Prevalence and Antimicrobial Susceptibility Profile of Bacteria Isolated from the Environment of two Tertiary Hospitals in Calabar Metropolis, Nigeria

Bacterial Pathogens and Their Antimicrobial Resistance Patterns of Inanimate Surfaces and Equipment in Ethiopia: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis

“…Likewise, higher results than the current finding such as research findings from Brazil [14] done to assess bacterial contamination of inert hospital surfaces and equipment in critical and noncritical care units with the prevalence of 94.1%; Libya [53,54] with a contamination rate of 99% and 100%, respectively; Morocco [55] with a contamination rate of 88%; the bacteriological study of electronic devices used by HCW in Rwanda [56] with contamination of 98.53%; a study in Slovakia [57] that was done to assess bacterial contamination of mobile phone and computer keyboard (92%); and the study in the United Kingdom [58] that reported a 95.7% of bacterial contamination of hospital bed-control handsets in a surgical setting were reported. The substantially higher reports of the previous studies as compared to the present findings may be explained due to the difference in the study design [14,58,59]; the frequency of cleaning, disinfecting, and sterilizing (use of irradiations) of surfaces and equipment used directly or indirectly for the patient diagnosis and treatment [5,52]; time of swabbing [60]; awareness of the HCW about microbial contamination of inanimate surfaces and devices [2]; the capability of the pathogen to form biofilm on inanimate surfaces and electronic devices which enables them to survive longer [61]; and variation in the type of microbial reservoir [53]. Moreover, the discrepancy could be due to variation in the study setting, selection of appropriate cleaning and disinfecting products, disinfectant kill time, and existing infection prevention and control strategies [51].…”

“…Besides, a study on medical device and equipment surface contamination in three tertiary hospitals (n = 1043 swabs) in Baghdad of Iraq [68], another study on microbial contamination of operating theatres and ICU at a specialized hospital in Erbil City of Iraq [69], a study on the bacterial profile from inanimate surfaces and contaminated equipment in ICU at a teaching hospital in Libya [70], another study on the occurrence of bacterial contamination in the operation theatre and related to surgical site infection in Libya [71], a study in Malawi conducted to assess the bacterial profile of toilets and bathroom door handle/knob contamination [15], a study in Palestine to monitor bacterial contamination (n = 243 swabs) of the operation theatre [72], and hospital-wide survey of bacterial contamination of point-of-care devices like ultrasound probes in the United States of America [73] had reported a much lower prevalence of 7.86%, 48.3%, 12.5%, 6.7%, 42.6%, 24.7%, and 5.6%, respectively. The discrepancy may be due to the difference in the sample size, study area, study design [14,59], practices of cleaning and decontaminations [51], facility infection prevention and control [2,27], type of contaminating isolate [74], and the type of equipment or inanimate surface with respect to the degree of contact [22,75].…”

Antibiogram Profile of Enteric Pathogens Isolated from Fomites in Cross River University of Technology Medical Centre, Calabar, Nigeria

“…However, Norfloxacin (100%), Chloramphenicol (95.8%) and Imipenem (85.4%) were effective against E. coli isolates. E. coli isolates from hospital environment has been shown to resist a number of antibiotics [13,34]. The 79.2% resistance to gentamycin recorded in our study disagrees with other findings [53] and [64] who reported 100% and 75% sensitivity of E. coli isolates to gentamycin respectively.…”

“…On the other hand, the isolate showed resistance to macrolides (Erythromycin), aminoglycosides (Amikacin and Gentamycin), and β-Lactams (Augumentin) at 57.1%, 42.9%, 42.9% and 42.9% respectively. Resistance of Enterobacter sp to macrolides, aminoglycosides and β-Lactams has previously been reported [48,57,34]. Resistance of Enterobacter sp as observed above may be mediated by the production β-Lactamses [58].…”

“…Multiple drug resistance to many available antibiotics including fluoroquinolones and carbapenems have been demonstrated against Enterobacteriaceae isolated from Calabar metropolis [34,35]. The production of extended β-Lactamases among Enterobacteriaceae groups, which impede the potencies of ESBL drugs has generated global concern [3,36].…”