Open Access


Read more
image01

Online Manuscript Submission


Read more
image01

Submitted Manuscript Trail


Read more
image01

Online Payment


Read more
image01

Online Subscription


Read more
image01

Email Alert



Read more
image01

Original Research Article | OPEN ACCESS

Making Antibiotic Choices: Formula Derivation and Usage in the Rational Selection of Antibiotics in the Empirical Treatment of Infections

Matthias Adorka1 , Martie Lubbe2, Jan Serfontein2, Kirk Allen3, Honore Mitonga Kabwebwe4

1School of Pharmacy, FOHS, University of Namibia. P/B 13301, Windhoek, Namibia; 2Medicine Usage in South Africa, School of Pharmacy, North-West University, Potchefstroom, 2520, South Africa; 3Faculty of Health & Medicine, Lancaster University, Lancaster, England; 4Department of Community Medicine, School of Medicine, University of Namibia, Windhoek, Namibia.

For correspondence:-  Matthias Adorka   Email: madorka@yahoo.com   Tel:+264817761424

Received: 4 September 2013        Accepted: 16 November 2013        Published: 24 December 2013

Citation: Adorka M, Lubbe M, Serfontein J, Allen K, Kabwebwe HM. Making Antibiotic Choices: Formula Derivation and Usage in the Rational Selection of Antibiotics in the Empirical Treatment of Infections. Trop J Pharm Res 2013; 12(6):1029-1034 doi: 10.4314/tjpr.v12i6.24

© 2013 The authors.
This is an Open Access article that uses a funding model which does not charge readers or their institutions for access and distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0) and the Budapest Open Access Initiative (http://www.budapestopenaccessinitiative.org/read), which permit unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly credited..

Abstract

Purpose: To develop mathematical formulae to aid the selection of antibiotics most appropriate in the empirical treatment of infections.
Methods: Formulae quantifying the characteristics of antibiotics with regard to their cost and activity against associated bacterial isolates of given infections were derived from probability laws. Data from records of culture sensitivity test results were compiled and analysed to ascertain bacterial pathogen associations with infections and their sensitivities to prescribed antibiotics. Applicability of derived formulae was demonstrated in the rational selection of antibiotics most appropriate in the empirical treatment of urinary tract infections (UTIs) in selected hospitals in Lesotho.
Results: Escherichia. coli, followed by Klebsiella spp, Proteus spp, non-haemolytic Streptococci, Streptococcus pyogenes and then, Pseudomonas spp were identified as the most common uropathogens at the hospitals studied.  Two mathematical formulae were derived and used in quantifying activity and cost characteristics of prescribed antibiotics. Cefotaxime, followed by ciprofloxacin - were considered most appropriate for use in treating UTIs empirically among inpatients of the hospitals.
Conclusion: Quantifying and using procedurally antibacterial activities and cost characteristics of antibiotics provides a suitable means of making antibiotic choices in the empirical treatment of infections.

Keywords: Antibiotics, Derived formulae, Rational selection, Empiric treatment, Urinary tract infection, Lesotho

Impact Factor
Thompson Reuters (ISI): 0.6 (2023)
H-5 index (Google Scholar): 49 (2023)

Article Tools

Share this article with



Article status: Free
Fulltext in PDF
Similar articles in Google
Similar article in this Journal:

Archives

2024; 23: 
1,   2,   3,   4,   5,   6,   7,   8,   9,   10
2023; 22: 
1,   2,   3,   4,   5,   6,   7,   8,   9,   10,   11,   12
2022; 21: 
1,   2,   3,   4,   5,   6,   7,   8,   9,   10,   11,   12
2021; 20: 
1,   2,   3,   4,   5,   6,   7,   8,   9,   10,   11,   12
2020; 19: 
1,   2,   3,   4,   5,   6,   7,   8,   9,   10,   11,   12
2019; 18: 
1,   2,   3,   4,   5,   6,   7,   8,   9,   10,   11,   12
2018; 17: 
1,   2,   3,   4,   5,   6,   7,   8,   9,   10,   11,   12
2017; 16: 
1,   2,   3,   4,   5,   6,   7,   8,   9,   10,   11,   12
2016; 15: 
1,   2,   3,   4,   5,   6,   7,   8,   9,   10,   11,   12
2015; 14: 
1,   2,   3,   4,   5,   6,   7,   8,   9,   10,   11,   12
2014; 13: 
1,   2,   3,   4,   5,   6,   7,   8,   9,   10,   11,   12
2013; 12: 
1,   2,   3,   4,   5,   6
2012; 11: 
1,   2,   3,   4,   5,   6
2011; 10: 
1,   2,   3,   4,   5,   6
2010; 9: 
1,   2,   3,   4,   5,   6
2009; 8: 
1,   2,   3,   4,   5,   6
2008; 7: 
1,   2,   3,   4
2007; 6: 
1,   2,   3,   4
2006; 5: 
1,   2
2005; 4: 
1,   2
2004; 3: 
1
2003; 2: 
1,   2
2002; 1: 
1,   2

News Updates