Table 3 Comparison of resistance rates among E. coli in Austria between ECO·SENS and ECO·SENS II and contrasting these data with the E. coli resistance data in the Austrian resistance report 2008 for the ambulatory sector
Antibiotic | Resistance rates | Resistance rates | Trend between ECO·SENS and ECO·SENS II | E. coliresistance data in the Austria resistance report 2008 for the ambulatory sector, n (%) |
|---|---|---|---|---|
ECO·SENS | ECO·SENS II | |||
(N = 126), n (%) | (N = 146), n (%) | |||
Mecillinam | 2 (1.6) | 0 (0.0) | ↘ | 4,361 (12.2) |
Ampicillin | 22 (17.5) | 42 (28.8) | ↗ | 8,992 (39.8) |
Amoxicillin/clavulanic acid | 3 (2.4) | 13 (8.9) | ↗ | 8,985 (5.8) |
Trimethoprim | 12 (9.5) | 23 (15.8) | ↗ | - |
Sulphamethoxazole | 32 (25.4) | 31 (21.3) | ↘ | - |
Trimethoprim/Sulphamethoxazole | 12 (9.5) | 21 (14.4) | ↗ | 8,992 (24.6) |
Nalidixic acid | 3 (2.4) | 14 (9.6) | ↗ | - |
Nitrofurantoin | 1 (0.8) | 1 (0.7) | ↘ | 8,789 (2.2) |
Ciprofloxacin | 0 (0.0) | 6 (4.1) | ↗ | 8,992 (15.7) |
Gentamicin | 1 (0.8) | 2 (1.4) | ↗ | 8,990 (4.7) |
Fosfomycin trometamol | 0 (0) | 1 (0.7) | ↗ | 5,489 (1.5) |
Cefadroxil | 1 (0.8) | 6 (4.1) | 9,088 (8.5) | |
Cefotaxime | Not tested | 4 (2.7) | - | |
Ceftazidime | Not tested | 4 (2.7) | - |