Skip to main content

Table 1 Factors associated with healthcare-associated infection caused by antimicrobial resistant versus susceptible Acinetobacter baumannii in two New York City hospitals, 2006-2012

From: Risk factors for hospital-acquired antimicrobial-resistant infection caused by Acinetobacter baumannii

  Resistant to ampicillin or ampicillin/sulbactam
  Yes, N (%) No, N (%) P-value*
Total 302 (45 %) 369 (55 %)  
Mean (range) age, in years 61 (19–98) 61 (18–97) 0.65
Sex    
 Female 125 (41 %) 160 (43 %) 0.61
 Male 177 (59 %) 209 (57 %)  
Hospital    
 A 217 (76 %) 190 (58 %) <0.0001
 B 70 (24 %) 139 (42 %)  
ICU prior to infection    
 Yes 219 (83 %) 178 (82 %) 0.72
 No 44 (17 %) 39 (18 %)  
Mean (range) Charlson Comorbidity Index 5.61 (0–17) 5.39 (0–16) 0.40
Mean (range) days of stay prior to infection 39 (3–377) 18 (3–193) <0.0001
High risk medication prior to infection    
 Yes 136 (72 %) 155 (77 %) 0.24
 No 53 (28 %) 46 (23 %)  
Prior stay in skilled nursing facility    
 Yes 21 (7 %) 31 (8 %) 0.49
 No 281 (93 %) 338 (92 %)  
Prior in-network hospitalization    
 Yes 72 (24 %) 74 (20 %) 0.24
 No 230 (76 %) 295 (80 %)  
Year of infection onset    
 2006 32 (11 %) 69 (19 %) 0.003
 2007 67 (22 %) 65 (18 %)  
 2008 64 (21 %) 48 (13 %)  
 2009 40 (13 %) 52 (14 %)  
 2010 36 (12 %) 44 (12 %)  
 2011 41 (14 %) 47 (13 %)  
 2012 22 (7 %) 44 (12 %)  
Site of infection    
 Bloodstream 65 (22 %) 85 (23 %) 0.64
 Urinary tract 96 (32 %) 123 (33 %) 0.67
 Pneumonia 187 (62 %) 172 (47 %) <0.0001
Season of infection onset    
 Winter 67 (22 %) 83 (22 %) 0.75
 Spring 76 (25 %) 95 (26 %)  
 Summer 85 (28 %) 113 (31 %)  
 Fall 74 (25 %) 78 (21 %)  
Diabetes    
 Yes 100 (33 %) 106 (29 %) 0.22
 No 202 (67 %) 263 (71 %)  
Renal failure    
 Yes 181 (60 %) 179 (49 %) 0.003
 No 121 (40 %) 190 (51 %)  
Malignancy    
 Yes 69 (23 %) 79 (21 %) 0.65
 No 233 (77 %) 290 (79 %)  
Antibiotic use prior to infection    
 Yes 16 (40 %) 20 (20 %) 0.017
 No 24 (60 %) 78 (80 %)  
  1. Numbers in strata may not equal total due to missing values
  2. *Continuous variables assessed using simple logistic regression (Wald χ 2). Categorical variables assessed using Pearson’s χ 2