Antimicrobial resistance patterns of bacterial pathogens recovered from the urine of patients at Canadian hospitals from 2009 to 2020
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Objectives To investigate in vitro susceptibility patterns of bacterial pathogens recovered from the urine of outpatients (isolates from outpatient clinics or emergency departments) and hospital inpatients across Canada from 2009 to 2020 as part of the CANWARD study Methods Canadian hospital microbiology laboratories submitted bacterial pathogens cultured from urine to the CANWARD study coordinating laboratory on an annual basis (January 2009 to December 2020). Antimicrobial susceptibility testing was performed by CLSI broth microdilution, with MICs interpreted by current CLSI breakpoints. Results In total, 4644 urinary pathogens were included in this study. Escherichia coli was recovered most frequently (53.3% of all isolates), followed by Enterococcus faecalis, Klebsiella pneumoniae, Proteus mirabilis, Pseudomonas aeruginosa and Staphylococcus aureus. Together, these six species accounted for 84.2% of study isolates. Nitrofurantoin demonstrated excellent in vitro activity versus E. coli, with 97.6% of outpatient and 96.1% of inpatient isolates remaining susceptible. In contrast, E. coli susceptibility rates were lower for ciprofloxacin (outpatient 79.5%, inpatient 65.9%) and trimethoprim/sulfamethoxazole (outpatient 75.2%, inpatient 73.5%). The percentage of E. coli isolates that were phenotypically positive for ESBL production significantly increased from 4.2% (2009–11) to 11.3% (2018–20). A similar although less pronounced temporal trend was observed with ESBL-producing K. pneumoniae. Conclusions E. coli was the pathogen most frequently recovered from the urine of Canadian patients, and the proportion of isolates that were ESBL producers increased over time. Susceptibility data presented here suggest that ciprofloxacin and trimethoprim/sulfamethoxazole may be suboptimal for the empirical treatment of complicated urinary infections.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".