BACTERIAL CONTAMINATION OF DIALYSIS WATER AND DIALYSATE AT MUKALLA ARTIFICIAL KIDNEY CENTER IN MUKALLA CITY - HADHRAMAUT - YEMEN: RATE OF CONTAMINATION AND SENSITIVITY OF BACTERIAL ISOLATES TO ANTIBIOTICS
Objective: Water treatment systems are a vital factor in dialysis therapy and precise control of hemodialysis water bacteriological quality is predominantly important in order to assurance a better quality of life of the hemodialysis patients. The purpose of this study was to detect the level of contamination in hemodialysis water and dialysate by bacteria in Mukalla Artificial Kidney Center and investigate the antimicrobial resistance patterns of isolated bacteria.
Methods: Forty eight samples of water and dialysate were assembled weekly over a period of 3 months from 4 points. Bacteriological analysis of samples was carried out then antimicrobial susceptibilities patterns of isolated bacteria were concluded by disk diffusion method.
Results: The mean of total count of bacteria for dialysis water and dialysate were higher than the recommended values (100 CFU/ ml). The isolated bacteria which colonized the hemodialysis systems were mostly Gram-negative bacilli as Pseudomonas sp., Serratia sp., Citrobacter sp. and Enterobater sp. In general, most of the isolated bacteria were poorly responsive to antibiotics.
Conclusion: In conclusion: Dialysis water and dialysate not passed to meet the bacteriological provisions for hemodialysis. To reduce the hazard of contaminants for hemodialysis patients, a sufficient system for water treatment, disinfection of hemodialysis system, and bacteriological contamination monitoring of the water and dialysate are necessary.
Peer Review History:
Received 20 November 2019; Revised 11 December 2019; Accepted 1 January 2020, Available online 15 January 2020
UJPR follows the most transparent and toughest ‘Advanced OPEN peer review’ system. The identity of the authors and, reviewers will be known to each other. This transparent process will help to eradicate any possible malicious/purposeful interference by any person (publishing staff, reviewer, editor, author, etc) during peer review. As a result of this unique system, all reviewers will get their due recognition and respect, once their names are published in the papers. We expect that, by publishing peer review reports with published papers, will be helpful to many authors for drafting their article according to the specifications. Auhors will remove any error of their article and they will improve their article(s) according to the previous reports displayed with published article(s). The main purpose of it is ‘to improve the quality of a candidate manuscript’. Our reviewers check the ‘strength and weakness of a manuscript honestly’. There will increase in the perfection, and transparency.
Average Peer review marks at initial stage: 6.0/10
Average Peer review marks at publication stage: 8.5/10