The Journal of infectious diseases · 2018
A Retrospective Review of Hospital-Based Data on Enteric Fever in India, 2014-2015.
СтатьяМногоцентровое исследованиеПоддержка исследования: вне правительства СШАНазвание и аннотация: Перевод в очереди
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Sur Dipika, Barkume Caitlin, Mukhopadhyay Bratati, Date Kashmira, Ganguly Nirmal Kumar, Garrett Denise
Аннотация
BACKGROUND: Enteric fever remains a threat to many countries with minimal access to clean water and poor sanitation infrastructure. As part of a multisite surveillance study, we conducted a retrospective review of records in 5 hospitals across India to gather evidence on the burden of enteric fever.
METHODS: We examined hospital records (laboratory and surgical registers) from 5 hospitals across India for laboratory-confirmed Salmonella Typhi or Salmonella Paratyphi cases and intestinal perforations from 2014-2015. Clinical data were obtained where available. For laboratory-confirmed infections, we compared differences in disease burden, age, sex, clinical presentation, and antimicrobial resistance.
RESULTS: Of 267536 blood cultures, 1418 (0.53%) were positive for S. Typhi or S. Paratyphi. Clinical data were available for 429 cases (72%); a higher proportion of participants with S. Typhi infection were hospitalized, compared with those with S. Paratyphi infection (44% vs 35%). We observed resistance to quinolones among 82% of isolates, with cases of cephalosporin resistance (1%) and macrolide resistance (9%) detected. Of 94 participants with intestinal perforations, 16 (17%) had a provisional, final, or laboratory-confirmed diagnosis of enteric fever.
DISCUSSION: Data show a moderate burden of enteric fever in India. Enteric fever data should be systematically collected to facilitate evidence-based decision-making by countries for typhoid conjugate vaccines.
METHODS: We examined hospital records (laboratory and surgical registers) from 5 hospitals across India for laboratory-confirmed Salmonella Typhi or Salmonella Paratyphi cases and intestinal perforations from 2014-2015. Clinical data were obtained where available. For laboratory-confirmed infections, we compared differences in disease burden, age, sex, clinical presentation, and antimicrobial resistance.
RESULTS: Of 267536 blood cultures, 1418 (0.53%) were positive for S. Typhi or S. Paratyphi. Clinical data were available for 429 cases (72%); a higher proportion of participants with S. Typhi infection were hospitalized, compared with those with S. Paratyphi infection (44% vs 35%). We observed resistance to quinolones among 82% of isolates, with cases of cephalosporin resistance (1%) and macrolide resistance (9%) detected. Of 94 participants with intestinal perforations, 16 (17%) had a provisional, final, or laboratory-confirmed diagnosis of enteric fever.
DISCUSSION: Data show a moderate burden of enteric fever in India. Enteric fever data should be systematically collected to facilitate evidence-based decision-making by countries for typhoid conjugate vaccines.