Evaluation of antibiotic susceptibility test results: how guilty a laboratory could be?

Background The selection of an appropriate antimicrobial is a challenging task for clinicians. The Kirby-Bauer disk diffusion method is one of the most widely practiced antimicrobial susceptibility tests (AST). It is affected by many factors among which are the media used. Mueller-Hinton agar (MHA)...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:Journal of the Egyptian Public Health Association 2019-01, Vol.94 (1), p.4-5, Article 4
Hauptverfasser: Nassar, Mohamed S. M., Hazzah, Walaa A., Bakr, Wafaa M. K.
Format: Artikel
Sprache:eng
Schlagworte:
Online-Zugang:Volltext
Tags: Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
container_end_page 5
container_issue 1
container_start_page 4
container_title Journal of the Egyptian Public Health Association
container_volume 94
creator Nassar, Mohamed S. M.
Hazzah, Walaa A.
Bakr, Wafaa M. K.
description Background The selection of an appropriate antimicrobial is a challenging task for clinicians. The Kirby-Bauer disk diffusion method is one of the most widely practiced antimicrobial susceptibility tests (AST). It is affected by many factors among which are the media used. Mueller-Hinton agar (MHA) is the standard medium recommended in guidelines. However, these guidelines are not strictly adhered to in some developing countries. Objectives Validation of AST results on nutrient agar (NA) medium used as a substitute for MHA by some microbiology laboratories in Alexandria, Egypt. Methods A total of 149 clinical bacterial isolates and 3 reference strains: Staphylococcus aureus ( S. aureus ) ATCC® 25923, Escherichia coli ( E . coli ) ATCC®25922, and Pseudomonas aeruginosa ( P. aeruginosa ) ATCC®27853 were comparatively challenged to antibiotics employing MHA and NA. Results All antibiotics-reference bacterial strain challenges on NA compared to MHA were unacceptable (> 3 out of limit zones in 30 consecutive days). Considering clinical isolates, the frequency of very major, major, and minor errors on NA was highest in the case of P. aeruginosa (8.98%, 4.08%, and 14.7% respectively) followed by S. aureus (7.6%, 6%, and 8.8% respectively). On the other hand, the least frequency of errors was in the case of Enterobacteriaceae (0%, 0.4%, and 3.2% respectively). Conclusions and recommendations Using NA in AST resulted in multiple errors and the high discrepancy in results compared to MHA making it unreliable for susceptibility testing. MHA should not be replaced by NA in AST. Following guidelines and QC measures for AST must be neither bypassed nor underestimated.
doi_str_mv 10.1186/s42506-018-0006-1
format Article
fullrecord <record><control><sourceid>pubmed_doaj_</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_pubmedcentral_primary_oai_pubmedcentral_nih_gov_6329728</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><doaj_id>oai_doaj_org_article_06112a9038c54e45bbee98046e9fc673</doaj_id><sourcerecordid>30686832</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c508t-e7f381016c79e2af348ad5b89039b4e0cc1c168e82f76b886413c79aefffe0df3</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNp9kc9OHSEYxUmjqcb6AN0YXmBa_swwjAtNY7Q1Memmxu4IMB9XbnC4AUZz316u0xrduOKDc86PwEHoKyXfKJXie25ZR0RDqGwIqQP9hA4ZGUjDBPu792Y-QMc5r8nOxHouxGd0wImQQnJ2iO4uH3WYdfFxwtFhPRVvfCze4jxnC5vdNviyxQVywQnyHEo-xffxCa9mH6qgcdAmJl1i2mIb5zBiA-df0L7TIcPxv_UI3V5d_rn41dz8_nl98eOmsR2RpYHecUkJFbYfgGnHW6nHzsiB8MG0QKyllgoJkrleGClFS3m1anDOARkdP0LXC3eMeq02yT_otFVRe_VyENNK6VSfE0ARQSnTlSxt10LbGQMwSNIKGJwVPa-ss4W1mc0DjBamknR4B32vTP5ereKjEpwNPZMVQBeATTHnBO41S4nalaaW0lQtTe36ULRmTt5e-pr4X1E1sMWQqzStIKl1nNNUP_UD6jOyv6Ri</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Open Website</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype></control><display><type>article</type><title>Evaluation of antibiotic susceptibility test results: how guilty a laboratory could be?</title><source>MEDLINE</source><source>DOAJ Directory of Open Access Journals</source><source>SpringerNature Journals</source><source>PubMed Central Open Access</source><source>PubMed Central</source><creator>Nassar, Mohamed S. M. ; Hazzah, Walaa A. ; Bakr, Wafaa M. K.</creator><creatorcontrib>Nassar, Mohamed S. M. ; Hazzah, Walaa A. ; Bakr, Wafaa M. K.</creatorcontrib><description>Background The selection of an appropriate antimicrobial is a challenging task for clinicians. The Kirby-Bauer disk diffusion method is one of the most widely practiced antimicrobial susceptibility tests (AST). It is affected by many factors among which are the media used. Mueller-Hinton agar (MHA) is the standard medium recommended in guidelines. However, these guidelines are not strictly adhered to in some developing countries. Objectives Validation of AST results on nutrient agar (NA) medium used as a substitute for MHA by some microbiology laboratories in Alexandria, Egypt. Methods A total of 149 clinical bacterial isolates and 3 reference strains: Staphylococcus aureus ( S. aureus ) ATCC® 25923, Escherichia coli ( E . coli ) ATCC®25922, and Pseudomonas aeruginosa ( P. aeruginosa ) ATCC®27853 were comparatively challenged to antibiotics employing MHA and NA. Results All antibiotics-reference bacterial strain challenges on NA compared to MHA were unacceptable (&gt; 3 out of limit zones in 30 consecutive days). Considering clinical isolates, the frequency of very major, major, and minor errors on NA was highest in the case of P. aeruginosa (8.98%, 4.08%, and 14.7% respectively) followed by S. aureus (7.6%, 6%, and 8.8% respectively). On the other hand, the least frequency of errors was in the case of Enterobacteriaceae (0%, 0.4%, and 3.2% respectively). Conclusions and recommendations Using NA in AST resulted in multiple errors and the high discrepancy in results compared to MHA making it unreliable for susceptibility testing. MHA should not be replaced by NA in AST. Following guidelines and QC measures for AST must be neither bypassed nor underestimated.</description><identifier>ISSN: 2090-262X</identifier><identifier>ISSN: 0013-2446</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 2090-262X</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1186/s42506-018-0006-1</identifier><identifier>PMID: 30686832</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>Berlin/Heidelberg: Springer Berlin Heidelberg</publisher><subject>Agar ; Anti-Bacterial Agents - pharmacology ; CLSI ; Culture Media ; Disk diffusion method ; Egypt ; Escherichia coli - drug effects ; Inhibition zones ; Medicine ; Medicine &amp; Public Health ; Microbial Sensitivity Tests ; Mueller-Hinton agar ; Pseudomonas aeruginosa - drug effects ; Public Health ; Quality control ; Staphylococcus aureus - drug effects</subject><ispartof>Journal of the Egyptian Public Health Association, 2019-01, Vol.94 (1), p.4-5, Article 4</ispartof><rights>The Author(s) 2019</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><oa>free_for_read</oa><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c508t-e7f381016c79e2af348ad5b89039b4e0cc1c168e82f76b886413c79aefffe0df3</citedby><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c508t-e7f381016c79e2af348ad5b89039b4e0cc1c168e82f76b886413c79aefffe0df3</cites></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><linktopdf>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6329728/pdf/$$EPDF$$P50$$Gpubmedcentral$$Hfree_for_read</linktopdf><linktohtml>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6329728/$$EHTML$$P50$$Gpubmedcentral$$Hfree_for_read</linktohtml><link.rule.ids>230,314,727,780,784,864,885,27924,27925,53791,53793</link.rule.ids><backlink>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/30686832$$D View this record in MEDLINE/PubMed$$Hfree_for_read</backlink></links><search><creatorcontrib>Nassar, Mohamed S. M.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Hazzah, Walaa A.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Bakr, Wafaa M. K.</creatorcontrib><title>Evaluation of antibiotic susceptibility test results: how guilty a laboratory could be?</title><title>Journal of the Egyptian Public Health Association</title><addtitle>J. Egypt. Public. Health. Assoc</addtitle><addtitle>J Egypt Public Health Assoc</addtitle><description>Background The selection of an appropriate antimicrobial is a challenging task for clinicians. The Kirby-Bauer disk diffusion method is one of the most widely practiced antimicrobial susceptibility tests (AST). It is affected by many factors among which are the media used. Mueller-Hinton agar (MHA) is the standard medium recommended in guidelines. However, these guidelines are not strictly adhered to in some developing countries. Objectives Validation of AST results on nutrient agar (NA) medium used as a substitute for MHA by some microbiology laboratories in Alexandria, Egypt. Methods A total of 149 clinical bacterial isolates and 3 reference strains: Staphylococcus aureus ( S. aureus ) ATCC® 25923, Escherichia coli ( E . coli ) ATCC®25922, and Pseudomonas aeruginosa ( P. aeruginosa ) ATCC®27853 were comparatively challenged to antibiotics employing MHA and NA. Results All antibiotics-reference bacterial strain challenges on NA compared to MHA were unacceptable (&gt; 3 out of limit zones in 30 consecutive days). Considering clinical isolates, the frequency of very major, major, and minor errors on NA was highest in the case of P. aeruginosa (8.98%, 4.08%, and 14.7% respectively) followed by S. aureus (7.6%, 6%, and 8.8% respectively). On the other hand, the least frequency of errors was in the case of Enterobacteriaceae (0%, 0.4%, and 3.2% respectively). Conclusions and recommendations Using NA in AST resulted in multiple errors and the high discrepancy in results compared to MHA making it unreliable for susceptibility testing. MHA should not be replaced by NA in AST. Following guidelines and QC measures for AST must be neither bypassed nor underestimated.</description><subject>Agar</subject><subject>Anti-Bacterial Agents - pharmacology</subject><subject>CLSI</subject><subject>Culture Media</subject><subject>Disk diffusion method</subject><subject>Egypt</subject><subject>Escherichia coli - drug effects</subject><subject>Inhibition zones</subject><subject>Medicine</subject><subject>Medicine &amp; Public Health</subject><subject>Microbial Sensitivity Tests</subject><subject>Mueller-Hinton agar</subject><subject>Pseudomonas aeruginosa - drug effects</subject><subject>Public Health</subject><subject>Quality control</subject><subject>Staphylococcus aureus - drug effects</subject><issn>2090-262X</issn><issn>0013-2446</issn><issn>2090-262X</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2019</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>C6C</sourceid><sourceid>EIF</sourceid><sourceid>DOA</sourceid><recordid>eNp9kc9OHSEYxUmjqcb6AN0YXmBa_swwjAtNY7Q1Memmxu4IMB9XbnC4AUZz316u0xrduOKDc86PwEHoKyXfKJXie25ZR0RDqGwIqQP9hA4ZGUjDBPu792Y-QMc5r8nOxHouxGd0wImQQnJ2iO4uH3WYdfFxwtFhPRVvfCze4jxnC5vdNviyxQVywQnyHEo-xffxCa9mH6qgcdAmJl1i2mIb5zBiA-df0L7TIcPxv_UI3V5d_rn41dz8_nl98eOmsR2RpYHecUkJFbYfgGnHW6nHzsiB8MG0QKyllgoJkrleGClFS3m1anDOARkdP0LXC3eMeq02yT_otFVRe_VyENNK6VSfE0ARQSnTlSxt10LbGQMwSNIKGJwVPa-ss4W1mc0DjBamknR4B32vTP5ereKjEpwNPZMVQBeATTHnBO41S4nalaaW0lQtTe36ULRmTt5e-pr4X1E1sMWQqzStIKl1nNNUP_UD6jOyv6Ri</recordid><startdate>20190111</startdate><enddate>20190111</enddate><creator>Nassar, Mohamed S. M.</creator><creator>Hazzah, Walaa A.</creator><creator>Bakr, Wafaa M. K.</creator><general>Springer Berlin Heidelberg</general><general>SpringerOpen</general><scope>C6C</scope><scope>CGR</scope><scope>CUY</scope><scope>CVF</scope><scope>ECM</scope><scope>EIF</scope><scope>NPM</scope><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>5PM</scope><scope>DOA</scope></search><sort><creationdate>20190111</creationdate><title>Evaluation of antibiotic susceptibility test results: how guilty a laboratory could be?</title><author>Nassar, Mohamed S. M. ; Hazzah, Walaa A. ; Bakr, Wafaa M. K.</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c508t-e7f381016c79e2af348ad5b89039b4e0cc1c168e82f76b886413c79aefffe0df3</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2019</creationdate><topic>Agar</topic><topic>Anti-Bacterial Agents - pharmacology</topic><topic>CLSI</topic><topic>Culture Media</topic><topic>Disk diffusion method</topic><topic>Egypt</topic><topic>Escherichia coli - drug effects</topic><topic>Inhibition zones</topic><topic>Medicine</topic><topic>Medicine &amp; Public Health</topic><topic>Microbial Sensitivity Tests</topic><topic>Mueller-Hinton agar</topic><topic>Pseudomonas aeruginosa - drug effects</topic><topic>Public Health</topic><topic>Quality control</topic><topic>Staphylococcus aureus - drug effects</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Nassar, Mohamed S. M.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Hazzah, Walaa A.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Bakr, Wafaa M. K.</creatorcontrib><collection>Springer Nature OA Free Journals</collection><collection>Medline</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE (Ovid)</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>PubMed</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>PubMed Central (Full Participant titles)</collection><collection>DOAJ Directory of Open Access Journals</collection><jtitle>Journal of the Egyptian Public Health Association</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Nassar, Mohamed S. M.</au><au>Hazzah, Walaa A.</au><au>Bakr, Wafaa M. K.</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Evaluation of antibiotic susceptibility test results: how guilty a laboratory could be?</atitle><jtitle>Journal of the Egyptian Public Health Association</jtitle><stitle>J. Egypt. Public. Health. Assoc</stitle><addtitle>J Egypt Public Health Assoc</addtitle><date>2019-01-11</date><risdate>2019</risdate><volume>94</volume><issue>1</issue><spage>4</spage><epage>5</epage><pages>4-5</pages><artnum>4</artnum><issn>2090-262X</issn><issn>0013-2446</issn><eissn>2090-262X</eissn><abstract>Background The selection of an appropriate antimicrobial is a challenging task for clinicians. The Kirby-Bauer disk diffusion method is one of the most widely practiced antimicrobial susceptibility tests (AST). It is affected by many factors among which are the media used. Mueller-Hinton agar (MHA) is the standard medium recommended in guidelines. However, these guidelines are not strictly adhered to in some developing countries. Objectives Validation of AST results on nutrient agar (NA) medium used as a substitute for MHA by some microbiology laboratories in Alexandria, Egypt. Methods A total of 149 clinical bacterial isolates and 3 reference strains: Staphylococcus aureus ( S. aureus ) ATCC® 25923, Escherichia coli ( E . coli ) ATCC®25922, and Pseudomonas aeruginosa ( P. aeruginosa ) ATCC®27853 were comparatively challenged to antibiotics employing MHA and NA. Results All antibiotics-reference bacterial strain challenges on NA compared to MHA were unacceptable (&gt; 3 out of limit zones in 30 consecutive days). Considering clinical isolates, the frequency of very major, major, and minor errors on NA was highest in the case of P. aeruginosa (8.98%, 4.08%, and 14.7% respectively) followed by S. aureus (7.6%, 6%, and 8.8% respectively). On the other hand, the least frequency of errors was in the case of Enterobacteriaceae (0%, 0.4%, and 3.2% respectively). Conclusions and recommendations Using NA in AST resulted in multiple errors and the high discrepancy in results compared to MHA making it unreliable for susceptibility testing. MHA should not be replaced by NA in AST. Following guidelines and QC measures for AST must be neither bypassed nor underestimated.</abstract><cop>Berlin/Heidelberg</cop><pub>Springer Berlin Heidelberg</pub><pmid>30686832</pmid><doi>10.1186/s42506-018-0006-1</doi><tpages>5</tpages><oa>free_for_read</oa></addata></record>
fulltext fulltext
identifier ISSN: 2090-262X
ispartof Journal of the Egyptian Public Health Association, 2019-01, Vol.94 (1), p.4-5, Article 4
issn 2090-262X
0013-2446
2090-262X
language eng
recordid cdi_pubmedcentral_primary_oai_pubmedcentral_nih_gov_6329728
source MEDLINE; DOAJ Directory of Open Access Journals; SpringerNature Journals; PubMed Central Open Access; PubMed Central
subjects Agar
Anti-Bacterial Agents - pharmacology
CLSI
Culture Media
Disk diffusion method
Egypt
Escherichia coli - drug effects
Inhibition zones
Medicine
Medicine & Public Health
Microbial Sensitivity Tests
Mueller-Hinton agar
Pseudomonas aeruginosa - drug effects
Public Health
Quality control
Staphylococcus aureus - drug effects
title Evaluation of antibiotic susceptibility test results: how guilty a laboratory could be?
url https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-01-02T00%3A18%3A35IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-pubmed_doaj_&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Evaluation%20of%20antibiotic%20susceptibility%20test%20results:%20how%20guilty%20a%20laboratory%20could%20be?&rft.jtitle=Journal%20of%20the%20Egyptian%20Public%20Health%20Association&rft.au=Nassar,%20Mohamed%20S.%20M.&rft.date=2019-01-11&rft.volume=94&rft.issue=1&rft.spage=4&rft.epage=5&rft.pages=4-5&rft.artnum=4&rft.issn=2090-262X&rft.eissn=2090-262X&rft_id=info:doi/10.1186/s42506-018-0006-1&rft_dat=%3Cpubmed_doaj_%3E30686832%3C/pubmed_doaj_%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_id=info:pmid/30686832&rft_doaj_id=oai_doaj_org_article_06112a9038c54e45bbee98046e9fc673&rfr_iscdi=true