<i>Streptococcus pneumoniae </i>serotype specific anti-microbial susceptibility profiles among PCV-10 vaccinated and unvaccinated children attending Gertrude’s Children’s Hospital: a cross-sectional study

Michael Walekhwa; Margaret Muturi; Eucharia Kenya; Beatrice Kabera

doi:10.12688/f1000research.20486.1

Home Browse Streptococcus pneumoniae serotype specific anti-microbial susceptibility...

ALL Metrics

-

Views

-

Downloads

Get PDF

Get XML

Export

▬

✚

Research Article

Streptococcus pneumoniae serotype specific anti-microbial susceptibility profiles among PCV-10 vaccinated and unvaccinated children attending Gertrude’s Children’s Hospital: a cross-sectional study

[version 1; peer review: 2 approved with reservations]

Michael Walekhwa ¹, Margaret Muturi², Eucharia Kenya³, Beatrice Kabera⁴

PUBLISHED 27 Sep 2019

Author details Author details

¹ Department of Biomedical Sciences, Kabarak University, Nakuru, Kenya, +254, Kenya
² Department of Medical Laboratory Sciences, Kenyatta University, Nairobi, Kenya, +254, Kenya
³ Department of Biological Sciences, University of Embu, Embu, Kenya, +254, Kenya
⁴ Department of Pathology & Laboratory Sciences, Gertrudes Children's Hospital, Nairobi, Kenya, +254, Kenya

Michael Walekhwa
Roles: Conceptualization, Data Curation, Formal Analysis, Funding Acquisition, Investigation, Methodology, Writing – Original Draft Preparation, Writing – Review & Editing

Margaret Muturi
Roles: Conceptualization, Methodology, Project Administration, Supervision

Eucharia Kenya
Roles: Funding Acquisition, Project Administration, Resources, Supervision

Beatrice Kabera
Roles: Investigation, Methodology, Resources, Supervision

OPEN PEER REVIEW

REVIEWER STATUS

This article is included in the Pathogens gateway.

This article is included in the Antimicrobial Resistance collection.

Abstract

Background: The spread of antimicrobial resistance threatens effective control and treatment of pneumococcal disease worldwide. In Kenya, an estimated one in every five children dies from pneumococcal disease every year. Of these, ≥50% are attributable to antibiotic resistance. Consequently, the WHO has recommended that continuous regional surveillance be done to detect early resistance to available antibiotics and make necessary changes. We therefore investigated antimicrobial susceptibility patterns of Streptococcus pneumoniae among PCV-10 vaccinated and unvaccinated children ≤5 years old at Gertrude's Children’s Hospital.
Methods: A 0.5 McFarland standard of freshly subcultured organisms were inoculated on Mueller–Hinton plates with 5% sheep blood agar. A standard disk dispenser was used to dispense various antibiotic disks on the Mueller–Hinton agar plate. Incubation was done overnight (20-24 hours) at 37^oC in 5% CO₂ and clearance zones read using a Vanier caliber. Antimicrobials tested included vancomycin (30µg, ≥17mm); erythromycin (15µg, ≥21mm); clindamycin (2µg, ≥19mm); oxacillin (1µg, ≥19mm) and ceftriaxone (1µg, ≥30mm).
Results: Thirty nine (92.86%) Streptococcus pneumoniae isolates were susceptible to erythromycin; 39 (92.86%) were susceptible to vancomycin; eight (19.86%) Streptococcus pneumoniae isolates were susceptible to oxacillin, while 34 (80.95%) were non-susceptible; 40 (95.24%) isolates were susceptible to clindamycin; and 24 (57.86%) isolates were susceptible to ceftriaxone, while 18 (42.86%) were non-susceptible. Children who attended daycare centers exhibited a four-fold significant risk of being resistant to ceftriaxone. All antibiotics studied were effective against Streptococcus pneumoniae except oxacillin and ceftriaxone, which exhibited high levels of non-susceptibility. Attendance of daycare centers, consumption of antibiotics two weeks prior to collection of sample and subject age were shown to be associated with an increased risk of Streptococcus pneumoniae being resistant to penicillins and ceftriaxone.
Conclusions: The law guiding use of antibiotics in Kenya should be meritoriously enforced to curb abuse of the available antibiotics.

Keywords

Streptococcus pneumoniae, Antimicrobial Resistance, Optochin, Kirby Bauer Test

Corresponding author: Michael Walekhwa

Competing interests: No competing interests were disclosed.

Grant information: The study was in part funded by the National Commission of Science Technology & Innovation (NACOSTI) Kenya [NACOSTI/RCD/ST&I/7TH CALL/PhD/148].
The funders had no role in study design, data collection and analysis, decision to publish, or preparation of the manuscript.

Copyright: © 2019 Walekhwa M et al. This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.

How to cite: Walekhwa M, Muturi M, Kenya E and Kabera B. Streptococcus pneumoniae serotype specific anti-microbial susceptibility profiles among PCV-10 vaccinated and unvaccinated children attending Gertrude’s Children’s Hospital: a cross-sectional study [version 1; peer review: 2 approved with reservations]. F1000Research 2019, 8:1699 (https://doi.org/10.12688/f1000research.20486.1) First published: 27 Sep 2019, 8:1699 (https://doi.org/10.12688/f1000research.20486.1) Latest published: 27 Sep 2019, 8:1699 (https://doi.org/10.12688/f1000research.20486.1)

Introduction

Globally, there is a growing concern over the burden of antimicrobial resistance (AMR) because it is presently estimated to account for more than 700,000 deaths per year worldwide (WHO, 2014). Hypothetically, studies have reported that if no appropriate measures are taken to arrest this unfortunate trend, AMR may cost up to 10 million lives and around US $100 trillion per year by 2050 (de Kraker et al., 2016). What is more appalling is that, contrary to some other health trepidations, AMR is a problem that concerns every country regardless of its level of income and development as resistant pathogens do not respect borders and jurisdictions (Cole, 2016).

Diverse forms of pneumococcal disease are rated among the highest vaccine preventable etiologies of child morbidity and mortality globally (Lowth, 2015). This is true despite availability of effective vaccines and antibiotic agents; it is therefore a matter of grave concern that Streptococcus pneumoniae is developing resistance to available antimicrobial agents. Paucity of quality and verifiable data on the pneumococci antimicrobial susceptibility profiles is a precursor for inadequate treatment guidelines, especially for countries that are still largely developing (Assamala, 2014). The gap in public health capacity is also an issue, given the changing resistance machineries and the emergence of multidrug-resistant Streptococcus pneumoniae that can only be detected through systematic screening in quality assured microbiology laboratories (O’Neill, 2016).

Overtime, there has been unswerving universal increase in antibiotic resistance by Streptococcus pneumoniae isolates, a trend that has made treatment options more challenging (Henriques-Normark & Tuomanen, 2013). The bacterium’s polysaccharide capsule is a major virulence factor (Mitchell & Mitchell, 2010). The bacterial serotype is determined on the basis of the capsule's antigenic features, which have also been expansively correlated with AMR patterns. Although Streptococcus pneumoniae antimicrobial resistance is a wide-reaching concern, low and middle income countries (LMICSs) are vulnerable to exceptional difficulties because substitute and/or effective therapeutic choices are either unattainable or too expensive for them to afford (Reardon, 2014). Experiential prescription of antibiotics for treatment of various forms of pneumococcal disease without data on antimicrobial susceptibility profiles is a very common practice, especially in Africa (Feldman & Anderson, 2016). Purchase of antibiotics over the counter and failing to comply with rules of antibiotic consumption and/or use significantly augments occurrence of AMR in Kenya (Donkor & Badoe, 2014). Unregulated and illicit hawking of major antibiotics at bus-stops by unlicensed persons and back-street manufacturing of counterfeit antimicrobial agents contribute majorly to pneumococci AMR (Laxminarayan et al., 2013).

The end result of ‘abuse’ of antimicrobial agents meant for treatment of Streptococcus pneumoniae infections is apparent; the pneumococcus has connivingly developed resistance to novel antibiotic agents (Ventola, 2015). Since the rates of Streptococcus pneumoniae AMR vary on the basis of geographic location, time, age, and site of infection, AMR surveillance must be incessant and guidelines be derived from local AMR data (Feldman & Anderson, 2016). As AMR impinges on the quality of patient care, concerted efforts must be made to understand the best way to circumvent it. To treat various forms of pneumococcal disease, antibiotics are the most commonly prescribed drugs in hospitals. Judicious use of antimicrobial agents is therefore one of the major avenues that can be employed to arrest the worrying trend of AMR.

An audit of Streptococcus pneumoniae antibiotic susceptibility patterns is imperative in the execution of a lucid and pragmatic antibiotic strategy. We therefore sought to analyze antimicrobial resistance profiles to commonly used antibiotics meant for treatment of pneumococcal disease among children ≤5 years in Nairobi County.

Methods

This was a descriptive cross-sectional study. Streptococcus pneumoniae anti-microbial susceptibility patterns among PCV-10 vaccinated and unvaccinated children below five years of age were measured between May 2017 to February 2018.

Ethical statement

Ethical approval for this study was given by the Kenyatta University Ethics Review Committee {KU/ERC/APPROVAL/VOLUME.1 (12)} and permission to carry out the study obtained from the National Commission of Science Technology and Innovation (NACOSTI/P/17/65428/15801). Gertrude's Children’s Hospital (GCH) research committee issued permission for the study to be conducted at the GCH outpatient clinic (GCH/ERB/VOLMMXVII/121). Biological mothers and/or legal guardians to eligible study subjects were approached to sign a written informed consent to allow their children participate in the study; this was done after reading and having the study explained to them. Participation in the study was completely on voluntary terms.

Study location

This study was conducted among children attending GCH, Nairobi County. GCH is the leading stand-alone hospital in East and Central Africa specializing in pediatric care. The hospital is accredited by the Joint Commission International (JCA). Streptococcus pneumoniae laboratory isolation, disk diffusion for AMR profiling and isolate stocking was done at the GCH main laboratory, while Streptococcus pneumoniae serotyping was done at KEMRI Wellcome Trust, Kilifi.

Study population

To take part in this study, biological mothers and/or legal guardians were approached at the GCH outpatient clinic when they brought their children for medical attention. For inclusion in this study, the subject was required to: be at most five years of age; be a resident of either Nairobi or Kiambu Counties; have been vaccinated with either three doses of PCV-10 or none (any child who had received less than three doses was considered ineligible); not be consuming any antibiotics at the time of the study; be clinically diagnosed by a physician at the site as having some form of pneumococcal disease; and the parent or guardian needed to voluntarily sign an informed consent form. Subjects who had known HIV/AIDS infection or had any immunosuppressive conditions were excluded from the study.

Sample size determination

To determine the minimum sample size, the Fisher’s formula (1998) was used, with a prevalence rate of 16% (Tuti et al., 2017) being the current occurrence rate of pneumococcal disease in Kenya.

n = \frac{z^{2} \hat{p} (1 - \hat{p})}{m^{2}}

Where: n = desired minimal sample size; z = standard normal deviation = 1.96 (from the tailed normal table); $\hat{p}$ = prevalence rate; and m = desired degree of accuracy at 95% confidence level = 0.05. n = 1.96² x 0.16 (1-0.16) / 0.05² = 206; therefore, n = 206.

Sociodemographic characteristics

A standardized questionnaire was used to collect data on the subjects’ sociodemographic features. The characteristics assessed included whether the child attended daycare or not, exposure to both cigarette and cooking smoke, breastfeeding frequency during the first six months after birth (classified as: none, meaning the child was never breastfed at all; moderate, meaning the child partially breastfed and partially given other food; and exclusive, meaning the child was entirely dependent on breast-milk), child’s age and PCV-10 immunization status.

Isolation and identification of Streptococcus pneumoniae

Nasopharyngeal swabs collected using flocked cotton swabs (Copan) were the specimen of choice for this study. All swabs were initially suspended in Amies Media and transported to the laboratory within three hours of collection. Each swab was inoculated onto a selective gentamicin blood agar (GBA) enriched with 5% sheep blood. The plates were incubated at 37°C in 5% CO₂ and examined at 16–24 hours and then again at 40–48 hours for growth of Streptococcus pneumoniae.

Isolates were identified as Streptococcus pneumoniae on the basis of colony morphology (mucoid, draughtsman's appearance, α-haemolysis), susceptibility to optochin (ethyl hydrocupreine hydrochloride) and, where necessary, solubility in bile salts (desoxycholate salts). The isolation of a single colony indicated nasopharyngeal carriage.

Optochin sensitivity test

All colonies on GBA plates demonstrating Streptococcus pneumoniae characteristics were evenly inoculated on plain blood agar (BA) plates. This was done using a sterile inoculating loop. An optochin disk was aseptically placed on the preparation using a sterile antibiotic dispenser and incubated for 24–48 hours at 37°C in 5% CO₂ atmosphere. After 24–48 hours, a clearance zone of ≥14mm around the optochin disk was a confirmation that the organism was Streptococcus pneumoniae. Plates with clearance zones <14mm but ≥6mm were further subjected to a bile solubility test. Bile soluble stocks confirmed that the organism was Streptococcus pneumoniae.

Bile solubility test

Using a sterile cotton inoculating swab, Streptococcus pneumoniae colonies from the blood agar plate were added to 1.0ml of 0.85% saline solution to achieve 1.0 McFarland standard turbidity. The cell suspension was divided into two equal volumes of 0.5ml/tube. Then, 0.5 ml of 2% sodium desoxycholate solution (bile salts) were added to one tube and 0.5 ml of 0.85% saline solution to another tube. The two tubes were gently mixed and incubated for up to two hours at 37°C in 5% CO₂. The tubes were vortexed while observing for any clearance of turbidity within 10 minutes and subsequently checked until two hours later. Any clearance in the tube containing bile salts and not in the saline tube confirmed that the organism was Streptococcus pneumoniae.

Quellung reaction

Capsular serotyping was done using the Quellung reaction test according to (Habib et al., 2014). Frozen vials containing Streptococcus pneumoniae stocks stored at -70°C were thawed at room temperature for about 30 minutes. Next, 10µl of the stored Streptococcus pneumoniae cells were suspended in 50µl PBS and gently vortexed. Subsequently, 10µl of the suspended cells were added on to a glass slide and mixed with 10µl pooled antisera (Statens Serum Institute, cat. No.16744). The glass slide was swirled gently while observing for any agglutination reaction until a positive reaction was observed with various pooled antisera. The process was repeated with individual groups under various antisera pools. After that, 10µl of the suspended cells in PBS were added to a glass slide and mixed with various Streptococcus pneumoniae serotype-specific antisera included in the antisera pools that gave a positive reaction. This was done until a positive reaction with the particular serotype specific antisera was observed.

Those serotypes that did not belong to any pool were typed directly until a positive agglutination reaction was observed. The cells/PBS/serotype-specific antisera mixture on the glass slide were covered with a cover slip and observed under a phase contrast microscope with a ×400 objective lens with oil emulsion.

Disk diffusion method

Antimicrobial susceptibility testing (AST) was performed using the Kirby–Bauer disc diffusion method according to Clinical and Laboratory Standards Institute (CLSI) guideline (Hegstad et al., 2014). A 0.5 McFarland standard of freshly subcultured pneumococci organisms was inoculated on a 150 mm Mueller–Hinton plate with 5 % sheep blood (MH-BA). A standard disk dispenser was used to dispense the various antibiotic disks on the MH-BA agar (CLSI, 2004). Incubation was done overnight (20–24 hours) at 35°C in 5% CO₂ and various clearance zones read with the aid of a vernier caliber. Antimicrobial agents tested included vancomycin (30µg, ≥17mm), erythromycin (15µg, ≥21mm), clindamycin (2µg, ≥19mm), oxacillin (1µg, ≥19mm) and ceftriaxone (1µg, ≥30mm). Because of ambiguity caused by poorly resolved concentration gradient around disks containing cephalosporins, this method may not give accurate results for ceftriaxone.

Statistical analysis

Data were entered, cleaned and analyzed on SPSS version 22. Descriptive statistics were used to summarize socio-demographic and antibiotic susceptibility patterns of Streptococcus pneumoniae isolates.

Adjusted logistic regression was used to establish the strength of relationship between selected risk factors and susceptibility patterns of the selected antibiotic agents studied.

Results

A total of 206 subjects were recruited to participate in this study. It was found that 98% (n=202) of the subjects’ mothers/guardians were non-smokers as compared to 2% (n=4) who were smokers. About 96% (n=197) of the subjects did not share a household with an alcoholic, while 4% (n=9) did. Regarding housing, 55% (n=113) of the subjects lived in single rooms, 20% (n=42) lived in one-bedroom houses, 22% (n=46) lived in two-bedroom houses, while 2% (n=5) lived three or more bed roomed houses. It was found that 46% (n=94), 30% (n=62), 18% (n=38), 4% (n=9) and 1.5% (n=3) of the subjects cooked using gas, stove, charcoal, firewood and electricity, respectively. In addition, 75% (n=154) of the subjects’ households disposed of their waste in the public sewer system, 23% (n=47) disposed of their waste in private septic tanks and 2% (n=5) disposed of their waste using other undisclosed ways. The majority, 90% (n=185) of the subjects lived in households that used electricity as their source of light, while 5% (n=11) used traditional lamps, 2% (n=5) used candles for lighting, 1% (n=3) used solar energy and 0.49% (n=1) used lanterns. Within the two weeks preceding their visit to the clinic, 54% (n=112) of the subjects had consumed antibiotics, while 46% (n=94) had not. Daycare centers were not attended by 81% (n=167) of the subjects as compared to 19% (n=39) who did attend. Approximately 30% (n=61) of the subjects shared their households with three people other than their parents/guardians, 25% (n=52) shared with two other people, 18% (n=37) shared with one other person, 16% (n=33) shared with four other people, 6% (n=12) shared with five other people and 5% (n=10) shared with more than five other people. Lastly, 65% (n=133) of the subjects were exclusively breastfed, 35% (n=72) were moderately breastfed, while 0.49% (n=1) had never been breastfed (Table 1).

Table 1. Socio-economic Demographic Characteristics of PCV-10 Vaccinated and Unvaccinated Children Attending Gertrude’s Childrens Hospital.F

Characteristic	Description	n	%
Education level of mother
	Primary School	61	29.61
	Secondary School	88	42.72
	Tertiary College	38	18.45
	University	19	9.22
Mother's smoking status
	Smoker	4	1.94
	Non-smoker	202	98.06
Alcoholic in the house
	Yes	9	4.37
	No	197	95.63
Size of the house of residence
	Single room	113	54.85
	One bedroom	42	20.39
	Two bedrooms	46	22.33
	Three bedrooms	5	2.43
Cooking fuel
	Firewood	9	4.37
	Stove	62	30.1
	Charcoal	38	18.45
	Gas	94	45.63
	Electricity	3	1.5
Waste disposal method
	Public sewerage system	154	74.76
	Private septic tank	47	22.82
	Other	5	2.43
Source of light
	Candle	5	2.43
	Traditional lamp	11	5.34
	Lantern	1	0.49
	Solar	3	1.46
	Electricity	185	89.81
	Missing	1	0.49
Recent consumption of antibiotics (two weeks prior to study)
	Yes	112	54.37
	No	94	45.63
Attendance at day care center
	Yes	39	18.93
	No	167	81.07
No. of household occupants
	One	37	17.96
	Two	52	25.24
	Three	61	29.61
	Four	33	16.02
	Five	12	5.83
	≥ Five	10	4.85
Breast feeding type
	None	1	0.49
	Moderate	72	34.95
	Exclusive	133	64.56
Child’s weight at birth
	1.1-2.0 kgs	5	2.43
	2.1-3.0 kgs	6	2.91
	3.1-4.0 kgs	37	17.96
	4.1-5.0 kgs	158	76.7
Child immunization
	Yes	106	51.46
	No	100	48.54

n, total number of subjects per category from a total of 206; %, percentage of subjects per category.

From the 206 subjects recruited, a total of 42 pneumococci were isolated. Out of the 42 total Streptococcus pneumoniae isolates, 39 (92.86%) were susceptible to erythromycin and vancomycin, eight (19.86%) were susceptible to oxacillin, 40 (95.24%) were susceptible to clindamycin and 24 (57.86%) were susceptible to ceftriaxone (Table 2). All the eight (19.05%) isolates of serotype 28F were susceptible to erythromycin, vancomycin and clindamycin; one isolate (2.38%) was susceptible to oxacillin and three (7.14%) were susceptible to ceftriaxone. All the five (11.9%) isolates of serotype 6A were susceptible to erythromycin; four (9.52%) were susceptible to vancomycin, one (2.38%) was susceptible to oxacillin, four (9.52%) were susceptible to clindamycin and two (4.76%) were susceptible to ceftriaxone.

Table 2. Susceptibility of Streptococcus pneumoniae isolates to various antimicrobial agents among PCV10 Vaccinated and Unvaccinated Attending Gertrude’s Childrens Hospital.

Antimicrobial agent	n=42	Percent (%)
Erythromycin
Sensitive	39	92.86
Resistant	3	7.14
Vancomycin
Sensitive	39	92.86
Resistant	3	7.14
Oxacillin
Sensitive	8	19.05
Resistant	34	80.95
Clindamycin
Sensitive	40	95.24
Resistant	2	4.76
Ceftriaxone
Sensitive	24	57.86
Resistant	18	42.86

The table above summarises the susceptibility of Streptococcus pneumoniae to various antibiotic agents at different concentrations. Vancomycin (30µg, ≥17mm); erythromycin (15µg, ≥21mm); clindamycin (2µg, ≥19mm); oxacillin (1µg, ≥19mm) and cetriaxone (1µg, ≥30mm) (CLSI, 2017).

Isolates from serotypes 13, 15B, 21, 35B, 35F, 39, 48 and untypeable were susceptible to erythromycin, vancomycin, clindamycin and ceftriaxone but were non-susceptible to oxacillin, except serotype 21 and untypeable. Isolates from serotypes 3, 23A, 23B, 20, 11A, 17F, 19B and 7C were susceptible to erythromycin, vancomycin and clindamycin. Serotypes 3, 23A and 11A were resistant to erythromycin and serotypes 11A and 7C were resistant to vancomycin. Serotypes 3, 23A, 23B, 20, 17F, 19B and 7C were non-susceptible to oxacillin. Serotype 17F was resistant to clindamycin, while serotypes 3, 23B, 11A, 17F and 7C were resistant to ceftriaxone (Table 3).

Table 3. Streptococcus pneumoniae serotype susceptibilities to various antimicrobial agents among PCV-10 Vaccinated and Unvaccinated Children Attending Gertrude’s Childrens Hospital.

Serotype	Erythromycin, n (%)		Vancomycin, n (%)		Oxacillin, n (%)		Clindamycin, n (%)		Ceftriaxone, n (%)
Serotype	Resistant	Sensitive	Resistant	Sensitive	Resistant	Sensitive	Resistant	Sensitive	Resistant	Sensitive
28F	0	8 (19.05)	0	8 (19.05)	7 (16.67)	1 (2.38)	0	8 (19.05)	5 (11.9)	3 (7.14)
6A	0	5 (11.90)	1 (2.38)	4 (9.52)	4 (9.52)	1 (2.38)	1 (2.38)	4 (9.52)	3 (7.14)	2 (4.76)
3	1 (2.38)	3 (7.14)	0	4 (9.52)	4 (9.52)	0	0	4 (9.52)	2 (4.76)	2 (4.76)
23A	1 (2.38)	2 (4.76)	0	3 (7.14	3 (7.14	0	0	3 (7.14	0	3 (7.14
23B	0	3 (7.14)	0	3 (7.14	2 (4.76)	1 (2.38)	0	3 (7.14	2 (4.76)	1 (2.38)
20	0	3 (7.14)	0	3 (7.14	2 (4.76)	1 (2.38)	0	3 (7.14	0	3 (7.14
11A	1 (2.38)	1 (2.38)	1 (2.38)	1 (2.38)	2 (4.76)	0	0	2 (4.76)	1 (2.38)	1 (2.38)
17F	0	2 (4.76)	0	2 (4.76)	1 (2.38)	1 (2.38)	1 (2.38)	1 (2.38)	2 (4.76)	0
19B	0	2 (4.76)	0	2 (4.76)	1 (2.38)	1 (2.38)	0	2 (4.76)	1 (2.38)	1 (2.38)
7C	0	2 (4.76)	1 (2.38)	1 (2.38)	2 (4.76)	0	0	2 (4.76)	1 (2.38)	1 (2.38)
13	0	1 (2.38)	0	1 (2.38)	1 (2.38)	0	0	1 (2.38)	0	1 (2.38)
15B	0	1 (2.38)	0	1 (2.38)	1 (2.38)	0	0	1 (2.38)	0	1 (2.38)
21	0	1 (2.38)	0	1 (2.38)	0	1 (2.38)	0	1 (2.38)	0	1 (2.38)
35B	0	1 (2.38)	0	1 (2.38)	1 (2.38)	0	0	1 (2.38)	0	1 (2.38)
35F	0	1 (2.38)	0	1 (2.38)	1 (2.38)	0	0	1 (2.38)	0	1 (2.38)
39	0	1 (2.38)	0	1 (2.38)	1 (2.38)	0	0	1 (2.38)	0	1 (2.38)
48	0	1 (2.38)	0	1 (2.38)	0	1 (2.38)	0	1 (2.38)	0	1 (2.38)
Untypeable	0	1 (2.38)	0	1 (2.38)	1 (2.38)	0	0	1 (2.38)	1 (2.38)	0

The table above shows Streptococcus pneumoniae serotypes susceptibility profiles to selected antimicrobial agents. The antimicrobial agents are vancomycin (30µg, ≥17mm), erythromycin (15µg, ≥21mm), clindamycin (2µg, ≥19mm), oxacillin (1µg, ≥19mm) and cetriaxone (1µg, ≥30mm).

Compared with males, Streptococcus pneumoniae isolated from female subjects were more likely to be resistant to erythromycin (OR 1.94; CI 0.23, 16.10) but odds of being resistant to vancomycin, oxacillin, clindamycin and ceftriaxone decreased when the subject was female: OR 0.14 (95% CI 0.01, 2.81), OR 0.51 (95% CI 0.11, 2.26), OR 0.51 (95% CI 0.11, 2.26), OR 0.2 (95% CI 0.01, 4.43) and OR 0.56 (95% CI 0.17, 1.86), respectively. The odds of being resistant to erythromycin, vancomycin, oxacillin, clindamycin and ceftriaxone decreased when the subject was aged 13–24 months, 25–36 months and 37–48 months old, but the odds increased when the subject was aged 49–60 months old. The odds of being resistant to erythromycin, vancomycin, oxacillin and clindamycin increased when the subjects had consumed antibiotics two weeks prior to the study. However, the odds of being resistant to ceftriaxone decreased. The odds of being resistant to the tested range of antimicrobial agents decreased when the subjects had had none, moderate and exclusive breastfeeding types with the exception of oxacillin whose odds of resistance increased when the subjects had had moderate breastfeeding. Odds of being resistant to the tested antimicrobial agents decreased when the subjects had received a full dose of PCV-10, except for vancomycin and ceftriaxone whose odds of resistance increased when the subjects had received a full dose of PCV-10. The odds of being resistant to the tested antimicrobial agents significantly increased when the subjects had been attending daycare centers (Table 4).

Table 4. Effect of Selected Risk Factors on Streptococcus Pneumoniae Susceptibility to Various Antimicrobial Agents among PCV-10 Vaccinated and Unvaccinated Children Attending Getrudes Children’s Hospital

Risk factor	Erythromycin		Vancomycin		Oxacillin		Clindamycin		Ceftriaxone
Risk factor	OR (95% CI)	p-value	OR (95% CI)	p-value	OR (95% CI)	p-value	OR (95% CI)	p-value	OR (95% CI)	p-value
Gender
Male	1		1		1		1		1
Female	1.94 (0.23, 16.10)	0.541	0.14 (0.01,2.81)	0.196	0.51 (0.11,2.26)	0.372	0.2 (0.01,4.43)	0.308	0.56 (0.17,1.86)	0.341
Age (months)
6–12	1		1		1		1		1
13–24	0.34 (0.01, 7.98)	0.504	0.34 (0.01,7.98)	0.504	0.25 (0.03,2.32)	0.224	2.07 (0.18,23.36)	0.557	0.3 (0.05,1.74)	0.181
25–36	0.76 (0.09, 6.61)	0.801	0.76 (0.09,6.61)	0.801	0.26 (0.03,2.09)	0.207	0.41 (0.02,11.05)	0.598	0.58 (0.13,2.49)	0.463
37–48	0.64 (0.03, 16.05)	0.789	0.64 (0.03,16.05)	0.789	0.23 (0.02,2.87)	0.251	1.15 (0.04,33.33)	0.936	0.34 (0.04,2.87)	0.321
49–60	1.16 (0.04, 32.08)	0.930	1.16 (0.04,32.08)	0.93	0.1 (0.01,1.62)	0.104	2.07 (0.06,66.3)	0.682	0.79 (0.07,9.22)	0.85
Recent use of antibiotics (two weeks)
No	1		1		1		1		1
Yes	1.30 (0.16, 10.78)	0.810	1.3 (0.16,10.78)	0.81	0.8 (0.18,3.58)	0.771	4.11 (0.19,91.08)	0.371	0.89 (0.27,2.98)	0.856
Breast feeding type
None	1		1		1		1		0.42 (0.01, 11.92)	0.613
Moderate	0.09 (0.00, 6.45)	0.270	0.78 (0.03, 23.53)	0.885	1.93 (0.06, 62.17)	0.71	0.29 (0.01, 10.76)	0.502	0.16 (0.01, 4.41)	0.28
Exclusive	0.47 (0.02, 13.89)	0.660	0.06 (0, 4.13)	0.192	1 (0.04, 27.7)	1	0.18 (0.01, 6.72)	0.356
PCV-10 immunization
No	1		1		1		1		1
Yes	0.52 (0.06, 4.29)	0.541	1.59 (0.19,13.17)	0.67	0.64 (0.14,2.84)	0.553	0.16 (0.01,3.64)	0.253	1.24 (0.37,4.09)	0.729
Day care attendance
No	1		1		1		1		1
Yes	1.69 (0.20, 14.37)	0.633	5.35 (0.62,45.99)	0.126	2.14 (0.32,14.27)	0.431	2.9 (0.27,31.05)	0.378	4.97 (1.17,21.14)	0.03

Odds ratio (OR)=1: exposure does not affect odds of outcome; OR>1: exposure associated with higher odds of outcome; OR<1: exposure associated with lower rates of outcome. Confidence intervals (CI) are used to estimate the precision of the OR. The higher the CI the lower the precision of the OR and the lower the CI the higher the precision of the OR. P-value is a measure of the significance level of the exposure.

Discussion

Antimicrobial resistance is a major global public health hazard in the waiting lounge. Infections that are resistant to antibiotics are often hard to treat, the cost of managing them is much higher and they generally pose more stress on families’ finances. Its envisaged that by 2050, general global mortality due to antimicrobial resistance will be at 10 million people annually (de Kraker et al., 2016); Streptococcus pneumoniae is likely to be one of the major culprits, the need for its earlier containment has never been more urgent.

The WHO (2014) recommends the use of penicillins as the first line of antibiotic therapy for treatment of pneumococcal disease and; clindamycin, erythromycin, vancomycin and cephalosporins as alternative antibiotic interventions. In the current study, most (93%, n=39) of the Streptococcus pneumoniae isolates were sensitive to erythromycin and vancomycin. Erythromycin and vancomycin act by inhibiting protein synthesis and development of the cell wall in the target bacteria (Tenson et al., 2003). Streptococcus pneumoniae tolerance to erythromycin and vancomycin can be attributed to the previous irregular exposure to the drug agents (Tenson et al., 1997).

However, in the current study, the number of erythromycin and vancomycin tolerant Streptococcus pneumoniae is almost medically insignificant as compared to previous studies, which reported that rates of nasopharyngeal Streptococcus pneumoniae susceptibility to erythromycin and vancomycin were even higher among healthy preschool children in Vilnius (90.4 and 98 % in 2006, respectively) (Heelan et al., 2004).

About 19% (n=8) of the Streptococcus pneumoniae isolates were susceptible to oxacillin. Being an antibiotic in the penicillin group of drugs, it is expected that it will be one of the most prescribed and irregularly used on the local market. The current results are similar to those observed among non-invasive Streptococcus pneumoniae strains in pediatric populations in Poland and Russia where only 29.5% to 29.2% and 16.7% to 19.3% of the isolates in these respective countries were susceptible to penicillins over a period of two consecutive years (Albrich et al., 2004; Mayanskiy et al., 2014) before routine PCV vaccination. What is common in both scenarios is that with poorly enforced National Antibiotic Use Plans (NAUP), the general population is predisposed to purchase of antibiotics over the counter without valid a physician’s prescription, effectively exposing the general populace to the dangers of resistant pneumococcal infections. This, coupled up with failure to consume the correct regimen, results in antibiotic selection pressure, which consequently brings forth resistant strains that are then horizontally spread across the population (Neu, 1992). This would explain the unexpected high resistance levels of Streptococcus pneumoniae serotypes to oxacillin. These results are consistent with those of Bronzwaer et al. (2002), who reported increased (53%, n=115) antibiotic failure, especially to different derivatives of penicillins.

High levels of sensitivity and tolerance to clindamycin and ceftriaxone agree with findings by scientists at the St. Jude Children’s Research Hospital, who demonstrated that clindamycin and azithromycin, which kill bacteria by inhibiting protein synthesis, are more effective than a standard first-line treatment with the beta-lactam antibiotic ampicillin, which causes the bacteria to lyse, or burst (Sutcliffe et al., 1996).

Clindamycin is especially recommended for Streptococcus pneumoniae treatment because of its spectrum of activity includes group A streptococci (Puopolo et al., 2007). Usually, it is reserved for cases of Streptococcus pneumoniae with high resistance to penicillins and/or cases of subjects being allergic to first line antibiotic therapies (Karlström et al., 2009). The high level of ceftriaxone tolerant Streptococcus pneumoniae (CT- Streptococcus pneumoniae) observed in this study is concerning. This is because broad spectrum cephalosporins like ceftriaxone are recommended for invasive pneumococcal disease in cases where other first line antibiotics have failed (Molyneux et al., 2011). Resistance would only be expected in cases where the subjects had been inappropriately exposed to other cephalosporins as the first line of therapy (Von Mollendorf et al., 2014). Resistance to penicillins has also been reported to have a nexus with resistance to cephalosporins as they both target the beta-lactam ring of the bacteria (Drawz & Bonomo, 2010). Irregular and non-prescribed purchase of antibiotics at local pharmacies and shops may be the other culprits behind these unfortunate findings.

Pneumococcal resistance to ceftriaxone was found to be high (up to 66–67%) in Estonia (Tadesse et al., 2017) and Romania, while the rates were lower in Norway (4.6%) (Steens et al., 2015), the Netherlands (12.9%) (Voets et al., 2012) and the Czech Republic (15.7 %) (Zemlickova et al., 2010). Streptococcus pneumoniae has over 90 serotypes belonging to different groups according to their capsular polysaccharides and the degree of cross-reactivity (Hathaway et al., 2012). The various Streptococcus pneumoniae serotypes behave differently when exposed to different antibiotic agents (Reinert, 2009). In this study, seven serotype 28F strains out of eight were tolerant to oxacillin, while only three were sensitive to ceftriaxone. Oxacillin, which is a penicillin, is normally given as a first line of treatment for the various forms of pneumococcal disease infections and ceftriaxone is a broad spectrum antibiotic normally given after penicillin has failed (File, 2006). The mode of resistance to the two antimicrobial agents is shared to some extent as both involve the use of a four atom beta-lactam ring (Kong et al., 2010). As such, resistance in one is likely to influence resistance in another. Inappropriate exposure to one or both of these agents prior to the collection of the study samples may explain the high resistance levels in both.

Most strains of serotypes 6A, 3, 23A, 23B, 20, 11A and 17 were oxacillin and ceftriaxone tolerant but highly susceptible to erythromycin, vancomycin and clindamycin. These results agree with findings from a previous study by Liñares et al. (2010), who demonstrated Streptococcus pneumoniae serotype susceptibility patterns to different antibiotics and intimated that serotype 28F and 6A are susceptible to erythromycin, vancomycin and clindamycin but highly resistant to penicillin and ceftriaxone. Serotypes 19A, 7C, 13, 15B, 21, 35B, 35F, 39, 48, and the untypeable Streptococcus pneumoniae were highly intolerant to erythromycin, clindamycin, vancomycin, oxacillin and ceftriaxone. While most Streptococcus pneumoniae serotypes in this study were susceptible to majority of the antimicrobials studied, resistance to oxacillin and ceftriaxone was clinically significant and largely worrying. A similar study examined antibiotic susceptibility of non-invasive Streptococcus pneumoniae in children aged less than six years with signs of an acute respiratory tract infection in Moscow, Russia. Non-susceptibility to penicillin, erythromycin and MDR was found in 28%, 26% and 22% of pneumococcal strains, respectively (Mayanskiy et al., 2014).

The slightly lower rates of Streptococcus pneumoniae resistance may be due to the enrolment of both vaccinated unvaccinated children and differences in the enactment and implementation of the antibiotic use/consumption policies. Although none of the risk factors had a significant influence on the Streptococcus pneumoniae nasopharyngeal carriage, odds demonstrated that age, gender, recent consumption of antibiotics by subjects, attendance at daycare centers, breast-feeding type and vaccination status had a bearing on the effectiveness of antibiotics. For instance, being female and young increased the subject’s susceptibility to erythromycin tolerance, while decreasing susceptibility to vancomycin, clindamycin, ceftriaxone and oxacillin. Children exposed to antibiotics within the two weeks prior to sample collection and PCV-10 unvaccinated children had increased odds of being resistant to all the antibiotics studied. Breastfeeding type, attendance at day-care centers and PCV-10 vaccination status play a major role in antibiotic susceptibility according to the findings of this study.

With the exception of oxacillin, the odds of Streptococcus pneumoniae being resistant to clindamycin, vancomycin, erythromycin, ceftriaxone decreased when subjects had been moderately or exclusively breastfed. According to Lynch & Zhanel (2009), due to the likelihood of horizontal transfer of Streptococcus pneumoniae resistant genes within a community, subjects who attended daycare centers and had not received PCV-10 immunization had increased chances of being resistant to all the sampled antibiotics. These results are consistent with findings from Lynch & Zhanel (2010) who postulated that age, PCV7 vaccination, attendance at day care or school, previous respiratory infection and non-susceptibility to penicillin were significantly or insignificantly associated with antibiotic resistance. While some of the results may not have strong research significance, they pose significant clinical concerns.

Data availability

This project contains the following underlying data:

Name of Repository: Harvard dataverse

Data Name: Streptococcus Pneumoniae Serotype Epidemiology, Antibiotic Susceptibility Profiles and Associated Risk Factors among Children Attending Getrudes Children’s Hospital

DOI: https://doi.org/10.7910/DVN/VDMKS2 (Walekhwa, 2019)

Extended data

This project contains the following extended data:

Questionnaire

Acknowledgements

Special thanks to Ms. Angela Karani of Kemri Wellcome Trust, Kilifi for her professional input. The laboratory and technical team: Ann Karanu, Elizabeth Mbithe, Shadrack Mutua and Alfred Too. Your technical input was amazing! The Gertrude's Hospital clinical and laboratory team (Linet Okose, Barasa Kasili, Charles Muia, Lilive Njagi, Carolyne Thumbi, and Peninah Chege) you made this possible. Thanks to Japheth Wambani Rapando for the review of my work.

F1000 recommended

References

Albrich WC, Monnet DL, Harbarth S: Antibiotic selection pressure and resistance in Streptococcus pneumoniae and Streptococcus pyogenes. Emerg Infect Dis. 2004; 10(3): 514–517. PubMed Abstract | Publisher Full Text | Free Full Text
Assamala: African Regional Health Report 2014. World Health Organisation. 2014; 187. Reference Source
Bronzwaer SL, Cars O, Buchholz U, et al.: A European study on the relationship between antimicrobial use and antimicrobial resistance. Emerg Infect Dis. 2002; 8(3): 278–282. PubMed Abstract | Publisher Full Text | Free Full Text
CLSI: Performance Standards for Antimicrobial Disk and Dilution Susceptibility Tests for Bacteria Isolated from Animals; Approved Standard; Informational Supplement. Clinical and Laboratory Standards Institute. 2004. Reference Source
CLSI: Performance standards for antimicrobial susceptibility testing. 27th ed. CLSI supplement M100. Wayne, PA: Clinical and Laboratory Standards Institute. Performance standards for antimicrobial susceptibility testing. 27th ed. CLSI supplement M100. Wayne, PA: Clinical and Laboratory Standards Institute. 2017. Reference Source
Cole J: Antimicrobial resistance--a 'rising tide' of national (and international) risk. J Hosp Infect. 2016; 92(1): 3–4. PubMed Abstract | Publisher Full Text
de Kraker ME, Stewardson AJ, Harbarth S: Will 10 Million People Die a Year due to Antimicrobial Resistance by 2050? PLoS Med. 2016; 13(11): e1002184. PubMed Abstract | Publisher Full Text | Free Full Text
Donkor ES, Badoe EV: Insights into Pneumococcal Pathogenesis and Antibiotic Resistance. Adv Microbiol. 2014; 04(10): 627–643. Publisher Full Text
Drawz SM, Bonomo RA: Three decades of beta-lactamase inhibitors. Clin Microbiol Rev. 2010; 23(1): 160–201. PubMed Abstract | Publisher Full Text | Free Full Text
Feldman C, Anderson R: Epidemiology, virulence factors and management of the pneumococcus [version 1; peer review: 2 approved]. F1000Res. 2016; 5: 2320. PubMed Abstract | Publisher Full Text | Free Full Text
File TM Jr: Clinical implications and treatment of multiresistant Streptococcus pneumoniae pneumonia. Clin Microbiol Infect. 2006; 12 Suppl 3: 31–41. PubMed Abstract | Publisher Full Text
Habib M, Porter BD, Satzke C: Capsular serotyping of Streptococcus pneumoniae using the Quellung reaction. J Vis Exp. 2014; (84): e51208. PubMed Abstract | Publisher Full Text | Free Full Text
Hathaway LJ, Brugger SD, Morand B, et al.: Capsule type of Streptococcus pneumoniae determines growth phenotype. PLoS Pathog. 2012; 8(3): e1002574. PubMed Abstract | Publisher Full Text | Free Full Text
Heelan JS, Hasenbein ME, McAdam AJ: Resistance of group B streptococcus to selected antibiotics, including erythromycin and clindamycin. J Clin Microbiol. 2004; 42(3): 1263–4. PubMed Abstract | Publisher Full Text | Free Full Text
Hegstad K, Giske CG, Haldorsen B, et al.: Performance of the EUCAST disk diffusion method, the CLSI agar screen method, and the Vitek 2 automated antimicrobial susceptibility testing system for detection of clinical isolates of Enterococci with low- and medium-level VanB-type vancomycin resistance: a multicenter study. J Clin Microbiol. 2014; 52(5): 1582–1589. PubMed Abstract | Publisher Full Text | Free Full Text
Henriques-Normark B, Tuomanen EI: The pneumococcus: epidemiology, microbiology, and pathogenesis. Cold Spring Harb Perspect Med. 2013; 3(7): pii: a010215. PubMed Abstract | Publisher Full Text | Free Full Text
Karlström A, Boyd KL, English BK, et al.: Treatment with protein synthesis inhibitors improves outcomes of secondary bacterial pneumonia after influenza. J Infect Dis. 2009; 199(3): 311–9. PubMed Abstract | Publisher Full Text | Free Full Text
Kong KF, Schneper L, Mathee K: Beta-lactam antibiotics: from antibiosis to resistance and bacteriology. APMIS. 2010; 118(1): 1–36. PubMed Abstract | Publisher Full Text | Free Full Text
Laxminarayan R, Duse A, Wattal C, et al.: Antibiotic resistance-the need for global solutions. Lancet Infect Dis. 2013; 13(12): 1057–98. PubMed Abstract | Publisher Full Text
Liñares J, Ardanuy C, Pallares R, et al.: Changes in antimicrobial resistance, serotypes and genotypes in Streptococcus pneumoniae over a 30-year period. Clin Microbiol Infect. 2010; 16(5): 402–10. PubMed Abstract | Publisher Full Text
Lowth M: Pneumococcal disease. Practice Nurse. 2015. Reference Source
Lynch JP 3rd, Zhanel GG: Streptococcus pneumoniae: does antimicrobial resistance matter? Semin Respir Crit Care Med. 2009; 30(2): 210–38. PubMed Abstract | Publisher Full Text
Lynch JP 3rd, Zhanel GG: Streptococcus pneumoniae: epidemiology and risk factors, evolution of antimicrobial resistance, and impact of vaccines. Curr Opin Pulm Med. 2010; 16(3): 217–25. PubMed Abstract
Mayanskiy N, Alyabieva N, Ponomarenko O, et al.: Serotypes and antibiotic resistance of non-invasive Streptococcus pneumoniae circulating in pediatric hospitals in Moscow, Russia. Int J Infect Dis. 2014; 20: 58–62. PubMed Abstract | Publisher Full Text
Mitchell AM, Mitchell TJ: Streptococcus pneumoniae: virulence factors and variation. Clin Microbiol Infect. 2010; 16(5): 411–8. PubMed Abstract | Publisher Full Text
Von Mollendorf C, Cohen C, de Gouveia L, et al.: Factors associated with ceftriaxone nonsusceptibility of streptococcus pneumoniae: analysis of south african national surveillance data, 2003 to 2010. Antimicrob Agents Chemother. 2014; 58(6): 3293–305. PubMed Abstract | Publisher Full Text | Free Full Text
Molyneux E, Nizami SQ, Saha S, et al.: 5 versus 10 days of treatment with ceftriaxone for bacterial meningitis in children: a double-blind randomised equivalence study. Lancet. 2011; 377(9780): 1837–45. PubMed Abstract | Publisher Full Text
Neu HC: The crisis in antibiotic resistance. Science. 1992; 257(5073): 1064–73. PubMed Abstract | Publisher Full Text
O’Neill J: Tackling drug-resistant infections globally: final report and recommendations. The Review on Antimicrobial Resistance. 2016; 84. Reference Source
Puopolo KM, Klinzing DC, Lin MP, et al.: A composite transposon associated with erythromycin and clindamycin resistance in group B Streptococcus. J Med Microbiol. 2007; 56(Pt 7): 947–55. PubMed Abstract | Publisher Full Text
Reardon S: Antibiotic resistance sweeping developing world. Nature. 2014; 509(7499): 141–2. PubMed Abstract | Publisher Full Text
Reinert RR: The antimicrobial resistance profile of Streptococcus pneumoniae. Clin Microbiol Infect. 2009; 15 Suppl 3: 7–11. PubMed Abstract | Publisher Full Text
Steens A, Caugant DA, Aaberge IS, et al.: Decreased Carriage and Genetic Shifts in the Streptococcus pneumoniae Population After Changing the Seven-valent to the Thirteen-valent Pneumococcal Vaccine in Norway. Pediatr Infect Dis J. 2015; 34(8): 875–83. PubMed Abstract | Publisher Full Text
Sutcliffe J, Tait-Kamradt A, Wondrack L: Streptococcus pneumoniae and Streptococcus pyogenes resistant to macrolides but sensitive to clindamycin: a common resistance pattern mediated by an efflux system. Antimicrob Agents Chemother. 1996; 40(8): 1817–24. PubMed Abstract | Publisher Full Text | Free Full Text
Tadesse BT, Ashley EA, Ongarello S, et al.: Antimicrobial resistance in Africa: a systematic review. BMC Infect Dis. 2017; 17(1): 616. PubMed Abstract | Publisher Full Text | Free Full Text
Tenson T, Lovmar M, Ehrenberg M: The mechanism of action of macrolides, lincosamides and streptogramin B reveals the nascent peptide exit path in the ribosome. J Mol Biol. 2003; 330(5): 1005–14. PubMed Abstract | Publisher Full Text
Tenson T, Xiong L, Kloss P, et al.: Erythromycin resistance peptides selected from random peptide libraries. J Biol Chem. 1997; 272(28): 17425–30. PubMed Abstract | Publisher Full Text
Tuti T, Agweyu A, Mwaniki P, et al.: An exploration of mortality risk factors in non-severe pneumonia in children using clinical data from Kenya. BMC Med. 2017; 15(1): 201. PubMed Abstract | Publisher Full Text | Free Full Text
Ventola CL: The antibiotic resistance crisis: part 1: causes and threats. P T. 2015; 40(4): 277–283. PubMed Abstract | Free Full Text
Voets GM, Platteel TN, Fluit AC, et al.: Population distribution of Beta-lactamase conferring resistance to third-generation cephalosporins in human clinical Enterobacteriaceae in the Netherlands. PLoS One. 2012; 7(12): e52102. PubMed Abstract | Publisher Full Text | Free Full Text
Walekhwa M: Streptococcus pneumoniae SEROTYPE EPIDEMIOLOGY, ANTIBIOTIC SUSCEPTIBILITY PROFILES AND ASSOCIATED RISK FACTORS AMONG CHILDREN ATTENDING GERTRUDES CHILDREN’S HOSPITAL. Harvard Dataverse, V3, 2019. http://www.doi.org/10.7910/DVN/VDMKS2
WHO: Antimicrobial resistance. Global Report on Surveillance. Bull World Health Organ. 2014; 383–394. Reference Source
Zemlickova H, Jakubu V, Urbaskova P, et al.: Serotype-specific invasive disease potential of Streptococcus pneumoniae in Czech children. J Med Microbiol. 2010; 59(Pt 9): 1079–83. PubMed Abstract | Publisher Full Text

Comments on this article Comments (0)

Version 1

VERSION 1 PUBLISHED 27 Sep 2019

Author details Author details

¹ Department of Biomedical Sciences, Kabarak University, Nakuru, Kenya, +254, Kenya
² Department of Medical Laboratory Sciences, Kenyatta University, Nairobi, Kenya, +254, Kenya
³ Department of Biological Sciences, University of Embu, Embu, Kenya, +254, Kenya
⁴ Department of Pathology & Laboratory Sciences, Gertrudes Children's Hospital, Nairobi, Kenya, +254, Kenya

Michael Walekhwa
Roles: Conceptualization, Data Curation, Formal Analysis, Funding Acquisition, Investigation, Methodology, Writing – Original Draft Preparation, Writing – Review & Editing

Margaret Muturi
Roles: Conceptualization, Methodology, Project Administration, Supervision

Eucharia Kenya
Roles: Funding Acquisition, Project Administration, Resources, Supervision

Beatrice Kabera
Roles: Investigation, Methodology, Resources, Supervision

Competing interests

No competing interests were disclosed.

Grant information

The study was in part funded by the National Commission of Science Technology & Innovation (NACOSTI) Kenya [NACOSTI/RCD/ST&I/7TH CALL/PhD/148].
The funders had no role in study design, data collection and analysis, decision to publish, or preparation of the manuscript.

Article Versions (1)

version 1

Published: 27 Sep 2019, 8:1699

https://doi.org/10.12688/f1000research.20486.1

Copyright

© 2019 Walekhwa M et al. This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.

Download

Export To

metrics

	Views	Downloads
F1000Research	-	-
PubMed Central Data from PMC are received and updated monthly.	-	-

Citations

0

SEE MORE DETAILS

CITE

how to cite this article

Walekhwa M, Muturi M, Kenya E and Kabera B. Streptococcus pneumoniae serotype specific anti-microbial susceptibility profiles among PCV-10 vaccinated and unvaccinated children attending Gertrude’s Children’s Hospital: a cross-sectional study [version 1; peer review: 2 approved with reservations] F1000Research 2019, 8:1699 (https://doi.org/10.12688/f1000research.20486.1)

NOTE: it is important to ensure the information in square brackets after the title is included in all citations of this article.

track

receive updates on this article

Track an article to receive email alerts on any updates to this article.

Open Peer Review

Current Reviewer Status: ?

Key to Reviewer Statuses VIEW HIDE

ApprovedThe paper is scientifically sound in its current form and only minor, if any, improvements are suggested

Approved with reservations A number of small changes, sometimes more significant revisions are required to address specific details and improve the papers academic merit.

Not approvedFundamental flaws in the paper seriously undermine the findings and conclusions

Version 1

VERSION 1

PUBLISHED 27 Sep 2019

Views

2

Reviewer Report 10 Aug 2020

Izabela Korona-Glowniak, Department of Pharmaceutical Microbiology, University of Lublin, Chodzki, Lublin, Poland

Approved with Reservations

https://doi.org/10.5256/f1000research.22518.r66815

The manuscript deals with an interesting topic in the field of pneumococcal resistance epidemiology. The link between antibiotic use and the emergence of bacterial resistance has been clearly established and many studies have shown the increase in antibiotic resistance of ... Continue reading

The manuscript deals with an interesting topic in the field of pneumococcal resistance epidemiology. The link between antibiotic use and the emergence of bacterial resistance has been clearly established and many studies have shown the increase in antibiotic resistance of S. pneumoniae. Due to geographical diversity of S. pneumoniae resistance, which depends on the local antimicrobial policy, epidemiological studies in each geographical region should be determined and analyzed separately.
The topic is interesting and worthy of note, yet the manuscript have to be improved.

Abstract: Methods paragraph is too detailed.
Method: In my opinion, the methods - especially related to diagnostic tests - are described too extensively.
Results: The authors should avoid duplicating the results in tables and in the text. The first paragraph of the Results is unnecessary. All data are shown in Table.
The last sentence of the Result " The odds of being resistant to the tested antimicrobial agents significantly increased when the subjects had been attending daycare centers" is an over interpretation of the statistical analysis. All but one tests showed insignificant differences between the analyzed groups.
The term odds in description of the statistical analysis results sounds awkward. The authors should rewrite the text using other terms, for example risk.
Discussion: The first paragraph of the Discussion is a repetition of information given in the Introduction.

Is the work clearly and accurately presented and does it cite the current literature?

Partly
Is the study design appropriate and is the work technically sound?

Partly
Are sufficient details of methods and analysis provided to allow replication by others?

Yes
If applicable, is the statistical analysis and its interpretation appropriate?

Partly
Are all the source data underlying the results available to ensure full reproducibility?

Yes
Are the conclusions drawn adequately supported by the results?

Partly

Competing Interests: No competing interests were disclosed.

Reviewer Expertise: microbiology, antibiotic resistance, microbiological diagnostics,

I confirm that I have read this submission and believe that I have an appropriate level of expertise to confirm that it is of an acceptable scientific standard, however I have significant reservations, as outlined above.

CITE

Report a concern

Respond or Comment

Views

3

Reviewer Report 05 Nov 2019

Bartholomew N. Ondigo, Centre for Global Health Research, Kenya Medical Research Institute, Kisumu, Kenya

Approved with Reservations

https://doi.org/10.5256/f1000research.22518.r55502

Abstract

Provide N, number of children sampled.
Clearance zones read in what units of measurements?
Results – This need to be tailored as per

Abstract

Provide N, number of children sampled.
Clearance zones read in what units of measurements?
Results – This need to be tailored as per the objective of the manuscript: patterns of Streptococcus pneumoniae among PCV-10 vaccinated and unvaccinated children ≤5 years old at Gertrude's Children’s Hospital. However, the results are written focusing on day care centres.
Key words – italicise scientific names.

Introduction

Paragraph 1- Repetition of globally and worldwide in the same sentence. The focus of this paragraph need to be antimicrobial resistance.
Paragraph 2 - Rewrite to introduce Streptococcus pneumonia as the causative agent of pneumococcal disease.
Paragraph 3 – Should focus briefly on the mechanisms of antimicrobial resistance.
Paragraph 4 – The problem and uniqueness of the study.

Methods

This was a descriptive cross-sectional study conducted among children attending Gertrude’s Children’s Hospital (GCH) in Nairobi.
Ethical statement: This was obtained and approved from ….. “not given…”. This statement need to be rewritten to reflect: Written consent was sought from each child guardian/parent with each consent form indicating clearly the study purpose, any anticipated consequences of the research, the anticipated uses of the data, possible benefits of the study and possible harm, confidentiality of the data and the option to withdraw their children participation at any given time.
Study location: Provide reference for Joint Commission International (JCA).
SPSS version 22 – source, city, state?

Results

Confirm if the 4 kids were smokers, and if smokers what was the criteria used.
Consume antibiotics does not sound medically – better word to use is take antibiotics.
Have headings for the several parts of the results focusing on:
- Socio-Demographic characteristics – a brief summary (Table 1).
- Antimicrobial susceptibility patterns of Streptococcus pneumoniae among PCV-10 vaccinated children ≤5 years (N =?) by selected antibiotic agents. Table 3 need to be split to show vaccinated children, then describe the results in text.
- Antimicrobial susceptibility patterns of Streptococcus pneumoniae among PCV-10 unvaccinated children ≤5 years (N=?) by selected antibiotic agents. Table 3 need to be split to show unvaccinated children, then describe the results in text.
- Risk factors and susceptibility patterns of vaccinated children by selected antibiotic agents.
- Risk factors and susceptibility patterns of unvaccinated children by selected antibiotic agents.

Is the work clearly and accurately presented and does it cite the current literature?

Yes
Is the study design appropriate and is the work technically sound?

Yes
Are sufficient details of methods and analysis provided to allow replication by others?

Yes
If applicable, is the statistical analysis and its interpretation appropriate?

I cannot comment. A qualified statistician is required.
Are all the source data underlying the results available to ensure full reproducibility?

Yes
Are the conclusions drawn adequately supported by the results?

Partly

Competing Interests: No competing interests were disclosed.

I confirm that I have read this submission and believe that I have an appropriate level of expertise to confirm that it is of an acceptable scientific standard, however I have significant reservations, as outlined above.

CITE

Report a concern

Respond or Comment

Comments on this article Comments (0)

Version 1

VERSION 1 PUBLISHED 27 Sep 2019

Open Peer Review

Reviewer Status

Reviewer Reports

	Invited Reviewers
	1	2
Version 1 27 Sep 19	read	read

Bartholomew N. Ondigo, Kenya Medical Research Institute, Kisumu, Kenya
Izabela Korona-Glowniak, University of Lublin, Chodzki, Poland

Comments on this article

All Comments(0)

Add a comment

Sign up for content alerts

Browse by related subjects

Back to all reports

Reviewer Report

2 Views

10 Aug 2020 | for Version 1

Izabela Korona-Glowniak, Department of Pharmaceutical Microbiology, University of Lublin, Chodzki, Lublin, Poland

2 Views Cite this report Responses(0)

Approved With Reservations

The manuscript deals with an interesting topic in the field of pneumococcal resistance epidemiology. The link between antibiotic use and the emergence of bacterial resistance has been clearly established and many studies have shown the increase in antibiotic resistance of S. pneumoniae. Due to geographical diversity of S. pneumoniae resistance, which depends on the local antimicrobial policy, epidemiological studies in each geographical region should be determined and analyzed separately.
The topic is interesting and worthy of note, yet the manuscript have to be improved.

Abstract: Methods paragraph is too detailed.
Method: In my opinion, the methods - especially related to diagnostic tests - are described too extensively.
Results: The authors should avoid duplicating the results in tables and in the text. The first paragraph of the Results is unnecessary. All data are shown in Table.
The last sentence of the Result " The odds of being resistant to the tested antimicrobial agents significantly increased when the subjects had been attending daycare centers" is an over interpretation of the statistical analysis. All but one tests showed insignificant differences between the analyzed groups.
The term odds in description of the statistical analysis results sounds awkward. The authors should rewrite the text using other terms, for example risk.
Discussion: The first paragraph of the Discussion is a repetition of information given in the Introduction.

Is the work clearly and accurately presented and does it cite the current literature?

Partly
Is the study design appropriate and is the work technically sound?

Partly
Are sufficient details of methods and analysis provided to allow replication by others?

Yes
If applicable, is the statistical analysis and its interpretation appropriate?

Partly
Are all the source data underlying the results available to ensure full reproducibility?

Yes
Are the conclusions drawn adequately supported by the results?

Partly

Competing Interests

No competing interests were disclosed.

Reviewer Expertise

microbiology, antibiotic resistance, microbiological diagnostics,

I confirm that I have read this submission and believe that I have an appropriate level of expertise to confirm that it is of an acceptable scientific standard, however I have significant reservations, as outlined above.

Respond to this report

Responses (0)

Back to all reports

Reviewer Report

3 Views

05 Nov 2019 | for Version 1

Bartholomew N. Ondigo, Centre for Global Health Research, Kenya Medical Research Institute, Kisumu, Kenya

3 Views Cite this report Responses(0)

Approved With Reservations

Abstract

Provide N, number of children sampled.
Clearance zones read in what units of measurements?
Results – This need to be tailored as per the objective of the manuscript: patterns of Streptococcus pneumoniae among PCV-10 vaccinated and unvaccinated children ≤5 years old at Gertrude's Children’s Hospital. However, the results are written focusing on day care centres.
Key words – italicise scientific names.

Introduction

Paragraph 1- Repetition of globally and worldwide in the same sentence. The focus of this paragraph need to be antimicrobial resistance.
Paragraph 2 - Rewrite to introduce Streptococcus pneumonia as the causative agent of pneumococcal disease.
Paragraph 3 – Should focus briefly on the mechanisms of antimicrobial resistance.
Paragraph 4 – The problem and uniqueness of the study.

Methods

This was a descriptive cross-sectional study conducted among children attending Gertrude’s Children’s Hospital (GCH) in Nairobi.
Ethical statement: This was obtained and approved from ….. “not given…”. This statement need to be rewritten to reflect: Written consent was sought from each child guardian/parent with each consent form indicating clearly the study purpose, any anticipated consequences of the research, the anticipated uses of the data, possible benefits of the study and possible harm, confidentiality of the data and the option to withdraw their children participation at any given time.
Study location: Provide reference for Joint Commission International (JCA).
SPSS version 22 – source, city, state?

Results

Confirm if the 4 kids were smokers, and if smokers what was the criteria used.
Consume antibiotics does not sound medically – better word to use is take antibiotics.
Have headings for the several parts of the results focusing on:
- Socio-Demographic characteristics – a brief summary (Table 1).
- Antimicrobial susceptibility patterns of Streptococcus pneumoniae among PCV-10 vaccinated children ≤5 years (N =?) by selected antibiotic agents. Table 3 need to be split to show vaccinated children, then describe the results in text.
- Antimicrobial susceptibility patterns of Streptococcus pneumoniae among PCV-10 unvaccinated children ≤5 years (N=?) by selected antibiotic agents. Table 3 need to be split to show unvaccinated children, then describe the results in text.
- Risk factors and susceptibility patterns of vaccinated children by selected antibiotic agents.
- Risk factors and susceptibility patterns of unvaccinated children by selected antibiotic agents.

Is the work clearly and accurately presented and does it cite the current literature?

Yes
Is the study design appropriate and is the work technically sound?

Yes
Are sufficient details of methods and analysis provided to allow replication by others?

Yes
If applicable, is the statistical analysis and its interpretation appropriate?

I cannot comment. A qualified statistician is required.
Are all the source data underlying the results available to ensure full reproducibility?

Yes
Are the conclusions drawn adequately supported by the results?

Partly

Competing Interests

No competing interests were disclosed.

I confirm that I have read this submission and believe that I have an appropriate level of expertise to confirm that it is of an acceptable scientific standard, however I have significant reservations, as outlined above.

Respond to this report

Responses (0)

[1] Albrich WC, Monnet DL, Harbarth S: Antibiotic selection pressure and resistance in Streptococcus pneumoniae and Streptococcus pyogenes. Emerg Infect Dis. 2004; 10(3): 514–517. PubMed Abstract | Publisher Full Text | Free Full Text

[2] Assamala: African Regional Health Report 2014. World Health Organisation. 2014; 187. Reference Source

[3] Bronzwaer SL, Cars O, Buchholz U, et al.: A European study on the relationship between antimicrobial use and antimicrobial resistance. Emerg Infect Dis. 2002; 8(3): 278–282. PubMed Abstract | Publisher Full Text | Free Full Text

[4] CLSI: Performance Standards for Antimicrobial Disk and Dilution Susceptibility Tests for Bacteria Isolated from Animals; Approved Standard; Informational Supplement. Clinical and Laboratory Standards Institute. 2004. Reference Source

[5] CLSI: Performance standards for antimicrobial susceptibility testing. 27th ed. CLSI supplement M100. Wayne, PA: Clinical and Laboratory Standards Institute. Performance standards for antimicrobial susceptibility testing. 27th ed. CLSI supplement M100. Wayne, PA: Clinical and Laboratory Standards Institute. 2017. Reference Source

[6] Cole J: Antimicrobial resistance--a 'rising tide' of national (and international) risk. J Hosp Infect. 2016; 92(1): 3–4. PubMed Abstract | Publisher Full Text

[7] de Kraker ME, Stewardson AJ, Harbarth S: Will 10 Million People Die a Year due to Antimicrobial Resistance by 2050? PLoS Med. 2016; 13(11): e1002184. PubMed Abstract | Publisher Full Text | Free Full Text

[8] Donkor ES, Badoe EV: Insights into Pneumococcal Pathogenesis and Antibiotic Resistance. Adv Microbiol. 2014; 04(10): 627–643. Publisher Full Text

[9] Drawz SM, Bonomo RA: Three decades of beta-lactamase inhibitors. Clin Microbiol Rev. 2010; 23(1): 160–201. PubMed Abstract | Publisher Full Text | Free Full Text

[10] Feldman C, Anderson R: Epidemiology, virulence factors and management of the pneumococcus [version 1; peer review: 2 approved]. F1000Res. 2016; 5: 2320. PubMed Abstract | Publisher Full Text | Free Full Text

[11] File TM Jr: Clinical implications and treatment of multiresistant Streptococcus pneumoniae pneumonia. Clin Microbiol Infect. 2006; 12 Suppl 3: 31–41. PubMed Abstract | Publisher Full Text

[12] Habib M, Porter BD, Satzke C: Capsular serotyping of Streptococcus pneumoniae using the Quellung reaction. J Vis Exp. 2014; (84): e51208. PubMed Abstract | Publisher Full Text | Free Full Text

[13] Hathaway LJ, Brugger SD, Morand B, et al.: Capsule type of Streptococcus pneumoniae determines growth phenotype. PLoS Pathog. 2012; 8(3): e1002574. PubMed Abstract | Publisher Full Text | Free Full Text

[14] Heelan JS, Hasenbein ME, McAdam AJ: Resistance of group B streptococcus to selected antibiotics, including erythromycin and clindamycin. J Clin Microbiol. 2004; 42(3): 1263–4. PubMed Abstract | Publisher Full Text | Free Full Text

[15] Hegstad K, Giske CG, Haldorsen B, et al.: Performance of the EUCAST disk diffusion method, the CLSI agar screen method, and the Vitek 2 automated antimicrobial susceptibility testing system for detection of clinical isolates of Enterococci with low- and medium-level VanB-type vancomycin resistance: a multicenter study. J Clin Microbiol. 2014; 52(5): 1582–1589. PubMed Abstract | Publisher Full Text | Free Full Text

[16] Henriques-Normark B, Tuomanen EI: The pneumococcus: epidemiology, microbiology, and pathogenesis. Cold Spring Harb Perspect Med. 2013; 3(7): pii: a010215. PubMed Abstract | Publisher Full Text | Free Full Text

[17] Karlström A, Boyd KL, English BK, et al.: Treatment with protein synthesis inhibitors improves outcomes of secondary bacterial pneumonia after influenza. J Infect Dis. 2009; 199(3): 311–9. PubMed Abstract | Publisher Full Text | Free Full Text

[18] Kong KF, Schneper L, Mathee K: Beta-lactam antibiotics: from antibiosis to resistance and bacteriology. APMIS. 2010; 118(1): 1–36. PubMed Abstract | Publisher Full Text | Free Full Text

[19] Laxminarayan R, Duse A, Wattal C, et al.: Antibiotic resistance-the need for global solutions. Lancet Infect Dis. 2013; 13(12): 1057–98. PubMed Abstract | Publisher Full Text

[20] Liñares J, Ardanuy C, Pallares R, et al.: Changes in antimicrobial resistance, serotypes and genotypes in Streptococcus pneumoniae over a 30-year period. Clin Microbiol Infect. 2010; 16(5): 402–10. PubMed Abstract | Publisher Full Text

[21] Lowth M: Pneumococcal disease. Practice Nurse. 2015. Reference Source

[22] Lynch JP 3rd, Zhanel GG: Streptococcus pneumoniae: does antimicrobial resistance matter? Semin Respir Crit Care Med. 2009; 30(2): 210–38. PubMed Abstract | Publisher Full Text

[23] Lynch JP 3rd, Zhanel GG: Streptococcus pneumoniae: epidemiology and risk factors, evolution of antimicrobial resistance, and impact of vaccines. Curr Opin Pulm Med. 2010; 16(3): 217–25. PubMed Abstract

[24] Mayanskiy N, Alyabieva N, Ponomarenko O, et al.: Serotypes and antibiotic resistance of non-invasive Streptococcus pneumoniae circulating in pediatric hospitals in Moscow, Russia. Int J Infect Dis. 2014; 20: 58–62. PubMed Abstract | Publisher Full Text

[25] Mitchell AM, Mitchell TJ: Streptococcus pneumoniae: virulence factors and variation. Clin Microbiol Infect. 2010; 16(5): 411–8. PubMed Abstract | Publisher Full Text

[26] Von Mollendorf C, Cohen C, de Gouveia L, et al.: Factors associated with ceftriaxone nonsusceptibility of streptococcus pneumoniae: analysis of south african national surveillance data, 2003 to 2010. Antimicrob Agents Chemother. 2014; 58(6): 3293–305. PubMed Abstract | Publisher Full Text | Free Full Text

[27] Molyneux E, Nizami SQ, Saha S, et al.: 5 versus 10 days of treatment with ceftriaxone for bacterial meningitis in children: a double-blind randomised equivalence study. Lancet. 2011; 377(9780): 1837–45. PubMed Abstract | Publisher Full Text

[28] Neu HC: The crisis in antibiotic resistance. Science. 1992; 257(5073): 1064–73. PubMed Abstract | Publisher Full Text

[29] O’Neill J: Tackling drug-resistant infections globally: final report and recommendations. The Review on Antimicrobial Resistance. 2016; 84. Reference Source

[30] Puopolo KM, Klinzing DC, Lin MP, et al.: A composite transposon associated with erythromycin and clindamycin resistance in group B Streptococcus. J Med Microbiol. 2007; 56(Pt 7): 947–55. PubMed Abstract | Publisher Full Text

[31] Reardon S: Antibiotic resistance sweeping developing world. Nature. 2014; 509(7499): 141–2. PubMed Abstract | Publisher Full Text

[32] Reinert RR: The antimicrobial resistance profile of Streptococcus pneumoniae. Clin Microbiol Infect. 2009; 15 Suppl 3: 7–11. PubMed Abstract | Publisher Full Text

[33] Steens A, Caugant DA, Aaberge IS, et al.: Decreased Carriage and Genetic Shifts in the Streptococcus pneumoniae Population After Changing the Seven-valent to the Thirteen-valent Pneumococcal Vaccine in Norway. Pediatr Infect Dis J. 2015; 34(8): 875–83. PubMed Abstract | Publisher Full Text

[34] Sutcliffe J, Tait-Kamradt A, Wondrack L: Streptococcus pneumoniae and Streptococcus pyogenes resistant to macrolides but sensitive to clindamycin: a common resistance pattern mediated by an efflux system. Antimicrob Agents Chemother. 1996; 40(8): 1817–24. PubMed Abstract | Publisher Full Text | Free Full Text

[35] Tadesse BT, Ashley EA, Ongarello S, et al.: Antimicrobial resistance in Africa: a systematic review. BMC Infect Dis. 2017; 17(1): 616. PubMed Abstract | Publisher Full Text | Free Full Text

[36] Tenson T, Lovmar M, Ehrenberg M: The mechanism of action of macrolides, lincosamides and streptogramin B reveals the nascent peptide exit path in the ribosome. J Mol Biol. 2003; 330(5): 1005–14. PubMed Abstract | Publisher Full Text

[37] Tenson T, Xiong L, Kloss P, et al.: Erythromycin resistance peptides selected from random peptide libraries. J Biol Chem. 1997; 272(28): 17425–30. PubMed Abstract | Publisher Full Text

[38] Tuti T, Agweyu A, Mwaniki P, et al.: An exploration of mortality risk factors in non-severe pneumonia in children using clinical data from Kenya. BMC Med. 2017; 15(1): 201. PubMed Abstract | Publisher Full Text | Free Full Text

[39] Ventola CL: The antibiotic resistance crisis: part 1: causes and threats. P T. 2015; 40(4): 277–283. PubMed Abstract | Free Full Text

[40] Voets GM, Platteel TN, Fluit AC, et al.: Population distribution of Beta-lactamase conferring resistance to third-generation cephalosporins in human clinical Enterobacteriaceae in the Netherlands. PLoS One. 2012; 7(12): e52102. PubMed Abstract | Publisher Full Text | Free Full Text

[41] Walekhwa M: Streptococcus pneumoniae SEROTYPE EPIDEMIOLOGY, ANTIBIOTIC SUSCEPTIBILITY PROFILES AND ASSOCIATED RISK FACTORS AMONG CHILDREN ATTENDING GERTRUDES CHILDREN’S HOSPITAL. Harvard Dataverse, V3, 2019. http://www.doi.org/10.7910/DVN/VDMKS2

[42] WHO: Antimicrobial resistance. Global Report on Surveillance. Bull World Health Organ. 2014; 383–394. Reference Source

[43] Zemlickova H, Jakubu V, Urbaskova P, et al.: Serotype-specific invasive disease potential of Streptococcus pneumoniae in Czech children. J Med Microbiol. 2010; 59(Pt 9): 1079–83. PubMed Abstract | Publisher Full Text

Streptococcus pneumoniae serotype specific anti-microbial susceptibility profiles among PCV-10 vaccinated and unvaccinated children attending Gertrude’s Children’s Hospital: a cross-sectional study

Abstract

Keywords

Introduction

Methods

Ethical statement

Study location

Study population

Sample size determination

Sociodemographic characteristics

Isolation and identification of Streptococcus pneumoniae

Optochin sensitivity test

Bile solubility test

Quellung reaction

Disk diffusion method

Statistical analysis

Results

Table 1. Socio-economic Demographic Characteristics of PCV-10 Vaccinated and Unvaccinated Children Attending Gertrude’s Childrens Hospital.F

Table 2. Susceptibility of Streptococcus pneumoniae isolates to various antimicrobial agents among PCV10 Vaccinated and Unvaccinated Attending Gertrude’s Childrens Hospital.

Table 3. Streptococcus pneumoniae serotype susceptibilities to various antimicrobial agents among PCV-10 Vaccinated and Unvaccinated Children Attending Gertrude’s Childrens Hospital.

Table 4. Effect of Selected Risk Factors on Streptococcus Pneumoniae Susceptibility to Various Antimicrobial Agents among PCV-10 Vaccinated and Unvaccinated Children Attending Getrudes Children’s Hospital

Discussion

Data availability

Extended data

Acknowledgements

References

Comments on this article Comments (0)

Open Peer Review

Comments on this article Comments (0)

Open Peer Review

Reviewer Status

Reviewer Reports

Comments on this article

Browse by related subjects

Competing Interests Policy

Stay Updated