients with asymptomatic bacteriuria were missed. The samples were not screened for pus cells due to practical constraints. The complicated, recurrent and relapsed UTIs were excluded from this study to avoid a bias in favour of the resistant strains. In the present study, the urine cultures confirmed that UTIs were present in 46% of the patients with CAUTIs. If the empiric treatment was based on the symptoms alone, then one would be giving the treatment for UTIs to at least 40% patients who didn’t have UTIs (5). The culture plates were inoculated at the bedside of the patients to avoid delays in their transport and bacterial overgrowth (6). About 42.6% of the samples did not yield any growth and 6.6% were contaminated, which was less than that reported by Cheong et al., (19%) (7) but similar to that reported by Keah et al., (3%) (6). E. coli was the commonest uropathogen which was responsible for CAUTIs (54.3%), followed by Klebsiella spp. (11.3%).

The prevalence of E. coli and Klebsiella spp. were reported to be 77% and 8.5% respectively by Keah et al., (6), and to be 24.7% and 6.5% respectively by Garcia Moure et al., (8). In the present study, 89.6% of the E. coli strains which were isolated were resistant to co-trimoxazole, which was higher than that which was reported from Japan 3.4% (2002) (9), Canada, Finland, Germany, Portugal, Ireland and United Kingdom 4.9-26.7% (2003) (10), Korea 32% (2011) (11), Nicaragua 64% (2004) (12) and Aligarh, India 76% (2007) (13). Similarly, 92% of the E coli isolates in the present study were resistant to ciprofloxacin. The prevalence of ciprofloxacin resistance among the E. coli strains which were isolated from CAUTIs was reported to be 18% in Philippines (1997) (14), 22% in Granada, Spain (2000) (15), 24% in Singapore (2009) (16), 72.5% in Chandigarh, India (2009) (17) and 73% in Monterrey NL, Mexico (2008) (8). In the present study, E. coli was susceptible to lomefloxacin (96%), ampicillin-sulbactam, nitrofurantoin and sparfloxacin (r=11.2%, 11.2% and 16% respectively). The resistance rate of the Klebsiella spp was high.

The Klebsiella spp. were most sensitive to ampicillin-sulbactam and nitrofurantoin (r=38.5% and 26.9% respectively) but not to lomefloxacin (r=57.7%) although only 10.3% of all the gram negative bacteria which were tested were resistant to it. Since the overall resistance rate of the gram negative bacteria (n=196) to ampicillin-salbactum (r=20.4%), nitrofurantoin (r=20.9%) and lomefloxacin (r=10.3%) is not high, these antimicrobials should be considered for the empirical treatment of the CAUTIs among the rural population of Kanpur. The indiscriminate use of antimicrobials increases the risk of the increasing resistance rate to that particular drug (18). In conclusion, the common uropathogens which are present in CAUTIs have a high resistance rate to the commonly used antimicrobials in the rural setting. Ampicillin-sulbactum, nitrofurantoin and lomefloxacin could be the empirical drugs of choice for the treatment of CAUTIs in the rural areas of Kanpur. In view of a high prevalence of the resistance rate, a molecular epidemiological study is mandated.

Acknowledgement

The authors thank Dr. B S Kuswaha, Chairman, the Rama Education Group for providing logistic support for this project.

DISCLOSURE: The authors declare that they have no conflict of interests.

References

1.
Gupta K, Scholes D, Stamm WE. The increasing prevalence of antimicrobial resistance among the uropathogens, which causes acute uncomplicated cystitis in women. JAMA 1999; 281:736-8.
2.
Teng CL, Achike FI, Phua KL, Nurjahan MI, Mastura I, Nor Asiah H, et al Modifying the antibiotic prescribing: The effectiveness of academic detailing plus an information leaflet in a Malaysian primary care setting. Med J Malaysia. 2006; 61(3):323-31.
3.
Butler CC, Hillier S, Roberts Z, Dunstan F, Howard A, Palmer S. The antibiotic-resistant infections in primary care settings are symptomatic for a longer time and they increase the workload: the outcomes for the patients with E coli UTIs. Br J Gen Pract 2006; 56:686-92.
4.
CSLI. Performance Standards for Antimicrobial Susceptibility Testing: Twenty-First Information Supplement. 2011; M100-S21: 31 (1).
5.
Winkens R, Nelissen-Arets H, Stobberingh E. Validity of the urine dipslides under the daily practice conditions. Fam Pract. 2003; 20(4):410-2.
6.
Keah SH, Wee EC, Chng KS, Keah KC. Antimicrobial susceptibility of the community-acquired uropathogens in the general practice. Malaysian Family Physician 2007; 2(2):64-9.
7.
Cheong YM, Fairuz A, Jegathesan M. The antimicrobial resistance patterns of the bacteria which were isolated from the patients who were seen by private practitioners in the Klang valley. Singapore Med J. 1995; 36(1): 43-6.
8.
García-Morúa A, Hernández-Torres A, Salazar-de-Hoyos JL, Jaime-Dávila R, Gómez-Guerra LS. Community-acquired urinary tract infection etiology and antibiotic resistance in a Mexican population group. Rev Mex Urol 2009;69(2):45-48.
9.
Ishihara S, Yokoi S, Masue N, Yamada T, Minamidate Y, Yasuda M, et al. Urinary tract-derived Escherichia coli which was resistant to co-trimoxazole in Japan, where the drug is seldom used for treating urinary tract infections. J Antimicrob Chemother 2002; 49(5):881-2.
10.
Kahlmeter G. An international survey of the antimicrobial susceptibility of the pathogens from uncomplicated urinary tract infections: the ECHO-SENS Project. J Antimicrob Chemother. 2003; 51(1):69-76.
11.
Lee S, Lee D, Choe H, Shim B, Kim C, Kim M, et al. Antimicrobial resistance in community-acquired urinary tract infections: results from the Korean Antimicrobial Resistance Monitoring System. J Infect Chemother 2011;17(3):440-6.
12.
Matute AJ, Hak E, Schurink CA, McArthur A, Alonso E, Paniagua M, et al. Resistance of the uropathogens in the symptomatic urinary tract infections in Leon, Nicaragua. Int J Antimicrob Agents 2004;23(5):506-9.
13.
Akram M, Shahid M, Khan AU. The aetiology and the antibiotic resistance patterns of the community-acquired urinary tract infections in the JNMC Hospital, Aligarh, India. Ann Clin Microbiol Antimicrob 2007; 6:4.
14.
Raco MO, Barez MYC. The profile of the community-acquired urinary tract infections in Davao city. Phil J Microbiol Infect Dis 1998; 27(2): 62-66.
15.
Daza R, Gutie´rrez J, Pie´drola G. The antibiotic susceptibility of the bacterial strains which were isolated from patients with community-acquired urinary tract infections. International Journal of Antimicrobial Agents 2011;18: 211–15.
16.
Bahadin J, Teo SSH, Mathew S. The aetiology of community-acquired urinary tract infections and the antimicrobial susceptibility patterns of the uropathogens which were isolated. Singapore Med J 2011; 52(6) : 415.
17.
Rani H, Kaistha N, Gupta V, Chander J. The choice of antibiotics in the community-acquired UTIs which are caused by Escherichia coli in the adult age groups. Journal of Clinical and Diagnostic Research. 2011; 5(3): 483-85.
18.
. Merino JMS, Cristina GM, Carlos FF, Ramiro LM, Martha GP, Carmen RF, et al. Evolución de la resistencia a antibióticos de E coli en muestras de orinaproce-dentes de la comunidad. Arch EspUrol 2008;61(7):776-80.

JCDR is now Monthly and more widely Indexed .
  • Emerging Sources Citation Index (Web of Science, thomsonreuters)
  • Index Copernicus ICV 2017: 134.54
  • Academic Search Complete Database
  • Directory of Open Access Journals (DOAJ)
  • Embase
  • EBSCOhost
  • Google Scholar
  • HINARI Access to Research in Health Programme
  • Indian Science Abstracts (ISA)
  • Journal seek Database
  • Google
  • Popline (reproductive health literature)
  • www.omnimedicalsearch.com