Journal of Clinical and Diagnostic Research, ISSN - 0973 - 709X

Users Online : 32074

AbstractMaterial and MethodsResultsDiscussionReferences
Readers' Comments (0) Article in PDF Audio Visual Citation Manager Article Statistics Link to PUBMED Print this Article Send to a Friend
Advertisers Access Statistics Resources

Dr Archana Dambal

"Journal of clinical and diagnostic research is a welcome change in publishing practices. It aims to reach out to the grass-root level researchers who do not lack in experience, clinical material and ideas, but lack in their knowledge in English language and statistics. The journal achieves it's aim by supporting in these exact domains.
It also gives due credit to all research designs like descriptive and qualitative studies while many journals ignore these important study designs. The rigorous review process does not allow any compromise in quality
It is indexed in many indexing agencies and the articles are available under creative commons licence free of cost
The frequency of publication supports many aspiring authors from India and other countries.
It's wide scope welcomes articles across various specialities in medicine. In an era when there is an unscientific insistence on speciality specific research by regulatory bodies in medical education, JCDR supports collaborative research across specialities. I wish the publisher all the best in his future endeavors."



Dr. Archana Dambal
Department of General Medicine,
Belgaum Institute of Medical Sciences,Belgaum, Karnataka,INDIA,
On 30 Nov 2018




Dr Bhanu K Bhakhri

"The Journal of Clinical and Diagnostic Research (JCDR) has been in operation since almost a decade. It has contributed a huge number of peer reviewed articles, across a spectrum of medical disciplines, to the medical literature.
Its wide based indexing and open access publications attracts many authors as well as readers
For authors, the manuscripts can be uploaded online through an easily navigable portal, on other hand, reviewers appreciate the systematic handling of all manuscripts. The way JCDR has emerged as an effective medium for publishing wide array of observations in Indian context, I wish the editorial team success in their endeavour"



Dr Bhanu K Bhakhri
Faculty, Pediatric Medicine
Super Speciality Paediatric Hospital and Post Graduate Teaching Institute, Noida
On Sep 2018




Dr Mohan Z Mani

"Thank you very much for having published my article in record time.I would like to compliment you and your entire staff for your promptness, courtesy, and willingness to be customer friendly, which is quite unusual.I was given your reference by a colleague in pathology,and was able to directly phone your editorial office for clarifications.I would particularly like to thank the publication managers and the Assistant Editor who were following up my article. I would also like to thank you for adjusting the money I paid initially into payment for my modified article,and refunding the balance.
I wish all success to your journal and look forward to sending you any suitable similar article in future"



Dr Mohan Z Mani,
Professor & Head,
Department of Dematolgy,
Believers Church Medical College,
Thiruvalla, Kerala
On Sep 2018




Prof. Somashekhar Nimbalkar

"Over the last few years, we have published our research regularly in Journal of Clinical and Diagnostic Research. Having published in more than 20 high impact journals over the last five years including several high impact ones and reviewing articles for even more journals across my fields of interest, we value our published work in JCDR for their high standards in publishing scientific articles. The ease of submission, the rapid reviews in under a month, the high quality of their reviewers and keen attention to the final process of proofs and publication, ensure that there are no mistakes in the final article. We have been asked clarifications on several occasions and have been happy to provide them and it exemplifies the commitment to quality of the team at JCDR."



Prof. Somashekhar Nimbalkar
Head, Department of Pediatrics, Pramukhswami Medical College, Karamsad
Chairman, Research Group, Charutar Arogya Mandal, Karamsad
National Joint Coordinator - Advanced IAP NNF NRP Program
Ex-Member, Governing Body, National Neonatology Forum, New Delhi
Ex-President - National Neonatology Forum Gujarat State Chapter
Department of Pediatrics, Pramukhswami Medical College, Karamsad, Anand, Gujarat.
On Sep 2018




Dr. Kalyani R

"Journal of Clinical and Diagnostic Research is at present a well-known Indian originated scientific journal which started with a humble beginning. I have been associated with this journal since many years. I appreciate the Editor, Dr. Hemant Jain, for his constant effort in bringing up this journal to the present status right from the scratch. The journal is multidisciplinary. It encourages in publishing the scientific articles from postgraduates and also the beginners who start their career. At the same time the journal also caters for the high quality articles from specialty and super-specialty researchers. Hence it provides a platform for the scientist and researchers to publish. The other aspect of it is, the readers get the information regarding the most recent developments in science which can be used for teaching, research, treating patients and to some extent take preventive measures against certain diseases. The journal is contributing immensely to the society at national and international level."



Dr Kalyani R
Professor and Head
Department of Pathology
Sri Devaraj Urs Medical College
Sri Devaraj Urs Academy of Higher Education and Research , Kolar, Karnataka
On Sep 2018




Dr. Saumya Navit

"As a peer-reviewed journal, the Journal of Clinical and Diagnostic Research provides an opportunity to researchers, scientists and budding professionals to explore the developments in the field of medicine and dentistry and their varied specialities, thus extending our view on biological diversities of living species in relation to medicine.
‘Knowledge is treasure of a wise man.’ The free access of this journal provides an immense scope of learning for the both the old and the young in field of medicine and dentistry as well. The multidisciplinary nature of the journal makes it a better platform to absorb all that is being researched and developed. The publication process is systematic and professional. Online submission, publication and peer reviewing makes it a user-friendly journal.
As an experienced dentist and an academician, I proudly recommend this journal to the dental fraternity as a good quality open access platform for rapid communication of their cutting-edge research progress and discovery.
I wish JCDR a great success and I hope that journal will soar higher with the passing time."



Dr Saumya Navit
Professor and Head
Department of Pediatric Dentistry
Saraswati Dental College
Lucknow
On Sep 2018




Dr. Arunava Biswas

"My sincere attachment with JCDR as an author as well as reviewer is a learning experience . Their systematic approach in publication of article in various categories is really praiseworthy.
Their prompt and timely response to review's query and the manner in which they have set the reviewing process helps in extracting the best possible scientific writings for publication.
It's a honour and pride to be a part of the JCDR team. My very best wishes to JCDR and hope it will sparkle up above the sky as a high indexed journal in near future."



Dr. Arunava Biswas
MD, DM (Clinical Pharmacology)
Assistant Professor
Department of Pharmacology
Calcutta National Medical College & Hospital , Kolkata




Dr. C.S. Ramesh Babu
" Journal of Clinical and Diagnostic Research (JCDR) is a multi-specialty medical and dental journal publishing high quality research articles in almost all branches of medicine. The quality of printing of figures and tables is excellent and comparable to any International journal. An added advantage is nominal publication charges and monthly issue of the journal and more chances of an article being accepted for publication. Moreover being a multi-specialty journal an article concerning a particular specialty has a wider reach of readers of other related specialties also. As an author and reviewer for several years I find this Journal most suitable and highly recommend this Journal."
Best regards,
C.S. Ramesh Babu,
Associate Professor of Anatomy,
Muzaffarnagar Medical College,
Muzaffarnagar.
On Aug 2018




Dr. Arundhathi. S
"Journal of Clinical and Diagnostic Research (JCDR) is a reputed peer reviewed journal and is constantly involved in publishing high quality research articles related to medicine. Its been a great pleasure to be associated with this esteemed journal as a reviewer and as an author for a couple of years. The editorial board consists of many dedicated and reputed experts as its members and they are doing an appreciable work in guiding budding researchers. JCDR is doing a commendable job in scientific research by promoting excellent quality research & review articles and case reports & series. The reviewers provide appropriate suggestions that improve the quality of articles. I strongly recommend my fraternity to encourage JCDR by contributing their valuable research work in this widely accepted, user friendly journal. I hope my collaboration with JCDR will continue for a long time".



Dr. Arundhathi. S
MBBS, MD (Pathology),
Sanjay Gandhi institute of trauma and orthopedics,
Bengaluru.
On Aug 2018




Dr. Mamta Gupta,
"It gives me great pleasure to be associated with JCDR, since last 2-3 years. Since then I have authored, co-authored and reviewed about 25 articles in JCDR. I thank JCDR for giving me an opportunity to improve my own skills as an author and a reviewer.
It 's a multispecialty journal, publishing high quality articles. It gives a platform to the authors to publish their research work which can be available for everyone across the globe to read. The best thing about JCDR is that the full articles of all medical specialties are available as pdf/html for reading free of cost or without institutional subscription, which is not there for other journals. For those who have problem in writing manuscript or do statistical work, JCDR comes for their rescue.
The journal has a monthly publication and the articles are published quite fast. In time compared to other journals. The on-line first publication is also a great advantage and facility to review one's own articles before going to print. The response to any query and permission if required, is quite fast; this is quite commendable. I have a very good experience about seeking quick permission for quoting a photograph (Fig.) from a JCDR article for my chapter authored in an E book. I never thought it would be so easy. No hassles.
Reviewing articles is no less a pain staking process and requires in depth perception, knowledge about the topic for review. It requires time and concentration, yet I enjoy doing it. The JCDR website especially for the reviewers is quite user friendly. My suggestions for improving the journal is, more strict review process, so that only high quality articles are published. I find a a good number of articles in Obst. Gynae, hence, a new journal for this specialty titled JCDR-OG can be started. May be a bimonthly or quarterly publication to begin with. Only selected articles should find a place in it.
An yearly reward for the best article authored can also incentivize the authors. Though the process of finding the best article will be not be very easy. I do not know how reviewing process can be improved. If an article is being reviewed by two reviewers, then opinion of one can be communicated to the other or the final opinion of the editor can be communicated to the reviewer if requested for. This will help one’s reviewing skills.
My best wishes to Dr. Hemant Jain and all the editorial staff of JCDR for their untiring efforts to bring out this journal. I strongly recommend medical fraternity to publish their valuable research work in this esteemed journal, JCDR".



Dr. Mamta Gupta
Consultant
(Ex HOD Obs &Gynae, Hindu Rao Hospital and associated NDMC Medical College, Delhi)
Aug 2018




Dr. Rajendra Kumar Ghritlaharey

"I wish to thank Dr. Hemant Jain, Editor-in-Chief Journal of Clinical and Diagnostic Research (JCDR), for asking me to write up few words.
Writing is the representation of language in a textual medium i e; into the words and sentences on paper. Quality medical manuscript writing in particular, demands not only a high-quality research, but also requires accurate and concise communication of findings and conclusions, with adherence to particular journal guidelines. In medical field whether working in teaching, private, or in corporate institution, everyone wants to excel in his / her own field and get recognised by making manuscripts publication.


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

Important Notice

Original article / research
Year : 2010 | Month : December | Volume : 4 | Issue : 6 | Page : 3378 - 3382

Retrospective Analysis Of The Incidence Of Nosocomial Infections In The ICU - Associated Risk Factors And Microbiological Profile

MOHANASOUNDARAM K M*

*M.D.,(Micro), Department of Microbiology, Vinayaka Missions Medical College, Salem, Email id: mohanapalani@gmail.com, Mobile number-94431-32290, No,14, 3rd street, Malligai nagar, Kandaiyan thottam, Soolai, Erode,638004

Correspondence Address :
*M.D.,(Micro), Department of Microbiology, Vinayaka Missions Medical College, Salem, Email id: mohanapalani@gmail.com, Mobile number-94431-32290, No,14, 3rd street, Malligai nagar, Kandaiyan thottam, Soolai, Erode,638004

Abstract

Background
Nosocomial infections, also known as health care associated infections, have become an important public health issue worldwide. Nosocomial infections pose a critical threat to patients, especially in high-risk departments such as intensive care units.

Aim
A retrospective review of the incidence of nosocomial infections in the ICU of a tertiary care hospital in Salem from January 2009 to December 2009 was performed.

Results
Among the 5680 patients who were admitted, the incidence of the nosocomial infection rate was 16%. Urinary tract infections (29.5%) were the most common ones, followed by lower respiratory tract infections occurring in 28.1% of the patients and blood stream infections in 22.8% of the patients.
Klebsiella pneumoniae was the most commonly isolated pathogen (23.1%), followed by Pseudomonas aeruginosa (12.7%) and Escherichia coli (10.4%).

Conclusion
An increased duration of the time spent in the ICU and interventional procedures increase the risk of nosocomial infections.

Keywords

nosocomial infections, ICU

How to cite this article :

K M MOHANASOUNDARAM . RETROSPECTIVE ANALYSIS OF THE INCIDENCE OF NOSOCOMIAL INFECTIONS IN THE ICU - ASSOCIATED RISK FACTORS AND MICROBIOLOGICAL PROFILE. Journal of Clinical and Diagnostic Research [serial online] 2010 December [cited: 2019 Aug 26 ]; 4:3378-3382. Available from
http://www.jcdr.net/back_issues.asp?issn=0973-709x&year=2010&month=December&volume=4&issue=6&page=3378-3382&id=988

INTRODUCTION:
The rising incidence of antibiotic resistance among bacterial organisms is alarming worldwide, especially in developing countries like ours, where the indiscriminate use of antibiotics is common. Antimicrobial resistance has emerged as an important determinant of the outcome for patients in the intensive care units (ICUs). Nosocomial infections can lead to complications in 25-33% of the patients who are admitted in the ICU(1). The recurrent problems with these nosocomially-acquired infections are the changes in the microbiological profile and the antibiotic sensitivity pattern of the pathogens which are isolated(2). The documented phenomena include the emergence of extended betalactamase producing organisms, the tendency of fluroquinolones, both to select the resistant strains of major pathogens and to induce cross resistance among the different classes like beta lactam and vancomycin resistance in Enterococci and Coagulase negative Staphylococci(3). In industrialized countries, nosocomial infections occur in 2-12% of the hospitalized patients, with the rates being upto 21% in ICUs (4).Nosocomial infections may result in an excess length of stay in the hospital for upto 10 days and increase in the costs of hospitalization .(1),(5),(6)

Nosocomial pneumonia remains to be a major medical problem in critically ill patients. It occurs at a rate of 5 –10 cases per 1000 hospital admissions and increases by as much as 6 to 20 fold in patients requiring mechanical ventilation(6). Mechanically ventilated patients have a higher incidence of pneumonia and mortality than non-ventilated patients, with aspiration as the major route of entry of the bacteria into the lower respiratory tract.

Urinary tract infection is the second most common infection which is encountered in clinical practice, accounting for 40% of all such infections 3. Most patients with nosocomial UTI have had genitourinary manipulation and 80% develop after urethral catheterization (3),(7). Studies on nosocomial infections in the ICU are only limited in India. Recently, we carried out a retrospective study to determine the current status of nosocomial infections at a tertiary hospital in Salem. All data on nosocomial infections from January 2009 to December 2009 were retrieved and reviewed. The incidence of nosocomial infections in the ICU, most frequently, isolated pathogens and their antimicrobial profiles, were investigated.

Material and Methods

The study population consisted of all patients admitted to the intensive care unit (Medical, Surgical, Cardiac and Neurosurgical) from January 1 2009 to December 31 2009.

INCLUSION CRITERIA:
1. Hospital stay for more than 48 hours.
2. The recovery of clinically significant isolates after 48 hours of hospital stay from any of the following specimens submitted. -Sputum, endotracheal /tracheal swabs, urine, blood, CSF, pus, exudates/discharges from surgical sites and wound swabs.


EXCLUSION CRITERIA:
1. The initial isolates that are taken during the first 48 hours of hospitalization, that are known to be community acquired.
2. Succeeding isolates, similar to the initial organisms that were labeled as community acquired.

PROCEDURE:
All patients admitted in the different ICUs from January 2009 to December 2009 were recorded. Data on the date and site of infection, patient demographic information and the devices used were collected for each patient. Moreover, the date on the isolated pathogens and their antimicrobial susceptibility pattern were also collected. The laboratory isolates of ICU patients from any clinical specimen were monitored for the presence of organisms. Patients with positive isolates and those who were in the ICU for more than 48 hours were evaluated.

The CDC (Center for Disease Control and Prevention) definitions and guidelines were used to identify the nosocomial infections.(8) The major nosocomial infections including lower respiratory tract infections (LRTIs), urinary tract infections (UTIs), and blood stream infections (BSIs) were defined as follows:
1. LRTIs refer to lower respiratory tract infections other than pneumonia, i.e. bronchitis, tracheobronchitis, bronchiolitis and tracheitis without the evidence of pneumonia.
2. 2.UTIs refer to symptomatic urinary tract infections and
3. BSIs refer to laboratory confirmed blood stream infections. The detailed criteria to diagnose these nosocomial infections were followed as per the CDC guidelines on nosocomial definitions.
Statistical analysis was performed by using SPSS software. Chi square test and Spearman’s rank correlation coefficients were applied wherever applicable. For all analyses, a p value of less than 0.05 was considered to be significant.


OPERATIONAL DEFINITIONS OF TERMS:
Nosocomial infections- Infections that develop 48 hours after confinement. The clinical basis for NI can be any one of the following: new onset fever, new chest x-ray findings, leucocytosis/leucopaenia, purulent surgical wound discharge, new onset UTI and the deterioration of the vital signs. By using the CDC guidelines, patients with possible nosocomial infections were evaluated.

Clinically significant isolates-isolates which are responsible for the ongoing infection as supported by the history, clinical findings and other laboratory results.

Baseline isolates-Organisms isolated from any specimen which was submitted from the patients who were diagnosed to have nosocomial infections.

Co-infection-Presence of a second organism in the patients with baseline isolates.

(Table/Fig 1): Diagnostic criteria for nosocomial infection

Results

A total of 5680 patients were admitted in different ICUs from January 1 2009 to December 31 2009.Among these patients, 355 developed nosocomial infections with an incidence of 16%. The mean age was 47 and 77% of the patients were males. The mean length of hospital stay was 20.30+/- 13.14 days.

A majority of patients were admitted with neurological disorders (29.9%), followed by respiratory conditions (16.1%) and renal disorders (13.8%). Urinary tract infections and lower respiratory tract infections were the most common types of infections, occurring in 29.5% and 8.7% of the catheterized patients, followed by lower respiratory tract infections including bronchitis and bronchiolitis, occurring in 28.1% and17.7% of the patients who had mechanical ventilation or tracheostomy. 22.8% of the patients had blood stream infections and 4.5% of them were catheter associated. The nosocomial infections of surgical sites, skin and soft tissue were 8.2%. A majority of the patients with nosocomial infections had co-infection (24) or super infection (42) or both (31).

Klebsiella pneumoniae was the most commonly isolated pathogen (23.1%), followed by Pseudomonas aeruginosa (12.7%) and E.coli (10.4%). The other organisms which were isolated were Acinetobacter baumanni (9.9%), Candida spp (8.2%), S.aureus (3.9%), S.epidermidis (1.7%) and Enterococci (3.1%). In patients with urinary tract infections, E.coli was the most commonly isolated pathogen, followed by Candida species. In patients with lower respiratory tract infections, Klebsiella pneumoniae and Pseudomonas aeruginosa were the most commonly isolated pathogens, followed by Acinetobacter baumannii. Acinetobacter baumannii, S.aureus and S.epidermidis were the most commonly isolated pathogens in blood stream infections.

Very high resistance rates were seen with Gram-negative bacteria against third generation cephalosporins (77.2%), fourth generation cephalosporins (82.4%) and a combination of cephalosporins and beta lactamase inhibitors (37.9%). A fairly low level of resistance was seen with Ciprofloxacin (25%), Amikacin (16.7) and Augmentin (35%). All S.aureus isolates were susceptible to Vancomycin. A high rate of resistance was noted for Oxacillin (90%) and Co-trimaxazole (68.4%).(Table/Fig 2)

All patients with nosocomial infections were treated with empirical antimicrobial therapies or according to the susceptibility testing reports.
46 patients with nosocomial infections died in the ICU.

(Table/Fig 2): Susceptibility pattern of S.aureus

Discussion

Nosocomial infections have become an important public health issue worldwide. The epidemiology of nosocomial infections, mainly in the ICUs, is less studied and is given less emphasis in the developing countries.(9) The relatively high incidence of nosocomial infections may be due to the excess length of hospital stay following high severity of illness, more intervention, no antibiotic policy and possibly poor adherence to aseptic techniques.(10)

In the present study, the overall incidence of nosocomial infections in the ICU was 16%, which was lower than that observed in the ICUs of developing countries. However, the rate was comparable with those reported from many industrialized countries, where it ranged from 7.7% to 16.5%.(9)

The general distribution pattern of the nosocomial infections that emerged in our study showed UTIs (29.5%) to be the most common, followed by LRTIs (28.1%), BSIs (22.8%) and skin and soft tissue infections (11.26%). This is in concordance with the study performed by Mukherjee et al(11), which showed UTIs (45%) as the commonest nosocomial infections, followed by LRTIs (30%)and BSIs (16%). A study performed by Zoleta(1) et al showed LRTIs (66%) as the predominant infections, followed by UTIs (31%).
Our study population included 355 patients and a majority (n=272) were males. The higher rate of UTIs in the present study could be due to the male preponderance BPH in association with restricted mobility in the ICU and many of these patients had diabetes as a co morbid illness.

The study showed that 28.1% of the patients with nosocomial lower respiratory tract infections received mechanical ventilation (23.9%) or tracheostomy (10.1%). 8.7% of nosocomial urinary tract infections and 4.5% of blood stream infections were catheter associated.(Table/Fig 1) These findings indicate that the nosocomial infections are often associated with the use of invasive devices. Therefore, to effectively reduce nosocomial infections, the use of invasive devices should be minimized and specific disinfection precautions should be taken during the application of the device.(8)

The most frequently encountered microorganisms were Klebsiella (23.1%), Pseudomonas aeruginosa (12.1%), Escherichia coli (10.4%) and Acinetobacter (9.9%). (Table/Fig 3)
(Table/Fig 3): Percentage of organisms isolated

The pathogen distribution of nosocomial infections in our study differs slightly from the findings of Mukherjee et al. We found Klebsiella spp to be the predominant pathogen which caused UTIs, but Mukherjee et al reported Pseudomonas aeruginosa to be the predominant cause of nosocomial UTIs. This difference could be explained by the difference in geographical locations, nutritional status and health care systems.

The rates of Gram negative isolates which were resistant to commonly used antibiotics ranged from 29.2% (imipenem) to 86.63% (II generation cephalosporins). (Table/Fig 4)

(Table/Fig 4): Susceptibility pattern of gram negative isolates


(Table/Fig 4): Susceptibility pattern of gram negative isolates

90% of the S.aureus species were Methicillin resistant and 15% were resistant to Linezolid. All isolates showed an in vitro susceptibility to Vancomycin

Since resistant organisms cause a high percentage of nosocomial infections, the antimicrobials used for the treatment of nosocomial infections must have a balanced and reliable spectrum of activity against these pathogens. Careful drug selection, coupled with surveillance and effective infection control procedures, may help in controlling pathogen resistance.

The present study has some limitations due to its retrospective nature. The data on the clinical consequences were not available for most cases, thus making it impossible to compare the clinical outcome of the patients with and without nosocomial infections. However, the present study showed that the length of stay in the hospital was significantly increased in patients with nosocomial infections, as compared to those without the infections.

References

1.
Zoleta LB, Alejandria MM, Berba RP..Antimicrobial Resistance Patterns and Clinical Outcomes of Health –Care Associated Infections due to Enterobacteriaceae among Critically Ill patients. Phil J Microbial Infect Dis 2004; 33(4): 133-141.
2.
Huang SS, LabusBJ , Samuel MC , Wan DT, and Reingold AL.Antibiotic Resistance Patterns Of Bacterial Isolates From Blood in San Francisco Country, California, 1996-1999.Emerging Infectious Diseases2002; 8(2): 195-201.
3.
Domingo KB, Mendoza MT, and Torres TT.. Catheter –related Urinary Tract Infections: Incidence, Risk Factors and Microbiologic Profile. Phil J Microbial Infect Dis 1999; 28(4): 133-138
4.
Jones RN.. Resistance Pathogens Among Nosocomial Pathogens: Trends Over the Past Few Years. Chest 2002; 119; 397-404S.
5.
Magalit SL, Gler MT and Tupasi TE..Increasing Antimicrobial Resistance Patterns of Community and Nosocomial Uropathogens in Makati Medical Center Phil J Microbial Infect Dis 2004; 33(4): 1433-1481.
6.
Berba R. Alejandria M, Rosaros J, and Reside I et al. Incidence, Risk factors and Outcome of Hospital Acquired Pneumonia in Critically Ill Patients at the Philippine General Hospital Phil J Microbial Infect Dis 1999; 28(2): 29-38
7.
Tambyah PA, Knasinski V, and Maki DG..The Direct Costs Of Nosocomial Catheter-Associated Urinary Tract Infection In The Era Of Managed Care. Infection Control and Hospital Epidemiology2002; 23(1) 27-31.
8.
8.Gamer JS, Jarvis WR, Horan TC, Hughes IM.CDC definitions of nosocomial infections,. Am J Infect Control.1988 ;16(3):128-140
9.
10.
9. Ding GJ , Sun QF, Li KC et al. Retrospective analysis of nosocomial infections in the intensive care unit of a tertiary hospital in china during 2003 and 2007.BMC Infectious Diseases2009, 9:115
11.
Shabina Habibi, Navneet Wig, Sunil Agarwal and Surendra K Sharma et .Epidemiology of nosocomial infections in medicine intensive care unit at a tertiary care hospital in northern India. Tropical doctor 2008; 38:233-235
12.
Mukherjee T, Pramod K,Srinivasan G, Rao MY.Nosocomial infections in Geriatric patients admitted I ICU. J of Academy of Geriatrics 2005;1(2);61-64

JCDR is now Monthly and more widely Indexed .
  • Emerging Sources Citation Index (Web of Science, thomsonreuters)
  • Index Copernicus ICV 2017: 134.54
  • Academic Search Complete Database
  • Directory of Open Access Journals (DOAJ)
  • EBSCOhost
  • Google Scholar
  • HINARI Access to Research in Health Programme
  • Indian Science Abstracts (ISA)
  • Journal seek Database
  • Google
  • Popline (reproductive health literature)
  • www.omnimedicalsearch.com