Skip to main content

Table 7 Comparison of antimicrobial resistant patterns of Gram-positive and Gram-negative isolates among patients with category II and category III DBW reporting to 2 PET centers in Uganda between April and October 2019

From: The potential for the double risk of rabies and antimicrobial resistance in a high rabies endemic setting: detection of antibiotic resistance in bacterial isolates from infected dog bite wounds in Uganda

Antimicrobial

Pattern

Gram positive isolates

Gram negative isolates

Category II wounds (n = 279), %

Category III wounds (n = 127), %

X2 (p-value)

Category II wounds n = 217

Category III wounds n = 145

X2 (p-value)

Ceftriaxone

R

38 (13.6)

22 (17.3)

1.23 (0.54)

15 (6.9)

11 (7.6)

1.85 (0.40)

 

I

7 (2.5)

2 (1.6)

 

3 (1.4)

5 (3.5)

 
 

S

234 (83.9)

103 (81.1)

 

199 (91.7)

128 (88.9)

 

Metronidazole*

R

264 (94.6)

116 (91.3)

1.57 (0.21)

217 (100.0)

145 (100.0)

–

 

I

15 (5.4)

11 (8.7)

 

0 (0.0)

0 (0.0)

 
 

S

0 (0.0)

0 (0.0)

 

0 (0.0)

0 (0.0)

 

Gentamicin

R

21 (7.6)

8 (6.3)

1.97 (0.37)

9 (4.2)

4 (2.8)

4.24 (0.11)

 

I

11 (3.9)

9 (7.1)

 

3 (1.4)

7 (4.8)

 
 

S

247 (88.5)

110 (86.6)

 

205 (94.5)

134 (92.4)

 

Amoxicillin

R

34 (12.2)

23 (18.1)

2.54 (0.11)

31 (14.3)

23 (15.9)

0.16 (0.69)

 

S

245 (87.8)

104 (81.9)

 

185 (85.7)

122 (84.1)

 

Trimethoprim / sulfamethoxazole

R

11 (3.9)

5 (3.9)

0.14 (0.93)

37 (17.0)

16 (11.0)

4.74 (0.09)

 

I

7 (2.5)

4 (3.2)

 

9 (4.2)

12 (8.3)

 
 

S

261 (93.6)

118 (92.9)

 

171 (78.8)

117 (80.7)

 

Vancomycin*

R

0 (0.0)

0 (0.0)

–

ND

ND

–

 

S

279 (100.0)

127 (100.0)

 

ND

ND

 

Ciprofloxacin

R

0 (0.0)

0 (0.0)

–

0 (0.0)

0 (0.0)

–

 

S

279 (100.0)

127 (100.0)

 

217 (100.0)

145 (100.0)

 

Imipenem*

R

9 (3.3)

6 (4.7)

0.55 (0.46)

1 (0.5)

0 (0.0)

 
 

S

270 (96.7)

121 (95.3)

 

216 (99.5)

145 (100.0)

 

Streptomycin

R

7 (2.5)

14 (11.0)

13.51 (0.001)**

6 (2.8)

10 (6.9)

3.84 (0.15)

 

I

4 (1.4)

3 (2.4)

 

5 (2.3)

2 (1.4)

 
 

S

268 (96.1)

110 (86.6)

 

206 (94.9)

133 (91.7)

 

Doxycycline

R

23 (8.3)

14 (11.0)

6.56 (0.038)**

55 (25.3)

28 (19.3)

329 (0.19)

 

I

4 (1.4)

7 (5.5)

 

9 (4.2)

3 (2.1)

 
 

S

252 (90.3)

106 (83.5)

 

153 (70.5)

114 (78.6)

 

Oxacillin*

R

169 (60.6)

109 (85.8)

25.78 (≤ 0.0001)**

62 (28.6)

44 (30.3)

0.13 (0.72)

 

S

110 (39.4)

18 (14.2)

 

155 (71.4)

101 (69.7)

 

Chloramphenicol

R

22 (7.9)

14 (11.1)

3.14 (0.21)

12 (5.5)

8 (5.5)

3.57 (0.17)

 

I

31 (11.1)

20 (15.7)

 

5 (2.3)

9 (6.2)

 
 

S

226 (81.0)

93 (73.2)

 

200 (92.2)

128 (88.3)

 

Methicillin*

R

9 (3.2)

5 (3.9)

0.27 (0.61)

ND

ND

–

 

S

270 (96.8)

122 (96.1)

 

ND

ND

 

Ampicillin

R

ND

ND

–

68 (31.3)

43 (29.7)

1.19 (0.55)

 

I

ND

ND

 

7 (3.2)

8 (5.5)

 
 

S

ND

ND

 

142 (65.4

94 (64.8)

 
  1. S sensitive; R resistant; I intermediate; ND not done
  2. *Antimicrobial agent did not have an intermediate zone; **differences are statistically significant at p ≤ 0.05
  3. That resistance to streptomycin (p = 0.001), doxycycline (p = 0.038), and oxacillin (p = 0.0001) was significantly associated with the isolate being from category III DBWs among gram positive isolates. For gram negative isolates, there were no significant association between the resistance of isolates of categories II and III DBWs
Back to article page

Antimicrobial Resistance & Infection Control

ISSN: 2047-2994

Contact us