Hostname: page-component-77c78cf97d-7dld4 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2026-04-25T04:42:04.363Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Risk factors for ciprofloxacin resistance in reported Campylobacter infections in southern Alberta

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  03 August 2007

J. Y. M. JOHNSON
Affiliation:
Department of Public Health Sciences, University of Alberta, Edmonton, Alberta, Canada Department of Agriculture, Food, and Nutritional Science, University of Alberta, Edmonton, Alberta, Canada
L. M. McMULLEN
Affiliation:
Department of Agriculture, Food, and Nutritional Science, University of Alberta, Edmonton, Alberta, Canada
P. HASSELBACK
Affiliation:
Interior Health Authority, Kelowna, British Columbia, Canada
M. LOUIE
Affiliation:
Provincial Laboratory for Public Health (Microbiology), Calgary, Alberta, Canada
G. JHANGRI
Affiliation:
Department of Public Health Sciences, University of Alberta, Edmonton, Alberta, Canada
L. D. SAUNDERS*
Affiliation:
Department of Public Health Sciences, University of Alberta, Edmonton, Alberta, Canada
*
*Address for correspondence: Dr L. D. Saunders, Department of Public Health Sciences, 13-103 Clinical Sciences Building, University of Alberta, Edmonton, Alberta, T6G 2G3, Canada. (Email: Duncan.Saunders@ualberta.ca)
Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Summary

We conducted a case-control study examining risk factors for ciprofloxacin resistance in Campylobacter infections that were reported in 2004 and 2005 in two health regions in southern Alberta. The study questionnaire included questions about recent travel and antibiotic use, food consumption frequency, use of household and personal hygiene products with antibacterial agents, contact with animals, and potential misuse of antibiotics. Of the 210 patients who participated, 31·0% had ciprofloxacin-resistant Campylobacter infections. Foreign travel was the strongest predictor of resistance. Surprisingly, possession of antibiotics for future use was identified as a risk factor for resistance. We also examined the potential for participation bias and resistance misclassification to affect the resulting multivariable models. Participation bias appears to have had a substantial effect on the model results, but the estimated misclassification effect due to the use of different ciprofloxacin susceptibility testing methods was only slight.

Information

Type
Original Papers
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 2007
Figure 0

Table 1. Definition of some study independent variables and abbreviations used in text and tables

Figure 1

Table 2. Distribution of ciprofloxacin-resistant Campylobacter cases and ciprofloxacin-susceptible Campylobacter controls in southern Alberta, 1 February 2004–29 July 2005 (n=210)

Figure 2

Table 3. Univariate analyses of risk factors for ciprofloxacin resistance of Campylobacter strains. Data collected from reported Campylobacter infections in southern Alberta, 1 February 2004–29 July 2005 (n=210)

Figure 3

Table 4. Univariate analyses of risk factors for ciprofloxacin resistance of Campylobacter strains from reported Campylobacter infections in southern Alberta, 1 February 2004–31 January 2005 (n=133)

Figure 4

Table 5. Risk factors for ciprofloxacin resistance identified from multivariable logistic regression model of reported Campylobacter infections (N=205) in southern Alberta, 1 February 2004–29 July 2005