Background: Rise in antibiotic resistance due to injudicious use of antibiotics is
worrying. Our clinicians routinely start empirical therapy and discharge
patients on same treatment without doing culture /sensitivity. This practice
leads to over and misuse of antibiotics. To motivate the clinicians and build
their faith on culture reports we started this comparative study in which
empirical therapy started by the clinicians is compared with actual sensitivity
Aim: By highlighting the gap between empirical therapy and actual antibiotic
susceptibility pattern and motivating consultants that empirical therapy should
be based on local culture sensitivity pattern.
Methodology: Pus samples were collected aseptically from infected surgical sites. A
profoma was filled with detailed clinical history and empirical therapy
prescribed. Culture/ sensitivity results were noted. Results of sensitivity
were compared with empirical therapy prescribed.
Results: A total 110 patients were included in the study. Out of total samples
growth was obtained in 84 (76.4%) samples while remaining samples 26 (23.6%)
shown no growth. Empirical therapy was in accordance in 10 (11.9%) patients
while it was not in 74 (88.1%) patients. Gram negative organisms were more
common 64/84 (76%) as compared to Gram positive organisms 12/84 (14.5%), while
remaining 08/84 (9.5%) grown both gram positive and negative organisms.
Conclusion: Empirical therapy is not in accordance with actual sensitivity pattern.
Key words: Antibiotics, antibiogram, definitive therapy, empirical therapy.