Comparison of microscan MICroSTREP, PASCO, and sensititre MIC panels for determining antimicrobial susceptibilities of Streptococcus pneumoniae

Linda L. Guthrie, Shawn Banks, Wendy Setiawan, Ken B. Waites

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

12 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

The MicroScan MICroSTREP MIC panel was compared with PASCO and Sensititre systems against 157 isolates of Streptococcus pneumoniae chosen to include penicillin-susceptible, intermediate, and resistant strains. Arbitration testing was performed by microbroth dilution using National Committee for Clinical Laboratory Standards guidelines. Overall essential agreement of 94-97% and categorical agreement of 91-94% with the reference method was achieved for the three systems. There were 8 very major errors (false susceptibility) for PASCO, 10 for Sensititre, and 9 for MICroSTREP; 4 major errors (false resistance) each for PASCO and MICroSTREP, and 6 for Sensititre. Most of these errors occurred with trimethoprim/sulfamethoxazole. Minor errors (susceptible or resistant versus intermediate) totaled 47 for PASCO, 69 for Sensititre, and 53 for MICroSTREP. Minor interpretive errors were most common with penicillin and ceftriaxone. This study showed that all three MIC panels provided interpretive results comparable to one another and to the reference method. Copyright (C) 1999 Elsevier Science Inc.

Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)267-273
Number of pages7
JournalDiagnostic Microbiology and Infectious Disease
Volume33
Issue number4
DOIs
StatePublished - Apr 1 1999
Externally publishedYes

Fingerprint

Streptococcus pneumoniae
Penicillins
Ceftriaxone
Negotiating
Sulfamethoxazole Drug Combination Trimethoprim
Guidelines

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Infectious Diseases
  • Immunology and Allergy
  • Virology
  • Parasitology
  • Microbiology
  • Immunology
  • Applied Microbiology and Biotechnology

Cite this

Comparison of microscan MICroSTREP, PASCO, and sensititre MIC panels for determining antimicrobial susceptibilities of Streptococcus pneumoniae. / Guthrie, Linda L.; Banks, Shawn; Setiawan, Wendy; Waites, Ken B.

In: Diagnostic Microbiology and Infectious Disease, Vol. 33, No. 4, 01.04.1999, p. 267-273.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

@article{2d83ad11e5cd4cc484fc2036c93a4d6a,
title = "Comparison of microscan MICroSTREP, PASCO, and sensititre MIC panels for determining antimicrobial susceptibilities of Streptococcus pneumoniae",
abstract = "The MicroScan MICroSTREP MIC panel was compared with PASCO and Sensititre systems against 157 isolates of Streptococcus pneumoniae chosen to include penicillin-susceptible, intermediate, and resistant strains. Arbitration testing was performed by microbroth dilution using National Committee for Clinical Laboratory Standards guidelines. Overall essential agreement of 94-97{\%} and categorical agreement of 91-94{\%} with the reference method was achieved for the three systems. There were 8 very major errors (false susceptibility) for PASCO, 10 for Sensititre, and 9 for MICroSTREP; 4 major errors (false resistance) each for PASCO and MICroSTREP, and 6 for Sensititre. Most of these errors occurred with trimethoprim/sulfamethoxazole. Minor errors (susceptible or resistant versus intermediate) totaled 47 for PASCO, 69 for Sensititre, and 53 for MICroSTREP. Minor interpretive errors were most common with penicillin and ceftriaxone. This study showed that all three MIC panels provided interpretive results comparable to one another and to the reference method. Copyright (C) 1999 Elsevier Science Inc.",
author = "Guthrie, {Linda L.} and Shawn Banks and Wendy Setiawan and Waites, {Ken B.}",
year = "1999",
month = "4",
day = "1",
doi = "10.1016/S0732-8893(98)00151-5",
language = "English",
volume = "33",
pages = "267--273",
journal = "Diagnostic Microbiology and Infectious Disease",
issn = "0732-8893",
publisher = "Elsevier Inc.",
number = "4",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Comparison of microscan MICroSTREP, PASCO, and sensititre MIC panels for determining antimicrobial susceptibilities of Streptococcus pneumoniae

AU - Guthrie, Linda L.

AU - Banks, Shawn

AU - Setiawan, Wendy

AU - Waites, Ken B.

PY - 1999/4/1

Y1 - 1999/4/1

N2 - The MicroScan MICroSTREP MIC panel was compared with PASCO and Sensititre systems against 157 isolates of Streptococcus pneumoniae chosen to include penicillin-susceptible, intermediate, and resistant strains. Arbitration testing was performed by microbroth dilution using National Committee for Clinical Laboratory Standards guidelines. Overall essential agreement of 94-97% and categorical agreement of 91-94% with the reference method was achieved for the three systems. There were 8 very major errors (false susceptibility) for PASCO, 10 for Sensititre, and 9 for MICroSTREP; 4 major errors (false resistance) each for PASCO and MICroSTREP, and 6 for Sensititre. Most of these errors occurred with trimethoprim/sulfamethoxazole. Minor errors (susceptible or resistant versus intermediate) totaled 47 for PASCO, 69 for Sensititre, and 53 for MICroSTREP. Minor interpretive errors were most common with penicillin and ceftriaxone. This study showed that all three MIC panels provided interpretive results comparable to one another and to the reference method. Copyright (C) 1999 Elsevier Science Inc.

AB - The MicroScan MICroSTREP MIC panel was compared with PASCO and Sensititre systems against 157 isolates of Streptococcus pneumoniae chosen to include penicillin-susceptible, intermediate, and resistant strains. Arbitration testing was performed by microbroth dilution using National Committee for Clinical Laboratory Standards guidelines. Overall essential agreement of 94-97% and categorical agreement of 91-94% with the reference method was achieved for the three systems. There were 8 very major errors (false susceptibility) for PASCO, 10 for Sensititre, and 9 for MICroSTREP; 4 major errors (false resistance) each for PASCO and MICroSTREP, and 6 for Sensititre. Most of these errors occurred with trimethoprim/sulfamethoxazole. Minor errors (susceptible or resistant versus intermediate) totaled 47 for PASCO, 69 for Sensititre, and 53 for MICroSTREP. Minor interpretive errors were most common with penicillin and ceftriaxone. This study showed that all three MIC panels provided interpretive results comparable to one another and to the reference method. Copyright (C) 1999 Elsevier Science Inc.

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=0033059740&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=0033059740&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1016/S0732-8893(98)00151-5

DO - 10.1016/S0732-8893(98)00151-5

M3 - Article

VL - 33

SP - 267

EP - 273

JO - Diagnostic Microbiology and Infectious Disease

JF - Diagnostic Microbiology and Infectious Disease

SN - 0732-8893

IS - 4

ER -