Search

A rich store of detailed information about antimicrobial resistance is at each medical center in paper files inaccessible to analysis or in electronic files too diverse to support a common analytical software. WHONET puts that information on a personal computer at each center in a file code and format that is the same at all centers, so that one software can then fully analyze the files at any center or those merged from many centers. The software monitors the complex matrix of interrelationships between all the measurements of resistance to antimicrobials of tested isolates of each species and of control strains. Differences at a center over time or between centers reflect differences in test performance or in the prevalence of specific resistant strains, which may be tracked. The software helps workers who are knowledgeable about resistance, infection control and clinical use of antimicrobials at any center to control test quality and integrate the management of resistance there. Their ongoing monitoring and experience locally also builds the quality and interpretation of the files merged from many centers.

The objectives of this United States Consensus Panel meeting were to evaluate the effectiveness of current surveillance systems for the detection of bacterial resistance as well as to formulate recommendations that can assist hospitals in determining actions that should be taken when a resistance problem is detected. These recommendations may be particularly helpful in controlling the emergence and spread of type-I beta-lactamase resistance. Numerous case reports of antimicrobial resistance among Enterobacter species, Pseudomonas aeruginosa, and other Gram-negative nosocomial pathogens known to produce type-I beta-lactamases have appeared in the literature since the introduction of the newer "third-generation" cephalosporins. The widespread use of these newer antimicrobial agents, often selected as standard therapy for serious hospital-acquired infections, has been associated with a corresponding increase in resistance to them. The failure of hospitalwide surveillance methods to describe the scope of this problem, especially among the most critically ill patients, may have resulted in a false sense of security among some infectious disease specialists and clinicians prescribing these antimicrobials as empiric therapy. High-level resistance in individual hospital units may be masked in hospitalwide antibiograms. A variety of conclusions and recommendations were formulated based on the collective experiences of the Consensus Panel members. Microbiology laboratories must make it a high priority to identify markers that will assist in rapidly identifying resistant organisms. Cooperative efforts are needed among users of commercial and automated microbiology test instruments to standardize results and to improve quality control, thereby making the data more directly comparable between laboratories.(ABSTRACT TRUNCATED AT 250 WORDS)

The sizes of the zones of inhibition around routinely tested antibiotic disks classified gentamicin-resistant isolates of Klebsiella pneumoniae from one hospital into four major antibiotype classes. From each isolate of the prevalent class (A1), two plasmids could be transferred conjugally. One carried genes for resistance to tetracycline, sulfonamides, and chloramphenicol, and for the SHV beta lactamase. The other carried genes for two aminoglycoside-inactivating enzymes, APH (3')-I and AAC (3)-III, for the TEM 1 beta lactamase, and for resistance to sulfonamides. Transconjugants of either plasmid from any A1 isolate yielded the same DNA fragments after restriction endonuclease digestion, but the two plasmids had no fragments in common. Fragments or genes from either plasmid were variously combined or lacking in plasmids from variant isolates (A2, A3, and A4). Plasmids transferable from isolates of classes B and C shared no common DNA restriction fragments with each other or with either plasmid from Class A. Fragments and genes of the plasmids from C isolates, however, were identical with those of a plasmid endemic in a nearby hospital. Routine monitoring by diagnostic microbiology laboratories of distinctive antibiotypes and of the plasmids that produce them would aid infection control and antibiotic usage policy.