Antibiogram of Escherichia coli Isolated from Dairy Cattle and in-Contact Humans in Selected Areas of Central Ethiopia

T. Tadesse, Haile Alemayehu, G. Medhin, Aberaw Akalu, T. Eguale
{"title":"Antibiogram of Escherichia coli Isolated from Dairy Cattle and in-Contact Humans in Selected Areas of Central Ethiopia","authors":"T. Tadesse, Haile Alemayehu, G. Medhin, Aberaw Akalu, T. Eguale","doi":"10.2147/VMRR.S456247","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Background Antimicrobial resistance (AMR) is a global threat to public and animal health. Escherichia coli is considered an indicator organism for monitoring AMR among gram-negative Enterobacteriaceae in humans and animals. The current study aims to assess the antibiogram profile of E. coli isolated from dairy cattle and in-contact humans in central Ethiopia and to identify risk factors associated with multidrug resistance (MDR). Methods A cross-sectional study was conducted in which 58 farms were recruited from selected districts of central Ethiopia. E. coli was isolated using standard bacteriological techniques. A total of 200 representative isolates (140 from cattle and 60 from humans in contact) were randomly selected and tested for susceptibility to a panel of 13 antimicrobials using the Kirby-Bauer disc diffusion assay. Results The highest rate of resistance was observed for sulfamethoxazole+trimethoprim (58.6%, 82/140) and amoxicillin+clavulanic acid (70.0%, 42/60) among E. coli isolates from cattle and hmans, respectively. In contrast, resistance rates in isolates from in contact humans with the cattle were 30%, 33.3%, and 66.7%, respectively. Resistance to tetracycline (p=0.02), streptomycin (p=0.03), and sulfamethoxazole+trimethoprim (p=0.007) was significantly high in E. coli isolated from cattle on commercial dairy farms than in those isolated from cattle on smallholder farms. There was no significant difference (p>0.05) in the rate of resistance between E. coli isolated from in contact humans with smallholder and commercial dairy farms. Antimicrobial use for treatment purpose (p=0.04) and non-compliance with the drug withdrawal period (p=0.03) were significantly associated with the farm-level occurrence of MDR. Conclusion A high rate of resistance was detected in E. coli isolated from the feces of dairy cattle and in-contact humans. This necessitates an effective intervention through a one-health approach and further molecular studies are required to establish source attribution.","PeriodicalId":23607,"journal":{"name":"Veterinary Medicine : Research and Reports","volume":"379 1","pages":"117 - 127"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-04-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Veterinary Medicine : Research and Reports","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.2147/VMRR.S456247","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background Antimicrobial resistance (AMR) is a global threat to public and animal health. Escherichia coli is considered an indicator organism for monitoring AMR among gram-negative Enterobacteriaceae in humans and animals. The current study aims to assess the antibiogram profile of E. coli isolated from dairy cattle and in-contact humans in central Ethiopia and to identify risk factors associated with multidrug resistance (MDR). Methods A cross-sectional study was conducted in which 58 farms were recruited from selected districts of central Ethiopia. E. coli was isolated using standard bacteriological techniques. A total of 200 representative isolates (140 from cattle and 60 from humans in contact) were randomly selected and tested for susceptibility to a panel of 13 antimicrobials using the Kirby-Bauer disc diffusion assay. Results The highest rate of resistance was observed for sulfamethoxazole+trimethoprim (58.6%, 82/140) and amoxicillin+clavulanic acid (70.0%, 42/60) among E. coli isolates from cattle and hmans, respectively. In contrast, resistance rates in isolates from in contact humans with the cattle were 30%, 33.3%, and 66.7%, respectively. Resistance to tetracycline (p=0.02), streptomycin (p=0.03), and sulfamethoxazole+trimethoprim (p=0.007) was significantly high in E. coli isolated from cattle on commercial dairy farms than in those isolated from cattle on smallholder farms. There was no significant difference (p>0.05) in the rate of resistance between E. coli isolated from in contact humans with smallholder and commercial dairy farms. Antimicrobial use for treatment purpose (p=0.04) and non-compliance with the drug withdrawal period (p=0.03) were significantly associated with the farm-level occurrence of MDR. Conclusion A high rate of resistance was detected in E. coli isolated from the feces of dairy cattle and in-contact humans. This necessitates an effective intervention through a one-health approach and further molecular studies are required to establish source attribution.
埃塞俄比亚中部部分地区从奶牛和接触人群中分离出的大肠埃希氏菌的抗生素图谱
背景抗菌药耐药性(AMR)是对公共和动物健康的全球性威胁。大肠埃希菌被认为是监测人类和动物革兰氏阴性肠杆菌科细菌抗药性的指示生物。本研究旨在评估从埃塞俄比亚中部奶牛和接触人群中分离出的大肠杆菌的抗生素谱,并确定与多重耐药性(MDR)相关的风险因素。方法 在埃塞俄比亚中部选定地区的 58 个农场中开展了一项横断面研究。采用标准细菌学技术分离大肠杆菌。随机选取了 200 个有代表性的分离物(其中 140 个来自牛,60 个来自接触过的人),使用柯比-鲍尔盘扩散法检测其对 13 种抗菌药物的敏感性。结果 在牛和人的大肠杆菌分离物中,磺胺甲噁唑+三甲氧苄啶(58.6%,82/140)和阿莫西林+克拉维酸(70.0%,42/60)的耐药率最高。相比之下,与牛有接触的人类分离物的耐药率分别为 30%、33.3% 和 66.7%。从商业化奶牛场的牛身上分离出的大肠杆菌对四环素(p=0.02)、链霉素(p=0.03)和磺胺甲恶唑+三甲氧苄啶(p=0.007)的耐药性明显高于从小农农场的牛身上分离出的大肠杆菌。从与小农牧场和商业化牧场有接触的人群中分离出的大肠杆菌耐药率没有明显差异(p>0.05)。为治疗目的使用抗菌药(p=0.04)和不遵守停药期(p=0.03)与农场一级的 MDR 发生率显著相关。结论 从奶牛和接触人群的粪便中分离出的大肠杆菌耐药率很高。这就需要通过一种健康方法进行有效干预,并需要进一步的分子研究来确定源头归属。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信