ArticleThe Journal of antimicrobial chemotherapy2025
Antimicrobial resistance among Gram-positive agents of bacteraemia in the UK and Ireland: trends from 2001 to 2019.
Article in The Journal of antimicrobial chemotherapy, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Antimicrobial resistance among agents of hospital-acquired lower respiratory tract infection in the UK and Ireland: trends from 2008/2009 to 2018/2019.The Journal of antimicrobial chemotherapy · 2025Article
- Two decades of resistance surveillance by the British Society for Antimicrobial Chemotherapy: design, development, delivery, deficiencies and future directions.The Journal of antimicrobial chemotherapy · 2025Article
- The British Society for Antimicrobial Chemotherapy Resistance Surveillance Project: methods and limitations.The Journal of antimicrobial chemotherapy · 2025Article
- Trends of serotypes and resistance among Streptococcus pneumoniae in the UK and Ireland (1999-2019).The Journal of antimicrobial chemotherapy · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
11 authors.
Funding
Abstract
objectivesThe BSAC Bacteraemia Resistance Surveillance collected isolates from UK and Irish hospitals for central testing. Concurrent UKHSA surveillance collated English hospitals' own susceptibility data. Results were collated and compared.
methodsBSAC Surveillance collected quotas of isolates per site annually from 2001 to 2019. MIC testing was by BSAC agar dilution, with resistance mechanisms identified by synergy tests, interpretive reading and PCR. The UKHSA sought hospitals' data on all bacteraemia isolates.
resultsBoth surveillance systems recorded dramatic falls in MRSA, from c. 40% of bloodstream Staphylococcus aureus in 2001 to <10% by 2019. Both noted rises in the proportion of MRSA (especially) and MSSA resistant to fusidic acid, along with declines of ciprofloxacin and macrolide resistance amongst MRSA. Methicillin resistance also fell among coagulase-negative staphylococci, albeit only modestly; fusidic acid resistance rose. Shifts for pneumococci were complex, reflecting vaccine-contingent serotype displacements; resistance rates remained low, with high-dose penicillin almost universally active. Enterococcus faecium became more prevalent relative to Enterococcus faecalis; vancomycin resistance averaged 29% among E. faecium versus 2% in E. faecalis, without trend. Erythromycin resistance rose among groups B, C and G (but not group A) streptococci. Oxazolidinones, tigecycline, daptomycin and anti-PBP2' cephalosporins retained near-universal activity against target species, except that tigecycline has been compromised by breakpoint reductions for streptococci.
conclusionsGram-positive pathogens were the dominant historical pathogens of bacteraemia. The trends seen here-with many near-universally active antibiotics-indicate little hazard of this situation returning. Nevertheless, few treatments exist in some settings, notably multi-resistant E. faecium endocarditis.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.