Browsing by Author "Odongo, Charles O."

Now showing 1 - 2 of 2
  • Thumbnail Image
    Item
    Antibiograms from community-acquired uropathogens in Gulu, northern Uganda - a cross-sectional study
    (BMC infectious diseases, 2013) Odongo, Charles O.; Anywar, Denis A.; Luryamamoi, Kenneth; Odongo, Pancras
    Urinary tract infections (UTI) are common in clinical practice and empirical treatment is largely employed due to predictability of pathogens. However, variations in antibiotic sensitivity patterns do occur, and documentation is needed to inform local empirical therapy. The current edition of the Uganda Clinical Guidelines recommends amoxicillin or cotrimoxazole as choice drugs for empirical treatment of community-acquired UTI. From our clinical observations, we suspected that this recommendation was not effective in our setting. In order to examine validity, we sought to identify bacteria from community-acquired infections and determine their susceptibility against these antibiotics plus a range of potentially useful alternatives for treatment of UTI. Methods: A cross-sectional study of mid-stream urine collected from 339 symptomatic patients over a three-month period at Gulu regional referral hospital. Qualitative culture and identification of bacteria and antibiotic sensitivity testing using the modified Kirby-Bauer disk diffusion method was done. Participants’ demographic and clinical characteristics were collected using a standard form. Results were analyzed by simple proportions among related variables and confidence intervals computed using binomial exact distribution. Results: Eighty two cultures were positive for UTI. Staphylococcus spp (46.3%) and Escherichia coli (39%) were the most common pathogens. There was high resistance to cotrimoxazole (73.2%), nalidixic acid (52.4%) and amoxicillin (51.2%). The most favorable antibiograms were obtained with gentamicin, amoxicillin-clavulanate and levofloxacin where 85.4%, 72.0%, 67.1% of isolates respectively, were either sensitive or intermediate. Only 51% of isolates were sensitive to ciprofloxacin.
  • Thumbnail Image
    Item
    Is there a distinction between malaria treatment and intermittent preventive treatment? Insights from a cross-sectional study of anti-malarial drug use among Ugandan pregnant women
    (Malaria journal, 2015) Odongo, Charles O.; Bisaso, Kuteesa R.; Kitutu, Freddy; Obua, Celestino; Byamugisha, Josaphat
    In Uganda, treatment of clinical malaria and intermittent preventive treatment with sulphadoxinepyrimethamine (SP) are common during pregnancy. As a result, both formal and informal reports from antenatal sources suggest possible misuse of SP for malaria treatment among pregnant women. The objective of this study was to investigate anti-malarial drug use patterns among women who had recently suffered malaria illness before and during pregnancy. Methods: A cross-sectional study in which a structured questionnaire (interviewer-administered) was used to collect data from pregnant women attending an urban antenatal clinic. Details of medicines used to treat malaria episodes suffered before and during pregnancy were captured. A first order Markov probability model was used to estimate probabilities of transitioning between treatment choices made before and during pregnancy. Logistic regression was used to explore whether demographic and obstetric characteristics were associated with transition patterns. Results: Seven hundred women were interviewed among whom 428 had suffered malaria in both instances. Three hundred thirty of these could recall the medicines used in both instances. Women who used ACT/QNN (correct choice) before pregnancy had higher probabilities of transitioning to SP than staying on ACT/QNN during pregnancy (0.463 versus 0.451). Access of medicines from private outlets (clinics and pharmacies) were more than nine times predictive of receiving correct medicines (p=0.035 and p=0.039 respectively). Access of medicines from clinics was 5.9 times protective against receiving SP for malaria treatment (p=0.033). Among those who used SP before pregnancy, there was a 0.75 probability of staying on it during pregnancy. None of the factors explored could explain this observation. Conclusion: Use of SP for malaria treatment is common during pregnancy. This may be contributing to adverse pregnancy outcomes. Antenatal care providers should endeavour to emphasize the distinction between treatment and prevention of malaria during pregnancy.