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
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
Original article / research
Full Version
The Prevalence Of Moraxella Catarrhalis In Lower Respiratory Tract Infections
Correspondence Address :
Anita.K.B, Nandanvan, Near KUSHE School, Attavara, Mangalore,
Karnataka, India -575001
E-mail id: anitakasargod@yahoo.com, Phone: +91 9945354173
The recognition of Moraxella catarrhalis as an important human respiratory tract pathogen, together with the increasing prevalence of beta lactamase producing strains, has generated much interest in this bacterium. The aim of the present study was to know the prevalence of respiratory tract infections which were caused due to Moraxella catarrhalis, to compare its isolation rates with the common respiratory pathogens and to study its antibiotic susceptibility pattern. Sputum samples were collected from 1402 adult patients with lower respiratory tract infections. The specimens were subjected to gram staining, culturing and antibiotic sensitivity testing. The isolates were identified by their appearance on gram staining and their colony characteristics and their biochemical tests.
The β - lactamse assay ANITA K .B,. FASEELA T S, NEVILLE FERNANDEZ, CHAITHRA S MALLI, SRIKARA MALLYA and antibiotic susceptibility testing were done. A total of 137 Moraxella catarrhalis strains were isolated from 1402 sputum samples (9.8%). The isolation rate of Moraxella catarrhalis alone was 10.2%. The isolation with H. influenzae was 10.9% and with S. pneumoniae, it was 4.16%. The isolation along with both H. influenzae and S. pneumoniae was 30.6%. The antibiotic sensitivity pattern showed only 14% sensitivity to Penicillin, but the sensitivity to Amoxyclav was 100%. There was more than 90% sensitivity to both cefotaxime and ceftriaxone. The sensitivity to erythromycin was 84%, while it was 95% to both tetracycline and chloramphenicol. β -lactamase production was detected in 86% of the isolates.
MORAXELLA CATARRHALIS, RESPIRATORY PATHOGEN
Respiratory diseases range in severity from common cold to life threatening illnesses such as Pneumonia. Depending on the part of the respiratory tract which is involved, the infections can be classified as rhinitis, pharyngitis, laryngitis, tracheitis, bronchitis and pneumonia. The aetiological agents which are implicated inrespiratory tract infections could be viral, bacterial, protozoal or fungal. Moraxella catarrhalis was once considered as a nonpathogenic commensal of the upper respiratory tract (2), (7). Now, it is considered as the third commonest pathogen of the respiratory tract after Streptococcus pneumoniae and Hemophilus influenzae (1), (3), (8), (12), (13), (16), (18), (19), (20). Because this organism rarely causes bacteraemia and empyema, the diagnosis is usually based on the findings from the expectorated sputum (4).
A total of 1402 adult cases with lower respiratory tract infections, with multiple risk factors, were studied. Because Moraxella catarrhalis rarely causes bacteraemia or empyema, the diagnosis is usually based on the findings from the expectorated sputum (4). Sputum samples were taken as the specimens. Only those sputum samples with less than 10 epithelial cells and more than 25 polymorphonuclear leucocytes / low power field were studied (12). A gram stained sputum sample which shows a predominance of gram negative diplococci is highly predictive of the presence of Moraxella catarrhalis (23). In the absence of reliable and clinically useful serological tests, the gram staining of sputum remains the corner stone of the diagnosis. Indeed, this is the single most useful diagnostic test which can be used in establishing the lower respiratory tract infections which are caused by Moraxella catarrhalis (5), (23). The specimens were subjected to gram staining, culturing and antibiotic sensitivity testing. The culturing was done on 5% sheep blood agar and chocolate agar. The isolates were identified by their appearance on gram staining and by their colony characteristics and their biochemical tests. The β - lactamse assay was done by the iodometric method and antibiotic susceptibility testing was done by the Kirby Bauer disc diffusion method.
A total of 137 Moraxella catarrhalis strains were isolated from 1402sputum samples (9.8%). Out of the 1402 samples, 801 isolates were of H. infuenzae and S. pneumoniae (57.1%) and 464 isolates were of other pathogens (33.1%) (Table/Fig 1).
The isolation rate of Moraxella catarrhalis alone was 10.2%. The isolation with H. influenzae was 10.9% and with S. pneumoniae, it was 4.16%. The isolation along with both H. influenzae and S. pneumoniae was 30.6% (Table/Fig 2).
The incidence of M.catarrhalis was 68% in patients of ages above 50 years. The study of the antibiotic sensitivity pattern showed only 14% sensitivity to Penicillin, but it showed 100% sensitivity to Amoxyclav. There was more than 90% sensitivity to both cefotaxime and ceftriaxone. The sensitivity to erythromycin was 84%, while it was 95% to both tetracycline and chloramphenicol. β -lactamase production was detected in 86% of the isolates.
Moraxella catarrhalis which was for long considered as a commensal, has of late gained importance as a pathogen which causesrespiratory disease, especially lower respiratory tract infections in adults. Although the cexacerbation of chronic bronchitis is the commonest manifestation of the infection with Moraxella catarrhalis, pneumonia may also occur (10). More recently, it has been recognized as a nosocomial respiratory tract pathogen (14), (15). Evidence to prove the pathogenecity of Moraxella catarrhalis includes its presence as the predominant organism in the gram staining of the sputum of patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease. In the absence of reliable and clinically useful serological tests, the gram staining of sputum remains the corner stone of diagnosis. Indeed, this is the single most useful diagnostic test which can be used in establishing the lower respiratory tract infections which are caused by Moraxella catarrhalis (5), (23). The clinical improvement on treatment with appropriate antibiotics in patients with suspected moraxella infections and presence of specific antibodies in the sera of patients with Moraxella catarrhalis infection are the other evidences to prove the pathogenecity of M. catarrhalis. In our study, we isolated Moraxella catarrhalis from 137 patients. Pure growth of Moraxella catarrhalis was seen in 10.2% of the specimens and a majority of the isolates were found in association with S. pneumoniae and H. influenzae (30.6%).
The antibiotic sensitivity patterns showed a high level of resistance to Penicillin. This is because of a rapid increase in the prevalence of the β- lactamase producing strains of Moraxella. In our study, 86% isolates were β- lactamase producers as was seen in several studies across the world (21), (22), (24). The β- lactamase activity of M. catarrhalis is inhibited by β- lactam inhibitors like clavulanic acid and salbactum (23). This is reflected in the fact that our isolates were 100% sensitive to the amoxycillin -clavunilic acid combination. Antimicrobial susceptibility among community acquired respiratory tract infections in the respiratory surveillance programme study showed a more or less similar study pattern (19), (20) It has been demonstrated in vitro, that M. catarrhalis BRO enzymes can confer protection from β - lactam antibiotics to other co-existing respiratory pathogens residing in the host. This phenomenon which is referred to as the ‘indirect pathogenicity’ of M catarrhalis, may lead to antibiotic failure when treating a mixed infection containing both susceptible bacteria and resistant M. catarrhalis strains (6), (8), (9), (10), (12), (17), (23) . All these factors put together, with a great increase in the proportion of strains which produce β – lactamase, makes it necessary for the incidence of M. catarrhalis to be reported when seen both in isolation and when it is coexisting with other pathogens. This will help in prescribing the appropriate antibiotics and will also help in combating the infections by other pathogens, which may otherwise be protected by β- lactamase which is produced by M. catarrhalis.
Moraxella catarrhalis is finally being recognized as an important cause of human disease. It is a significant cause of respiratory tract infections in adults with underlying lung disease. The emergence of antibiotic resistance in M. catarrhalis suggests that the incidence of these infections may continue to rise.
- 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
- Popline (reproductive health literature)
- www.omnimedicalsearch.com