Skip to content

Advertisement

You're viewing the new version of our site. Please leave us feedback.

Learn more

BMC Research Notes

Open Access

Prevalence and drug susceptibility pattern of group B Streptococci (GBS) among pregnant women attending antenatal care (ANC) in Nekemte Referral Hospital (NRH), Nekemte, Ethiopia

BMC Research Notes201710:388

https://doi.org/10.1186/s13104-017-2725-3

Received: 10 June 2017

Accepted: 2 August 2017

Published: 10 August 2017

Abstract

Objective

The main objective of this study was to determine the prevalence and drug susceptibility pattern of group B Streptococci (GBS) among pregnant women. The specific objectives include; (1) To determine the prevalence of GBS colonization among pregnant women (2) To determine the drug susceptibility pattern of GBS among pregnant women and (3) To identify associated risk factors with GBS colonization among pregnant women.

Results

The median age of the participants was 24.5 years (range 16–38) and 86% participants were urban residents. The total prevalence of maternal GBS colonization from vaginal swab culture was 12.2% (22/180). The prevalence of GBS colonization rate was significantly higher in those pregnant women above 37 weeks of gestation [AOR, 95% CI 2.1 (1.2, 11.6), P = 0.03] and married ones [AOR, 95% CI 3.2 (1.8, 11.6), P < 0.021]. Twenty (91%) of GBS isolates were sensitive to vancomycin and the highest resistance was observed against penicillin G (77.3%). The prevalence of GBS colonization in this study was significantly high and differed by gestational age and marital status. None of the GBS isolates were resistant to vancomycin but higher resistance was shown against Penicillin G.

Keywords

Prevalence of GBSDrug susceptibility patternPregnant womenNekemte

Introduction

Group B Streptococcus causes invasive disease primarily in infants, pregnant or postpartum women, and older adults, with the highest incidence among young infants. Maternal infections of GBS constitute one of the leading pathogens associated with both early and late-onset neonatal sepsis. Maternal vaginal GBS colonization is related with early onset of neonatal sepsis and subsequent colonization during birth occurs in approximately 70–75% of infants [14].

Studies state that maternal intrapartum GBS colonization is the primary risk factor for early-onset disease in infants. A study conducted in the 1980s revealed that pregnant women with GBS colonization were >25 times more likely than pregnant women with negative prenatal cultures to deliver infants with early-onset GBS disease [5].

Although intrapartum prophylaxis has been established to lead to a 70% decline in the incidence of GBS disease, early-onset GBS disease remains a leading cause of illness and death among newborns less than the age of 7 days [6]. GBS colonization rate is significantly important and the isolates are variably sensitive to different antimicrobials as revealed by different studies from Ethiopia [7, 8].

There is a paucity of published data concerning maternal GBS colonization and antimicrobial susceptibility patterns in West Ethiopia particularly in the study area (Nekemte). The present study is, therefore, aimed to determine prevalence and drug susceptibility pattern of GBS among pregnant women attending antenatal care (ANC) in Nekemte Town, Western Ethiopia.

Main text

Materials and methods

Study setting and context

A prospective cross-sectional study was conducted between March and May 2016 in Nekemte Referral Hospital (NRH).

Sample size and sampling technique

Sample size was calculated using single population proportion formula considering 95% CI and P = 0.21 from the previous study conducted in Hawassa, Ethiopia [8] as follows;
$${\text{n}} = {\text{Z}}_{{({\text{a}}/ 2)}}^{ 2} {\text{P}}\left( { 1- {\text{P}}} \right)/{\text{d}}^{ 2}$$
where the average number of pregnant women attending ANC in NRH per 2 months (N) was 480. Therefore, based on correction formula (n = n0/(1 + n0/N)) and 20% contingency, a total of 180 pregnant women were enrolled consecutively in the study.

Study population and data collection

Pregnant women with gestational age of ≥35 weeks were included. Site assessment and pre-test were done prior to data collection and questionnaires were used to obtain data on socio-demographic, obstetric and clinical factors. The questionnaires were developed in English and participants were interviewed using local language; Afan Oromo. Nurses who can speak the local language were trained on data collection for this particular study. The data collectors were regularly supervised by the investigators.

Specimen collection and transportation

Vaginal swabs were collected by brushing the lower vagina with a sterile cotton swab by trained nurses following universal precautions [9]. The swabs were immediately inoculated in 1.5 ml Todd Hewitt broth (supplemented with colistin and nalidixic acid) and transported to the Medical Microbiology laboratory of Nekemte Regional Laboratory (NRL).

Culture and identification of GBS

The broth was incubated for 18–24 h at 35–37 °C and subcultured on 5% sheep blood agar (OXOID, UK) and then incubated overnight in 5% CO2 atmosphere for 18–24 h. All suspected GBS colonies (with narrow beta-hemolysis) were sub-cultured on nutrient agar and subjected to gram stain and catalase test. All gram-positive and catalase negative isolates were tested for Bacitracin sensitivity and CAMP test for confirmation.

CAMP test

The CAMP test is used to identify beta-hemolytic streptococci; Streptococcus agalactiae (group B) (CAMP positive) from Streptococcus pyogenes (group A) (CAMP negative). In brief, Staphylococcus aureus is inoculated onto a sheep blood agar plate by making a narrow streak down the center of the plate with a loop. The test organism (group B Streptococcus) is then streaked in a straight-line inoculum at right angles to the S. aureus within 2 mm far. The plates are incubated at 35 °C for 24 h. A positive CAMP result is indicated by an “arrowhead”-shaped enhanced zone of beta-hemolysis in the area between the two cultures with the “arrow point” toward the S. aureus streak. No enhanced zone of beta-hemolysis is observed in a CAMP negative reaction [10].

Antimicrobial susceptibility testing

The inoculums were prepared by suspending 4–5 isolated colonies of the same morphology in 5 ml of sterile physiological saline equal to a 0.5 McFarland’s standard used as a reference to adjust the turbidity of bacterial suspensions. Colonies were inoculated on Mueller–Hinton agar (MHA) plates supplemented with 5% defibrinated sheep blood. Then antibiotic disks were placed and incubated at 35–37 °C under 5% CO2 atmosphere for 20 h. Six antibiotic disks (Oxoid) namely; Penicillin G (P) (10 IU), erythromycin (E) (15 μg), ceftriaxone (CRO) (30 μg), chloramphenicol (C) (30 μg), vancomycin (VA) (30 μg) and Clindamycin (CLI) (10 μg) were used Each isolate was classified as susceptible, intermediate or resistant to each antibiotic tested based on clinical laboratory standards institute (CLSI) guideline [11].

Data processing and analysis

Data were cleaned, coded and double entered into EpiData 3.1 version software. Then data were exported to SPSS 24 version software for analysis. Binary logistic regression models were used to determine the association between predictors and dependent variables. P values ≤0.05 were taken to a significant level.

Quality control

Standard operating procedures (SOPs) were followed during sample collection, transportation, and processing steps. The proficiency of Todd–Hewitt broth was checked by inoculating the broth with known Gram-negative bacteria (Escherichia coli) and GBS isolates to see if it can really inhibit Gram-negative bacteria and allow growth of Gram-positive bacteria. Before using any reagents and culture media, any physical change was assessed and expiration date checked. The quality of the culture media and antimicrobial disks was checked using standard American Type Culture Collection (ATCC) reference strain of Staphylococcus aureus ATCC 25923, Escherichia coli (ATCC 25922) and S. agalactiae isolates (ATCC 12386).

Results

Socio-demographic characteristics

A total of 180 pregnant women were recruited with a median age of 24.5 years (Range 16–38 years). As shown in Table 1, most participants were aged below 29 years old (78.3%), urban residents (86.1%), housewives (64.4%), married (95.6%) and literates (90.6%).
Table 1

Socio-demographic, obstetric and clinical characteristics and factors affecting maternal GBS colonization rate among pregnant women attending ANC in NRH from March to May 2016, Nekemte, Ethiopia

Variables

GBS

Total, n (%)

COR (95% CI)

AOR (95% CI)

Positive, n (%)

Negative, n (%)

Age group (in years)

 <29

15 (10.6)

126 (89.4)

131 (78.3)

1.4 (0.2, 12.3)

 

 ≥29

7 (18)

32 (82)

39 (21.7)

1

 

Residence

 Rural

5 (20)

20 (80)

25 (13.9)

1

 

 Urban

17 (11)

138 (89)

155 (86.1)

1.3 (0.8, 3.1)

 

Occupation

 Farmer

3 (43)

4 (57)

7 (3.9)

 

 Housewife

12 (10.3)

104 (89.7)

116 (64.4)

3.7 (0.4, 37)

 

 Merchant

2 (40)

3 (60)

5 (2.8)

  

 Civil servant

5 (9.6)

47 (90.4)

52 (28.9)

1

 

Marital status

 Single

3 (37.5)

5 (62.5)

8 (4.4)

4.7 (0.5, 46)*

3.2 (1.8, 11.6)**

 Married

19 (11)

153 (89)

172 (95.6)

1

1

Educational status

 Illiterate

9 (53)

8 (47)

17 (9.4)

1

 

 Literate

13 (8)

150 (92)

163 (90.6)

1 (1.01, 1,08)

 

Gravida

 Multigravida

14 (13.5)

90 (86.5)

104 (57.8)

1

 

 Primigravida

8 (10.5)

68 (89.5)

76 (42.2)

1.5 (0.3, 8.3)

 

Gestational age (weeks)

 35–37 

4 (3.1)

127 (96.9)

131 (72.8)

0.4 (0.07, 1.8)*

2.1 (1.2, 11.6)**

 >37 

18 (35.3)

31 (63.9)

49 (27.2)

1

1

Recent antibiotic treatment

 Yes

9 (17.6)

42 (82.4)

51 (28.3)

1

 

 No

13 (10)

116 (90)

129 (71.7)

1.3 (0.2, 7.2)

 

Contraception

 Yes

10 (8)

116 (92)

126 (70)

0.4 (0.08, 2.1)

 

 No

12 (22.2)

42 (77.8)

54 (30)

1

 

COR crude odds ratio, AOR adjusted odds ratio, NRH Nekemte referral hospital

* (marginally significant at P < 0.1)

** (significant at P < 0.05)

Obstetric and clinical characteristics

Regarding obstetric and clinical characteristics of the study participants; 104 (57.8%) were multigravida, 131 (72.8%) were between 35 and 37 weeks of gestational age, 129 (71.7%) had no history of recent antibiotic treatment and 175 (97.2%) had no history of stillbirth (Table 1).

Maternal GBS colonization and associated risk factors

The total GBS colonization rate from vaginal swab culture was 12.2% (22/180). From the total GBS isolates majority were from pregnant women aged below 29 years old (15, 68.2%), urban residents (17/22, 77.3%), housewives (12, 854.5%), married ones (19, 86.4%), literates (13, 59%), multigravida (14, 63.6%), with no recent antibiotic treatment (13, 59%), with no history of oral contraception use (12, 54.5%) and in those with gestational age above 37 weeks (18, 81.8%) (Table 1).

The prevalence of GBS colonization was significantly higher in those pregnant women above 37 weeks of gestation [AOR, 95% CI 2.1 (1.2, 11.6), P = 0.03] and married pregnant women [AOR, 95% CI 3.2 (1.8, 11.6), P = 0.021]. Therefore, married pregnant women and those above 37 weeks of gestation were 3.2 and 2.1 times more likely to be colonized by GBS than their counterparts, respectively (Table 1).

Antibiotic susceptibility pattern of GBS isolates

Twenty (91%) of GBS isolates were sensitive to vancomycin. All isolates were multi-drug resistant. The highest resistance was observed against penicillin G, 17 (77.3%). Nine (41%) of the isolates were intermediate against ceftriaxone. Half of the isolates were sensitive to clindamycin and 36.4% of them were intermediate against erythromycin (Table 2).
Table 2

GBS in vitro antimicrobial susceptibility pattern, 2016, Nekemte, Ethiopia

Antimicrobial

Sensitive

Intermediate

Resistant

Frequency (n = 22)

Percent (%)

Frequency (n = 22)

Percent (%)

Frequency (n = 22)

Percent (%)

Penicillin G (P)

3

13.6

2

9.1

17

77.3

Erythromycin (E)

9

41

8

36.4

5

22.6

Ceftriaxone (CRO)

6

27.2

9

41

7

31.8

Chloramphenicol (C)

11

50

11

50

Vancomycin (VA)

20

91

2

9

Clindamycin (CLI)

11

50

7

31.8

4

18.2

Discussion

The prevalence of GBS colonization during pregnancy is variable [12] and different studies have reported variable susceptibility of GBS against commonly prescribed drugs that indicates the importance of performing drug susceptibility test prior to prescription.

In this study, the total GBS colonization rate from vaginal swab culture was 12.2% (22/180). Although we have assessed the association of socio-demographic, obstetric and clinical variables with GBS colonization, only gestational age, and marital status were significant predictors of maternal GBS colonization (P < 0.05). We found that most (91%) GBS isolates were sensitive to vancomycin and the highest resistance of GBS isolates was observed against penicillin G (77.3%).

This 12.2% prevalence of maternal GBS colonization in this study is comparatively lower than studies from Hawassa (20.9%) [8], Italy (17.9%) [13], the Netherlands (21%) [14], Tanzania (23%) [16], China (27.7%) [20] and Uganda (28.8%) [22]. But it is higher or comparable with studies from Hong-Kong (10.4%) [15], Nigeria (11.3, 18%) [17, 18], Argentina (7.6%) [19], Saudi (13.4%) [21], different districts of Ethiopia (Gondar, Mekelle, Adigrat and Addis Ababa) (9, 13.7, 11.3 and 7.2%) [12, 23, 24 and 25]. This result is definitely higher than studies from Mozambique (1.8%) [26] and India (2.3%) [27].

The possible reasons for the above differences might be due to differences in geography (for data outside Ethiopia), differences in sample size (smaller or higher than others), specimen differences (most studies used anovaginal swab while only vaginal swab was used in the current study which may render our results), differences in gestational age (some studies recruited pregnant women of all gestational ages, others involved gestational ages of 35–37 weeks but pregnant women with gestational ages of ≥35 weeks were recruited the current study), and differences in sampling frame (most studies included both health center and hospital ANC attendants unlike the current study which was based at referral hospital which in turn may decrease GBS colonization rates).

Only gestational age above 37 weeks and being married were significant predictors of GBS colonization in the current study. This is consistent with different studies (8, 16, 18, 22 and 23) where authors reported a few significant risk factors for the higher maternal GBS colonization rates.

Regarding the antimicrobial susceptibility pattern of GBS isolates, most of GBS isolates were sensitive to vancomycin while the highest resistance was observed against penicillin and variable sensitivity to clindamycin and erythromycin. Except for vancomycin sensitivity, resistance of GBS isolates against penicillin G in the present study is in contrary from a study done in Saudi [21] where all isolates were sensitive to penicillin G. This high rate of GBS resistance in the current study might be due to differences in laboratory procedures and differences in community awareness in avoiding using non-prescribed Penicillin. The drug susceptibility pattern of GBS isolates to different antimicrobial discs in this study was partly consistent with different studies from abroad [18, 19, 27, 28] and from Ethiopia [8, 2325].

Two or more GBS isolates were intermediately sensitive to penicillin, erythromycin, ceftriaxone, and clindamycin. This is partly consistent with data from Mekelle and Adigrat [23, 24] but different from Hawassa and Addis Ababa [8, 25]. Three (13.6%) GBS isolates were sensitive to penicillin G in this study which is different from another finding in different districts of Ethiopia; Mekelle, Adigrat and Addis Ababa [2325] where authors reported a higher sensitivity of GBS to Penicillin. This may be due to the wide and non-prescription use of penicillin because of weak drug control mechanism in different settings of the country.

The differences in antimicrobial susceptibility patterns of GBS isolates against different antimicrobials might be due to the occurrence of differences regarding bacterial strain, laboratory procedures, bacterial load, laboratory facility, drug control policies and awareness of the community towards drug resistance. The findings of this research may help clinicians and policy makers to understand the magnitude of the problem and advance the fight against empirical treatment to prevent drug resistance.

Conclusion

The prevalence of maternal GBS colonization in this study is significantly high. Older gestational age and being married significantly increased the rate of maternal GBS colonization. None of the GBS isolates were resistant to vancomycin and half of the isolates were sensitive to chloramphenicol. Increased resistance was observed against Penicillin G and growing resistance was observed against erythromycin, clindamycin, and ceftriaxone. Screening of pregnant women for GBS colonization, AST before prescription, large-scale epidemiological studies are recommended in Ethiopia which will aid to put into practice antibiotics prophylaxis.

Limitations

This study has main limitations in terms of small sample size, non-probability sampling method, using disc diffusion for AST, exclusion of rectal swab and exclusion of neonates.

Abbreviations

AST: 

antimicrobial susceptibility test

ANC: 

antenatal care

AOR: 

adjusted odds ratio

CLSI: 

clinical laboratory standards institute

COR: 

crude odds ratio

GBS: 

group B Streptococci

NRH: 

nekemte referral hospital

NRL: 

nekemte regional laboratory

Declarations

Authors’ contributions

Conceived and designed the experiments: HMM. Performed the experiments: HMM. Analyzed the data: HMM. Contributed reagents/materials/analysis tools: HMM. Wrote the paper: HMM. Assisted with design, analysis, and interpretation of data: OZ, AB, RD. A critical review of the manuscript: OZ, AB, and RD. Read and approved the final manuscript: HMM, OZ, AB, RD. Critical appraisal of the manuscript: HMM, OZ, AB, RD. All authors read and approved the final manuscript.

Acknowledgements

We would like to express our gratitude to Wollega University research directorate for giving us the opportunity to undertake this research and funding. Our sincere and special thanks also go to all authors of references used in advance. We are happy to thank study participants and data collectors without whom this research could not be a reality. We duly acknowledge the staffs of Nekemte regional laboratory for their unreserved support and courage. In particular, I want to acknowledge my families for their patience.

Competing interests

The authors declare that they have no competing interests.

Availability of data and materials

The data sets during and/or analyzed during the current study are available from the corresponding author on reasonable request.

Consent for publication

Not applicable.

Ethics approval and consent to participate

The study was conducted after it was ethically reviewed and approved by the Institutional review board (IRB) of the research directorate of Wollega University. Then a letter informing the respective health center an administrator was written from Wollega University and permission obtained. All the information obtained from the study participants was coded to maintain confidentiality. Data were collected after participants consented. The IRB approved the use of oral consent documented by a witness after the objectives of the study had been explained. The positive results were timely reported to the clinicians for appropriate intervention.

Funding

The source of funding for the research was Wollega University research directorate office. The funder has no role in the design of the study and collection, analysis, and interpretation of data and in writing the manuscript.

Publisher’s Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Open AccessThis article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license, and indicate if changes were made. The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver (http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated.

Authors’ Affiliations

(1)
Department of Medical Laboratory Sciences, College of Medical and Health Sciences, Wollega University

References

  1. Phares CR, Lynfield R, Farley MM, Mohle-Boetani J, Harrison LH, Petit S, et al. Epidemiology of invasive group B streptococcal disease in the United States, 1999–2005. JAMA. 2008;299:2056–65.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  2. Apgar BS, Greenberg G, Yen G. Prevention of group B streptococcal disease in the newborn. Am Fam Physician. 2005;71:903–10.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  3. Goodman JR, Berg RL, Gribble RK, Meier PR, Fee SC, Mitchell PD. A longitudinal study of group B streptococcus carriage in pregnancy. Infect Dis Obstet Gynecol. 1997;5:237–43.View ArticlePubMedPubMed CentralGoogle Scholar
  4. Boyer KM, Gadzala CA, Burd LI, Fisher DE, Paton JB, Gotoff SP. Selective intrapartum chemoprophylaxis of neonatal group B streptococcal early-onset disease. I. Epidemiologic rationale. J Infect Dis. 1983;148:795–801.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  5. Boyer KM, Gotoff SP. Strategies for chemoprophylaxis of GBS early-onset infections. Antibiot Chemother. 1985;35:267–80.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  6. Benitz WE, Gould JB, Druzin ML. Antimicrobial prevention of early-onset group B streptococcal sepsis: estimates of risk reduction based on a critical literature review. Pediatrics. 2000;106:377–8.View ArticleGoogle Scholar
  7. Schmidt J, Halle E, Halle H, Mohammed T, Gunther E. Colonization of pregnant women and their newborn infants with group B Streptococci in the Gondar College of Medical Sciences. Ethiop Med J. 1989;27:115–9.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  8. Muhammed M, Asrat D, Woldeamanuel Y, Demissie A. Prevalence of group B Streptococcus colonization among pregnant women attending antenatal clinic of Hawassa Health Center, Hawassa, Ethiopia. Ethiop J Health Dev. 2012;26:36–42.Google Scholar
  9. Association of Clinical Microbiologists. Processing swabs for group B Streptococcal carriage. Health Prot Agency. 2006;58:1–12.Google Scholar
  10. Rahbar M, Hajia M, Mohammadzadeh M. Urinary tract infections caused by GBS in adult women: survey of 11,800 urine culture results. Iran J Pathol. 2012;7(1):32–7.Google Scholar
  11. Wayne PA. Performance standards for antimicrobial susceptibility testing. CLSI approved standard M100–S23. Clin Lab Stand Inst. 2013;33:118–56.Google Scholar
  12. Shet A, Ferrieri P. Neonatal & maternal group B Streptococcal infections: a comprehensive review. Indian J Med Res. 2004;120:141–50.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  13. Busetti M, D’Agaro P, Campello C. Group B Streptococcus prevalence in pregnant women from North-Eastern Italy: advantage of screening strategy based on direct plating plus broth enrichment. J Clin Pathol. 2007;60:1140–3.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  14. Valkenburg-van den Berg AW, Sprij AJ, Oostvogel PM, Mutsaers JA, Renes WB, Rosendaal FR, et al. Prevalence of colonization with group B Streptococci in pregnant women of a multi-ethnic population in The Netherlands. Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol. 2006;124:178–83.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  15. Tsui HY, Ip M, Ng P, Sahota DS, Leung T, Lau T. Change in prevalence of group B Streptococcus maternal colonization in Hong Kong. Hong Kong Med J. 2009;15:C1–66.Google Scholar
  16. Joachim A, Matee I, Massawe F, Lyamuya E. Maternal and neonatal colonization of group B streptococcus at Muhimbili National Hospital in Dar es Salaam, Tanzania: prevalence, risk factors and antimicrobial resistance. BMC Public Health. 2009;9:437.View ArticlePubMedPubMed CentralGoogle Scholar
  17. Onipede A, Adefusi O, Adeyemi A, Adejuyigbe E, Oyelese A, Ogunniyi T. Group B Streptococcus carriage during late pregnancy in Ile-Ife, Nigeria. Afr J Clin Exper Microbiol. 2012;5:135–43.Google Scholar
  18. Ezeonu IM, Agbo MC. Incidence and antimicrobial resistance profile of group B Streptococcus (GBS) infection in pregnant women in Nsukka, Enugu State, Nigeria. Afr J Microbiol Res. 2014;8:91.View ArticleGoogle Scholar
  19. Quiroga M, Pegeles E, Oviedo P, Pereyra E, Vergara M. antibiotic susceptibility patterns and prevalence of group B Streptococcus isolated from pregnant women in Misiones, Argentina. Braz J Microbiol. 2008;39:245–50.View ArticlePubMedPubMed CentralGoogle Scholar
  20. Bidgani S, Navidifar T, Najafian M, Amin M. Comparison of group B Streptococci colonization in vaginal and rectal specimens by culture method and polymerase chain reaction technique. J Chin Med Assoc. 2016;79:141–5.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  21. Khan M, Faiz A, Ashshi A. Maternal colonization of group B Streptococcus: prevalence, associated factors, and antimicrobial resistance. Ann Saudi Med. 2015;35(6):423–7.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  22. Namugongo A, Bazira J, Fajardot Y, Joseph N. Group B Streptococcus colonization among pregnant women attending antenatal care at tertiary hospital in Rural Southwestern Uganda. Int J Microbiol. 2016;2016:1–8.View ArticleGoogle Scholar
  23. Alemseged G, Niguse S, Hailekiros H, Abdulkadir M, Saravanan M, Asmelash T. Isolation and antimicrobial susceptibility pattern of group B Streptococcus among pregnant women attending antenatal clinics in Ayder Referral Hospital and Mekelle Health Center, Mekelle, Northern Ethiopia. BMC Res Notes. 2015;8:1–8.View ArticleGoogle Scholar
  24. Gebremesker TK, Zeleke TA, Mihiret A, Tikue MD. Prevalence and antibiotic susceptibility Pattern of Streptococcus agalactiae among pregnant women at Adigrat Zonal Hospital and Adigrat Health Center, Tigray, Ethiopia. SPG J Gynecol Obstet. 2015;3:29–35.View ArticleGoogle Scholar
  25. Woldu ZL, Teklehaimanot TG, Waji ST, Gebremariam MY. The prevalence of Group B Streptococcus recto-vaginal colonization and antimicrobial susceptibility pattern in pregnant mothers at two hospitals of Addis Ababa, Ethiopia. BMC Reprod Health. 2014;11:1–4.View ArticleGoogle Scholar
  26. De Steenwinkel DO, Tak HU, Muller AE, Nouwen JL, Oostvogel PM, Mocumbi SM. Low carriage rate of group B Streptococcus in pregnant women in Maputo, Mozambique. Trop Med Int health. 2008;13:427–9.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  27. Sharmila V, Joseph N, Babu T, Latha C, Sistla S. Genital tract group B streptococcal colonization in pregnant women: a South Indian perspective. Infect Dev Ctries. 2011;5:592–5.Google Scholar
  28. Strus M, Pawlik D, Wloch M, Gosiewosky T, Heczko B, Laurebach R, et al. Group B streptococcus colonization of pregnant women and their children observed on obstetric and neonatal wards of the University Hospital in Krakow, Poland. J Microbiol. 2008;58:228–33.Google Scholar

Copyright

© The Author(s) 2017

Advertisement