Skip to main content

The prevalence of ESBL-producing Enterobacteriaceae in a nursing home setting compared with elderly living at home: A cross-sectional comparison

13Citations
Citations of this article
53Readers
Mendeley users who have this article in their library.

This artice is free to access.

Abstract

Background: The aim of the study was to investigate the prevalence of faecal carriage of extended-spectrum beta-lactamase (ESBL)-producing Enterobacteriaceae among residents living in nursing homes and to compare it with a corresponding group of elderly people living in their own homes. Methods: A total of 160 persons participated in the study between February and April 2014, 91 were residents in nursing homes (n=10) and the remaining 69 were elderly living in their own homes. In addition to performing faecal samples, all participants answered a standardized questionnaire regarding known risk factors for ESBL-carriage. Results: There was no significant difference between the groups, as 10 of the 91 (11%) residents from nursing homes were ESBL-carriers compared with 6 of 69 (8,7%) elderly living in their own homes. There was no significant difference between the groups. The total prevalence was 10%. A univariate analysis revealed that the only studied risk factor significantly associated with ESBL-carriage was recent foreign travel (p=0,017). All ESBL-positive isolates were Escherichia coli and there was a high degree of co-resistance to other antibiotics. All isolates (n=17) were susceptible to imipenem and amikacin. Conclusion: Residents of nursing homes as well as elderly living in their own homes have high rates of faecal carriage of ESBL-producing bacteria. These findings may affect the choice of empirical antibiotic treatment of severe infections in older adults.

Cite

CITATION STYLE

APA

Blom, A., Ahl, J., Månsson, F., Resman, F., & Tham, J. (2016). The prevalence of ESBL-producing Enterobacteriaceae in a nursing home setting compared with elderly living at home: A cross-sectional comparison. BMC Infectious Diseases, 16(1). https://doi.org/10.1186/s12879-016-1430-5

Register to see more suggestions

Mendeley helps you to discover research relevant for your work.

Already have an account?

Save time finding and organizing research with Mendeley

Sign up for free