Skip to main content

Table 3 Resistance rates of the five most commonly isolated uropathogens from patients 65 years old or older in Vestfold County, Norway 2010: females compared to males (irrespective of residence)

From: Antibiotic resistance patterns of bacteria causing urinary tract infections in the elderly living in nursing homes versus the elderly living at home: an observational study

  E coli E faecalis a K pneumoniae P mirabilis P aeruginosa
  NH CD   NH CD   NH CD   NH CD   NH CD  
  n (%) n (%) p-value n (%) n (%) p-value n (%) n (%) p-value n (%) n (%) p-value n (%) n (%) p-value
Ampicillinb 680 (32) 100 (33) 0.74 0 0   Resc Res   11 (11) 5 (12) 0.99 Res Res  
Ciprofloxacind 153 (7) 36 (12) 0.03h NAe NAe   5 (3) 4 (8) 0.12 8 (8) 2 (5) 0.72 4 (11) 1 (4) 0.38
Mecillinam 74 (4) 13 (4) 0.51 NAf NAf   13 (8) 4 (8) 0.32 2 (2) 5 (12) 0.02h Res Res  
Nitrofurantoin 39 (2) 3 (1) 0.54 0 0   Res Res   Res Res   Res Res  
Trimethoprimg 490 (23) 59 (20) 0.36 65 (29) 34 (25) 0.1 27 (16) 13 (27) 0.1 22 (22) 4 (10) 0.4 Res Res  
  1. aResistance rate for Vancomycin was 0 % in both groups
  2. bFor E coli, and P mirabilis intermediate (I) is classified as sensitive (S) according to recommendations from Norwegian Working Group on Antibiotics
  3. cRes: Resistant
  4. d(S) classified as (I) if the microbe in question is resistant (R) for nalidixic acid
  5. eNA: not applicable. Minimum inhibitory concentrations are so high that ciprofloxacin is not recommended for infections due to E Faecalis
  6. fNA: not applicable. Mecillinam is ineffective against E Faecalis in vitro
  7. gFor E faecalis intermediate (I) is classified as sensitive (S)
  8. hSignificant at α = 5 %