We have located links that may give you full text access.
Fosfomycin Etest for Enterobacteriaceae: Interobserver and interlaboratory agreement.
International Journal of Antimicrobial Agents 2018 June 28
OBJECTIVES: The increasing use of fosfomycin requires reliable susceptibility testing in clinical practice. The reference standard, agar dilution (AD), is rarely used in routine settings. The fosfomycin Etest (BioMérieux) is frequently used, although reading MICs can be hampered by the interpretation of the growth of macrocolonies in the inhibition zone. We investigated the interobserver (IO), interlaboratory (IL), and interobserver-interlaboratory (IOIL) agreement of the fosfomycin Etest and evaluated the agreement with AD.
METHODS: Etests were performed for 57 extended spectrum beta-lactamase (ESBL)-producing Enterobacteriaceae of four bacterial species (Escherichia coli, Klebsiella pneumoniae, Klebsiella oxytoca and Enterobacter cloacae) in two laboratories. Photographs of fosfomycin Etests were interpreted by four observers following manufacturer's instructions.
RESULTS: Essential agreement (EA) and categorical agreement (CA) between Etest and AD were 57% and 89% (κ-value 0.68), respectively, with an underestimation of Etest interpretations compared with AD of 0.26 (95% confidence interval [CI] 0.03-0.48) 2-fold dilutions. Between Etest observations, IO-EA and -CA were reached in 82% and 94% of comparisons; IL-EA and -CA in 38% and 85% of comparisons; and IOIL-EA and -CA in 40% and 85% of comparisons, respectively. Agreement of the Etest with AD and between Etests was better for E. coli than for other species. Ignoring all macrocolonies and haze during Etest interpretation improved the agreement with AD (CA κ-value 0.80) and between Etests (CA κ-value from 0.68 to 0.81).
CONCLUSIONS: In this study on 57 ESBL-producing Enterobacteriaceae, IOIL agreement was low with an EA of 40% and a CA of 85%, affected most by IL agreement and to a lesser extent by IO agreement.
METHODS: Etests were performed for 57 extended spectrum beta-lactamase (ESBL)-producing Enterobacteriaceae of four bacterial species (Escherichia coli, Klebsiella pneumoniae, Klebsiella oxytoca and Enterobacter cloacae) in two laboratories. Photographs of fosfomycin Etests were interpreted by four observers following manufacturer's instructions.
RESULTS: Essential agreement (EA) and categorical agreement (CA) between Etest and AD were 57% and 89% (κ-value 0.68), respectively, with an underestimation of Etest interpretations compared with AD of 0.26 (95% confidence interval [CI] 0.03-0.48) 2-fold dilutions. Between Etest observations, IO-EA and -CA were reached in 82% and 94% of comparisons; IL-EA and -CA in 38% and 85% of comparisons; and IOIL-EA and -CA in 40% and 85% of comparisons, respectively. Agreement of the Etest with AD and between Etests was better for E. coli than for other species. Ignoring all macrocolonies and haze during Etest interpretation improved the agreement with AD (CA κ-value 0.80) and between Etests (CA κ-value from 0.68 to 0.81).
CONCLUSIONS: In this study on 57 ESBL-producing Enterobacteriaceae, IOIL agreement was low with an EA of 40% and a CA of 85%, affected most by IL agreement and to a lesser extent by IO agreement.
Full text links
Related Resources
Trending Papers
Heart failure with preserved ejection fraction: diagnosis, risk assessment, and treatment.Clinical Research in Cardiology : Official Journal of the German Cardiac Society 2024 April 12
Proximal versus distal diuretics in congestive heart failure.Nephrology, Dialysis, Transplantation 2024 Februrary 30
Efficacy and safety of pharmacotherapy in chronic insomnia: A review of clinical guidelines and case reports.Mental Health Clinician 2023 October
World Health Organization and International Consensus Classification of eosinophilic disorders: 2024 update on diagnosis, risk stratification, and management.American Journal of Hematology 2024 March 30
Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university
For the best experience, use the Read mobile app
All material on this website is protected by copyright, Copyright © 1994-2024 by WebMD LLC.
This website also contains material copyrighted by 3rd parties.
By using this service, you agree to our terms of use and privacy policy.
Your Privacy Choices
You can now claim free CME credits for this literature searchClaim now
Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university
For the best experience, use the Read mobile app