Biofilm formation and antibiogram profile of bacteria from infected wounds in a general hospital in southern Ethiopia.

Kebede Kulayta, Zerihun Zerdo, Mohammed Seid, Amanuel Dubale, Aseer Manilal, Teshome Kebede, Reham M Alahmadi, Gurusamy Raman, Idhayadhulla Akbar
Author Information
  1. Kebede Kulayta: Department of Medical Laboratory Science, College of Medicine and Health Sciences, Arba Minch University, Arba Minch, southern, Ethiopia.
  2. Zerihun Zerdo: Department of Medical Laboratory Science, College of Medicine and Health Sciences, Arba Minch University, Arba Minch, southern, Ethiopia.
  3. Mohammed Seid: Department of Medical Laboratory Science, College of Medicine and Health Sciences, Arba Minch University, Arba Minch, southern, Ethiopia. mohamedseid2005@gmail.com.
  4. Amanuel Dubale: Department of Medical Laboratory Science, College of Medicine and Health Sciences, Arba Minch University, Arba Minch, southern, Ethiopia.
  5. Aseer Manilal: Department of Medical Laboratory Science, College of Medicine and Health Sciences, Arba Minch University, Arba Minch, southern, Ethiopia. aseermanilal@gmail.com. ORCID
  6. Teshome Kebede: Department of Medical Laboratory Science, College of Medicine and Health Sciences, Arba Minch University, Arba Minch, southern, Ethiopia.
  7. Reham M Alahmadi: Department of Botany and Microbiology, College of Science, King Saud University, PO Box 2455, 11451, Riyadh, Saudi Arabia.
  8. Gurusamy Raman: Department of Life Sciences, Yeungnam University, Gyeongsan, Gyeongbuk-Do, South Korea. bioramg@gmail.com.
  9. Idhayadhulla Akbar: Research Department of Chemistry, Nehru Memorial College (Affiliated to Bharathidasan University), Puthanampatti, Tiruchirappalli District, 621007, Tamil Nadu, India.

Abstract

Biofilm-producing bacteria associated with wound infections exhibit exceptional drug resistance, leading to an escalation in morbidity, worse clinical outcomes (including delay in the healing process), and an increase in health care cost, burdening the whole system. This study is an attempt to estimate the prevalence and the relationship between the biofilm-forming capacity and multi-drug resistance of wound bacterial isolates. The findings intended to help clinicians, healthcare providers and program planners and to formulate an evidence-based decision-making process, especially in resource-limited healthcare settings. This study was done to assess the prevalence of bacterial infections in wounds and the antibiogram and biofilm-forming capacity of those bacteria in patients with clinical signs and symptoms, attending a General Hospital in southern Ethiopia. A cross-sectional study was performed in Arba Minch General Hospital from June to November 2021. The study participants comprised 201 patients with clinically infected wounds. Demographic and clinical data were gathered via a structured questionnaire. Specimens from wounds were taken from each participant and inoculated onto a series of culture media, namely MacConkey agar, mannitol salt agar, and blood agar, and different species were identified using a number of biochemical tests. Antimicrobial susceptibility tests were performed by means of the Kirby-Bauer disc diffusion technique following the guidelines of the Clinical and Laboratory Standards Institute. A micro-titer plate method was employed to detect the extent of biofilm formation. Bivariable and multivariable logistic regression models were applied to analyse the association between dependent and independent variables, and P values ≤ 0.05 were considered as statistically significant. Data analyses were done with Statistical Package for the Social Sciences version 25. Out of the 201 clinically infected wounds, 165 were found culture-positive with an overall prevalence of 82% (95% CI: 75.9-86.9). In total, 188 bacteria were recovered; 53.1% of them were Gram-positive cocci. The often-isolated bacterial species were Staphylococcus aureus, 38.3% (n = 72), and Pseudomonas aeruginosa, 16.4% (n = 31). The Gram-positive isolates showed considerable resistance against penicillin, 70%, and somewhat strong resistance against tetracycline, 57.7%. Gram-negative isolates showed severe resistance to ampicillin, 80.68%. The overall multi-drug resistance (MDR) among isolates was 48.4%. Extended beta-lactamase (ESBL)-producing Gram-negatives and methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA) accounted for 49 and 41.67%, respectively; 62.2% of the isolates were biofilm formers and were correlated statistically with MDR, ESBL producers, and MRSA (P < 0.005). The extent of biofilm formation and the prevalence of MDR bacteria associated with infected wounds hint at a public health threat that needs immediate attention. Thus, a more balanced and comprehensive wound management approach and antimicrobial stewardship program are essential in the study setting.

References

  1. APMIS Suppl. 2013 May;(136):1-51 [PMID: 23635385]
  2. PLOS Glob Public Health. 2024 Apr 16;4(4):e0003077 [PMID: 38626068]
  3. Foods. 2021 Sep 08;10(9): [PMID: 34574227]
  4. Wound Repair Regen. 2017 Sep;25(5):744-757 [PMID: 28960634]
  5. Infect Drug Resist. 2023 Sep 28;16:6405-6426 [PMID: 37789841]
  6. Int J Low Extrem Wounds. 2022 Jun;21(2):182-192 [PMID: 32594808]
  7. J Clin Microbiol. 2000 Feb;38(2):918-22 [PMID: 10655417]
  8. Lancet Glob Health. 2024 Feb;12(2):e201-e216 [PMID: 38134946]
  9. J Clin Microbiol. 2021 Nov 18;59(12):e0021321 [PMID: 34550809]
  10. Cureus. 2020 Dec 21;12(12):e12208 [PMID: 33489616]
  11. Biology (Basel). 2024 Feb 09;13(2): [PMID: 38392327]
  12. Heliyon. 2019 Dec 13;5(12):e02956 [PMID: 31886427]
  13. BMC Pharmacol Toxicol. 2019 May 30;20(1):35 [PMID: 31146791]
  14. Am J Infect Control. 2004 Dec;32(8):470-85 [PMID: 15573054]
  15. APMIS. 2007 Aug;115(8):891-9 [PMID: 17696944]
  16. PLoS One. 2020 Aug 7;15(8):e0237263 [PMID: 32764812]
  17. Adv Wound Care (New Rochelle). 2021 May;10(5):281-292 [PMID: 33733885]
  18. P T. 2019 Apr;44(4):192-200 [PMID: 30930604]
  19. J Wound Care. 2022 Dec 1;31(Sup12):S10-S21 [PMID: 36475844]
  20. EXCLI J. 2020 Feb 18;19:201-208 [PMID: 32256266]
  21. Clin Microbiol Infect. 2012 Mar;18(3):268-81 [PMID: 21793988]
  22. BMC Res Notes. 2014 Aug 07;7:500 [PMID: 25100042]
  23. Infect Drug Resist. 2021 Feb 23;14:709-717 [PMID: 33654415]
  24. Ann Clin Microbiol Antimicrob. 2014 Apr 14;13:14 [PMID: 24731394]
  25. J Antimicrob Chemother. 2014 Sep;69(9):2337-53 [PMID: 24879668]
  26. J Wound Care. 2017 Jan 2;26(1):20-25 [PMID: 28103163]
  27. Tanzan J Health Res. 2011 Oct;13(4):68-74 [PMID: 26592050]
  28. Angew Chem Int Ed Engl. 2022 Mar 21;61(13):e202112218 [PMID: 34806284]
  29. Sci Rep. 2021 Mar 4;11(1):5116 [PMID: 33664307]
  30. Adv Wound Care (New Rochelle). 2015 Jul 1;4(7):389-397 [PMID: 26155381]
  31. Curr Opin Crit Care. 2015 Aug;21(4):343-50 [PMID: 26126129]
  32. BMC Proc. 2019 Dec 16;13(Suppl 11):20 [PMID: 31890013]
  33. Int J Gen Med. 2018 Jan 18;11:25-32 [PMID: 29403304]
  34. Int J Microbiol. 2017;2017:8953829 [PMID: 28386280]
  35. Ann Clin Microbiol Antimicrob. 2013 Jul 23;12:17 [PMID: 23879886]
  36. Pathog Glob Health. 2021 Sep;115(6):339-356 [PMID: 33851566]
  37. J Glob Antimicrob Resist. 2021 Sep;26:133-139 [PMID: 34129993]
  38. Adv Wound Care (New Rochelle). 2021 Jan;10(1):13-23 [PMID: 32496980]
  39. Lancet Infect Dis. 2018 May;18(5):516-525 [PMID: 29452941]
  40. Afr Health Sci. 2014 Dec;14(4):802-9 [PMID: 25834486]
  41. J Antimicrob Chemother. 2020 Mar 1;75(3):709-717 [PMID: 31821452]

MeSH Term

Humans
Ethiopia
Biofilms
Female
Male
Adult
Wound Infection
Hospitals, General
Middle Aged
Cross-Sectional Studies
Anti-Bacterial Agents
Microbial Sensitivity Tests
Young Adult
Adolescent
Bacteria
Drug Resistance, Multiple, Bacterial
Aged
Bacterial Infections
Prevalence

Chemicals

Anti-Bacterial Agents

Word Cloud

Created with Highcharts 10.0.0resistancewoundsbacteriastudyisolatesprevalenceinfectedwoundclinicalbacterialagarbiofilmformationMDRassociatedinfectionsprocesshealthbiofilm-formingcapacitymulti-drughealthcareprogramdoneantibiogrampatientsGeneralHospitalsouthernEthiopiaperformed201clinicallyspeciestestsextentstatisticallyoverallGram-positiveStaphylococcusaureus4%showedESBLMRSABiofilm-producingexhibitexceptionaldrugleadingescalationmorbidityworseoutcomesincludingdelayhealingincreasecarecostburdeningwholesystemattemptestimaterelationshipfindingsintendedhelpcliniciansprovidersplannersformulateevidence-baseddecision-makingespeciallyresource-limitedsettingsassesssignssymptomsattendingcross-sectionalArbaMinchJuneNovember2021participantscomprisedDemographicdatagatheredviastructuredquestionnaireSpecimenstakenparticipantinoculatedontoseriesculturemedianamelyMacConkeymannitolsaltblooddifferentidentifiedusingnumberbiochemicalAntimicrobialsusceptibilitymeansKirby-BauerdiscdiffusiontechniquefollowingguidelinesClinicalLaboratoryStandardsInstitutemicro-titerplatemethodemployeddetectBivariablemultivariablelogisticregressionmodelsappliedanalyseassociationdependentindependentvariablesPvalues ≤ 005consideredsignificantDataanalysesStatisticalPackageSocialSciencesversion25165foundculture-positive82%95%CI:759-869total188recovered531%coccioften-isolated383%n = 72Pseudomonasaeruginosa16n = 31considerablepenicillin70%somewhatstrongtetracycline577%Gram-negativesevereampicillin8068%among48Extendedbeta-lactamase-producingGram-negativesmethicillin-resistantaccounted494167%respectively622%formerscorrelatedproducersP < 0005hintpublicthreatneedsimmediateattentionThusbalancedcomprehensivemanagementapproachantimicrobialstewardshipessentialsettingBiofilmprofilegeneralhospital

Similar Articles

Cited By