Skip to main content
. 2012 Sep 18;12:222. doi: 10.1186/1471-2334-12-222

Table 3.

Comparison of resistance rates among E. coli in Austria between ECO·SENS and ECO·SENS II and contrasting these data with the E. coli resistance data in the Austrian resistance report 2008 for the ambulatory sector

Antibiotic
Resistance rates
Resistance rates
Trend between ECO·SENS and ECO·SENS II
E. coli resistance data in the Austria resistance report 2008 for the ambulatory sector, n (%)
 
ECO·SENS
ECO·SENS II
 
 
  (N = 126), n (%) (N = 146), n (%)    
Mecillinam
2 (1.6)
0 (0.0)

4,361 (12.2)
Ampicillin
22 (17.5)
42 (28.8)

8,992 (39.8)
Amoxicillin/clavulanic acid
3 (2.4)
13 (8.9)

8,985 (5.8)
Trimethoprim
12 (9.5)
23 (15.8)

-
Sulphamethoxazole
32 (25.4)
31 (21.3)

-
Trimethoprim/Sulphamethoxazole
12 (9.5)
21 (14.4)

8,992 (24.6)
Nalidixic acid
3 (2.4)
14 (9.6)

-
Nitrofurantoin
1 (0.8)
1 (0.7)

8,789 (2.2)
Ciprofloxacin
0 (0.0)
6 (4.1)

8,992 (15.7)
Gentamicin
1 (0.8)
2 (1.4)

8,990 (4.7)
Fosfomycin trometamol
0 (0)
1 (0.7)

5,489 (1.5)
Cefadroxil
1 (0.8)
6 (4.1)
 
9,088 (8.5)
Cefotaxime
Not tested
4 (2.7)
 
-
Ceftazidime Not tested 4 (2.7)   -