Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Mostrar: 20 | 50 | 100
Resultados 1 - 2 de 2
Filtrar
Mais filtros

Base de dados
País/Região como assunto
Ano de publicação
Tipo de documento
País de afiliação
Intervalo de ano de publicação
1.
BMC Infect Dis ; 20(1): 514, 2020 Jul 16.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-32677988

RESUMO

BACKGROUND: Worldwide, an increase in antimicrobial resistance (AMR) of Neisseria gonorrhoeae has been observed. Until now, no protocol for an external quality assessment (EQA) has been available for Germany. The German gonococcal resistance network (GORENET) performed an EQA of primary laboratories in Germany in order to assess quality of antibiotic susceptibility testing, to gain information about laboratory procedures and to assess the impact of these procedures on test results. METHODS: Laboratories assessed drug susceptibility to cefixime, ceftriaxone, azithromycin, penicillin and ciprofloxacin for five N. gonorrhoeae strains, using their standard laboratory protocols. Minimal inhibitory concentrations (MICs) were compared to World Health Organisation (WHO) consensus results (or, if not available, reference laboratory results), while deviation by +/- one doubling dilution was accepted. Data on laboratory procedures were collected via a standardised questionnaire. Generalized linear models and conditional inference trees (CTREE) were used to assess relationships between laboratory procedures and testing outcomes. RESULTS: Twenty-one primary laboratories participated in the EQA in June 2018. 96% of ciprofloxacin MICs were reported within accepted deviations, as well as 88% for cefixime, 85% for ceftriaxone, 79% for penicillin and 70% for azithromycin. The use of interpretation standards and general laboratory procedures like agar base, incubation settings or the use of control strains strongly differed between laboratories. In statistical analysis, incubation time of cultures < 24 h was associated with correct measurements. Additionally, a 5% CO2 concentration was associated with correct results regarding azithromycin compared to 3%. CTREE analysis showed that incubation time, humidity and CO2 concentration had the greatest influence on the average deviation from consensus results. CONCLUSIONS: In conclusion, we report the development of a protocol for N. gonorrhoeae antimicrobial susceptibility testing in Germany. While testing results were in accordance with the expected consensus results in 70-96%, depending on the antibiotic agent, laboratory methodology was heterogeneous and may significantly affect the testing quality. We therefore recommend the development of a standard operating procedure (SOP) for N. gonorrhoeae susceptibility testing in Germany.


Assuntos
Antibacterianos/uso terapêutico , Farmacorresistência Bacteriana/efeitos dos fármacos , Gonorreia/tratamento farmacológico , Laboratórios/normas , Ensaio de Proficiência Laboratorial , Neisseria gonorrhoeae/efeitos dos fármacos , Antibacterianos/farmacologia , Azitromicina/farmacologia , Azitromicina/uso terapêutico , Cefixima/farmacologia , Cefixima/uso terapêutico , Ceftriaxona/farmacologia , Ceftriaxona/uso terapêutico , Ciprofloxacina/farmacologia , Ciprofloxacina/uso terapêutico , Alemanha , Gonorreia/microbiologia , Humanos , Ensaio de Proficiência Laboratorial/métodos , Testes de Sensibilidade Microbiana , Penicilinas/farmacologia , Penicilinas/uso terapêutico , Controle de Qualidade , Padrões de Referência , Inquéritos e Questionários
2.
J Mycol Med ; 30(2): 100970, 2020 Jun.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-32334948

RESUMO

A survey of mycology laboratories for antifungal susceptibility testing (AFST) was undertaken in France in 2018, to better understand the difference in practices between the participating centers and to identify the difficulties they may encounter as well as eventual gaps with published standards and guidelines. The survey captured information from 45 mycology laboratories in France on how they perform AFST (number of strains tested, preferred method, technical and quality aspects, interpretation of the MIC values, reading and interpretation difficulties). Results indicated that 86% of respondents used Etest as AFST method, with a combination of one to seven antifungal agents tested. Most of the participating laboratories used similar technical parameters to perform their AFST method and a large majority used, as recommended, internal and external quality assessments. Almost all the participating mycology laboratories (98%) reported difficulties to interpret the MIC values, especially when no clinical breakpoints are available. The survey highlighted that the current AFST practices in France need homogenization, particularly for MIC reading and interpretation.


Assuntos
Antifúngicos/uso terapêutico , Laboratórios , Testes de Sensibilidade Microbiana , Micologia , Prática Profissional/estatística & dados numéricos , Testes de Sensibilidade a Antimicrobianos por Disco-Difusão/métodos , Testes de Sensibilidade a Antimicrobianos por Disco-Difusão/normas , Testes de Sensibilidade a Antimicrobianos por Disco-Difusão/estatística & dados numéricos , Farmacorresistência Fúngica , França , História do Século XXI , Humanos , Laboratórios/normas , Laboratórios/estatística & dados numéricos , Ensaio de Proficiência Laboratorial/métodos , Ensaio de Proficiência Laboratorial/estatística & dados numéricos , Testes de Sensibilidade Microbiana/métodos , Testes de Sensibilidade Microbiana/normas , Testes de Sensibilidade Microbiana/estatística & dados numéricos , Micologia/história , Micologia/métodos , Micologia/normas , Micologia/estatística & dados numéricos , Prática Profissional/normas , Controle de Qualidade , Inquéritos e Questionários
SELEÇÃO DE REFERÊNCIAS
DETALHE DA PESQUISA