4.7 Article

Community-onset healthcare-related urinary tract infections: Comparison with community and hospital-acquired urinary tract infections

Journal

JOURNAL OF INFECTION
Volume 64, Issue 5, Pages 478-483

Publisher

W B SAUNDERS CO LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.jinf.2012.01.010

Keywords

Urinary tract infection; Healthcare-associated infections; Antimicrobial resistance

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Objectives: To analyze the characteristics of infection, adequacy of empirical treatment and outcome of patients with community-onset healthcare-associated (HCA) urinary tract infections (UTI) and compare them with hospital (HA) and community-acquired (CA) UTI. Methods: Prospective observational cohort study performed at a university 600-bed hospital between July 2009 and February 2010. Patients with UTI requiring hospital admission were included. Epidemiological, clinical and outcome data were recorded. Results: 251 patients were included. Patients with community-onset HCA UTI were older, had more co-morbidities and had received previous antimicrobial treatment more frequently than CA UTI (p = 0.02, p = 0.01 and p < 0.01). ESBL-Escherichia coli and Pseudomonas aeruginosa infections were more frequent in HCA than in CA UTI (p = 0.03 and p < 0.01). Inadequate empirical treatment was not significantly different between community-onset HCA and CA. Factors related to mortality were P. aeruginosa infection (OR 6.51; 95%CI: 1.01-41.73), diabetes mellitus (OR 22.66; 95%CI: 3.61-142.21), solid neoplasia (OR 22.48; 95%CI: 3.38-149.49) and age (OR 1.15; 95%CI 1.03-1.28). Conclusions: Epidemiological, clinical and microbiological features suggest that community-onset HCA UTI is different from CA and similar to HA UTI. However, in our series inadequate empirical antimicrobial therapy and mortality were not significantly higher in community-onset HCA than in CA UTI. (C) 2012 The British Infection Association. Published by Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.7
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available