FUW TRENDS IN SCIENCE & TECHNOLOGY JOURNAL
(A Peer Review Journal)
e–ISSN: 2408–5162; p–ISSN: 2048–5170
keywords: Amoxicillin, antibiotic, brand, ciprofloxacin, erythromycin, S. aureus
This study is to compare the effectiveness of three (3) different commercial brands of antibiotics (the antibiotics selected for the comparison include: Amoxicillin, Ciprofloxacin and Erythromycin) against the standard (NCTC 8854) and two (2) clinical Staphylococcus aureus isolated from wounds of two different patients attending Bethel Hospital Wukari, Taraba State. The brands of antibiotics selected and used for this work were marked as Brand 1, 2 and 3. The methods of assay used were, Dilution Test for the determination of Minimum Inhibitory Concentration (MIC) and Minimum Bactericidal Concentration (MBC) following these concentrations: 1, 10-1, 10-2, 10-3, 10-4 and 10-5 mg/ml along with positive and negative control for all the antibiotics. Disc Diffusion Test was carried out to determine the Antibiotic Susceptibility Test (AST). The discs used were locally produced with the concentration of 1 mg/ml for each of the antibiotics. Brand 3 antibiotics were found to be the most effective against all the isolates with MIC as low as 10-3 mg/ml and MBC of 10-1 mg/ml. There was no much differences in the AST of the different brands. Ciprofloxacin showed up as the antibiotic with better MIC and MBC. Therefore, in comparing the effectiveness of the three (3) different commercial brands of antibiotics; the Brand 3 is the most effective brand while ciprofloxacin is the most effective antibiotic.
Cheesbrough M 2006. Medical Laboratory Manual for Tropical Countries, II Microbiology (ELBS), 2nd edition. Butterworth, Kent, UK, pp. 23-78. El-Astal Z 2005. Bacterial pathogens and their antimicrobial susceptibility in Gaza Strip, Palestine. Pak. J. Med. Sci., 20 (4): 365 370. Gorwitz RJ 2008. Changes in the prevalence of nasal colonization with Staphylococcus aureus in the United States, 2001–2004. J. Infect. Dis., 197: 1226 1234 Hugo WB & Russell AD 2004. Pharmaceutical Microbiology. Blackwell Publishing; 7th edition: 120. Lalitha KM 2005. Manual on antimicrobial susceptibility testing. Indian Assoc. Med. Microbiol., 6 – 20. Masroor I, Ahmed MN & Pasha S 2009. To evaluate the role of sonography as an adjunct tomammography in women with dense breasts. J. Pak. Med. Assoc. 59: 298 – 301.Miller LG & Diep BA 2008. Clinical practice: Colonization, fomites, and virulence: Rethinking the pathogenesis of community-associated methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus infection. Clin. Infect. Dis., 46: 752 – 760. Moges F & Genetu A 2002. Antibiotic sensitivity of common bacterial pathogens in urinary tract infections at Gonder Hospital, Ethiopia. East Afri. Med. J., 79: 140-142. Nkang OA, Okonko OI, Lennox AJ, Babalola TE, Adewale GO, Motayo OB, Mejeha KO, Adekolurejo AO & Amande TJ 2010. Survey of the efficacy and quality of some brands of the antibiotics sold in Calabar Metropolis, South-south region of Nigeria. Sci. Res. & Essays, 5 (4): 395 – 406. Sharma CP, Jain A & Jain S 2009. Fluoroquinolone antibacterials: A review on chemistry, microbiology and therapeutic prospects. Acta Poloniae Pharmaceutica & Drug Res., 66 (6): 587-604. Tessema B, Kassu A, Mulu A & Yismaw G 2007. Predominant Isolates of Urinary Tract Pathogens and their susceptibility Patterns in Gonder University Teaching Hospital, Northwest Ethiopia. Ethiopian Medical Journal, 45: 61- 67. WHO (World Health Organization) (2017). WHO Publishes List of Bacteria for which New Antibiotics are Urgently Needed. Geneva WHO (World Health Organization) 2014. Antimicrobial Resistance: Global Rep. on Surveil. Available online: http://apps.who.int/iris/bitstream. Zhanel GG, Hisanaga TL, Laing NM, DeCorby MR, Nichol KA, Palatnik LP, Johnson J, Noreddin A, Harding GK, Nicolle LE & Hoban DJ 2005. Antibiotic resistance in outpatient urinary isolates: Final results from the North American Urinary Tract Infection Collaborative Alliance (NAUTICA). Inter. J. Antimicr. Agts., 26: 380-388.
