{"id":29393,"date":"2019-12-28T10:38:44","date_gmt":"2019-12-28T10:38:44","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/biomedpharmajournal.org\/?p=29393"},"modified":"2020-06-11T07:33:43","modified_gmt":"2020-06-11T07:33:43","slug":"urinary-tract-infection-among-pregnant-women-and-its-associated-risk-factors-a-cross-sectional-study","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/biomedpharmajournal.org\/staging\/vol12no4\/urinary-tract-infection-among-pregnant-women-and-its-associated-risk-factors-a-cross-sectional-study\/","title":{"rendered":"Urinary Tract Infection among Pregnant Women and its Associated Risk Factors: A Cross-Sectional Study"},"content":{"rendered":"

Introduction<\/strong><\/p>\n

Pregnancy is associated with, structural, physiological and functional \u00a0changes in the\u00a0 urinary tract\u00a0 which most often Resulting in ascending of pathogens into the urinary bladder, causing urinary tract infections (UTIs).1<\/sup> In the general population, The extent of UTIs among pregnant women is higher than other healthy women.2<\/sup>\u00a0 \u00a0Both symptomatic and asymptomatic UTIs are prevalent among pregnant women and are linked with adverse effects to the mother, the fetus, and newborn. 1,3<\/sup><\/p>\n

The changes in the urinary tract during pregnancy and immune system increase the prevalence of bacteriuria, causing serious risks for both mother and fetus. Parity, Increasing age, sickle cell anemia,\u00a0 \u00a0diabetes, urinary tract disorders and history of UTI, \u00a0may increase the risk of urinary tract infection in pregnant women . 4,5<\/sup><\/p>\n

In pregnancy, \u00a0urinary tract infection\u00a0 without antibiotic treatment may be \u00a0result in serious \u00a0complications such as low birth weight , \u00a0preterm labor, \u00a0hypertension , pre-eclampsia, anemia, \u00a0pyelonephritis, amnionitis, stillbirths, neonatal deaths , bacteremia and toxic septicaemia.6,7<\/sup> Treatment of urinary tract infection may reduce the risk of pregnancy complications. So, screening for early diagnosis and treatment of urinary tract infection in pregnant women is essential to avoid its complications. 8<\/sup><\/p>\n

Among pregnant women in Saudi Arabia, the prevalence of UTI\u00a0 was reported to be 20%\u00a0 (12% with symptomatic urinary trcat infection and 8% were asymptomatic.9<\/sup> In general, the cases of UTIs are caused by bacteria bathogenes, especially gastrointestinal bathogens, that infects the urethral meatus through contaminating the area that surrounds the rectum and spreading to the bladder. 10<\/sup><\/p>\n

Approximately the common pathogenic causes of urinary tract infection are \u201cEscherichia coli, Staphylococcus spp., Streptococcus spp., Proteus spp., Klebsiella spp. Corynebacterium, Neisseria, and Pseudomonas spp<\/em> \u201c. The severity of a urinary tract infection is influenced by the malevolence of the bacteria and the susceptibility of the host.11<\/sup> Penicillin, Amoxicillin, celtaxidime, norfloxacin, and cefoxitin are the most competent antibiotics for the treatment of the majority\u00a0 of the urinary tract \u00a0pathogens. 9<\/sup><\/p>\n

The significance of the present study is that urinary tract infection can be a danger for pregnant women between whom it has been revealed that up to 50% of those with asymptomatic Bacteriuria (ABU) go on to get pyelonephritis. Therefore, women during pregnancy should be assessed for predisposing factor and the causative organism of UTI during their antenatal follow-up.\u00a0 The urine examination for the presence of pathogens and the suitable antibiotic regimen should be specified for maternal and fetal health safety. The sensitivity for the antibiotics and their adverse reaction related to pregnancy should be considered 12<\/sup><\/p>\n

The aim of the study<\/strong><\/p>\n

This study aimed to assess the urinary tract infection among pregnant women and its associated risk factors, and to investigate the most common antibacterial used by infected pregnant women.<\/p>\n

Material and Methods<\/strong><\/p>\n

Study design<\/strong><\/p>\n

A cross-sectional descriptive <\/em>design<\/p>\n

Study population and samples<\/strong><\/p>\n

The total subjects of the study sample consisted of 303 pregnant women who attend the antenatal clinic at Wadi Addwaser General Hospital, KSA with the inclusion criteria. The inclusion criteria are pregnant women at the second trimester of pregnancy with suspected clinical symptoms of urinary tract infection. The suspected clinical symptoms of urinary tract infection such as; the frequency of \u00a0urination, \u00a0fever,\u00a0 dysuria, painful burning sensation, strangury, incomplete bladder voiding,\u00a0 lower abdominal pain, flank pain, changed urine color and shaking chills. Exclusion criteria; \u00a0<\/strong>sickle cell disease (renal damage), anatomic or functional congenital urinary abnormalities, the pregnant women under antibiotic regimen within 72 hours to the study data collection were excluded because the antibiotic must have inhibited or destroyed the pathogens. \u00a0\u00a0<\/strong><\/p>\n

Sampling<\/strong><\/p>\n

The\u00a0 <\/strong>data were collected through face to face interview from first October 2018 to end of March 2019 by using \u00a0structured questionnaire that inclue;\u00a0 the socio-demographic characteristics as (age, level of education, occupation, and family income).<\/p>\n

Obstetrical history(\u00a0 number of pregnancies, number of deliveries, abortion, number of children and Previous treatment for UTI during current pregnancy.\u00a0\u00a0 Medical history and\u00a0 health habits\u00a0 ( regular voiding, drinking enough water,\u00a0 intake of vitamin C, frequent tea intake ,\u00a0 soft drinks and coffee ingestion; . Medical history as<\/p>\n

previous genital tract infection,\u00a0 hypertension, anemia , kideney calculi, and\u00a0\u00a0 Diabetes Mellitus and clincal symptoms faced by pregnant women. The vaginal swab was taken from the study sample and analyzed to exclude vaginal infection according to the hospital rules.<\/p>\n

Urine sample technique<\/strong><\/p>\n

enough clean-catch midstream urine specimen was collected by the pregnant women after given adequate and careful instructions for urine sample collection technique.<\/p>\n

The urine sample was inoculated on blood agar- plates- (MacConkey agar). The urine sample plates were put in the incubator under perfectly aerobic conditions at 37\u00b0C for 24 hrs.\u00a0\u00a0 After 24 hours of inculation, The urine culture plates were examend macroscopically to identify the color,\u00a0 appearance, morphology,\u00a0 and the colonies size. The isolated bacteria were diagnosed by using\u00a0 Gram stain and biochemical test and using microscopic examination. Antimicrobial susceptibility of isolated bacteria was examined to determine the proper antibiotic use. The presence of leukocyte (LE) and nitrate in urine were secreened by using the biochemical reagent strip test (dipstick test). The microscope was used to test\u00a0 red blood cells (RBCs) and pus cell (pyuria) in urine 13<\/sup><\/strong><\/p>\n

Statistical analysis<\/strong><\/p>\n

The original data were coded and inserted into SPSS system files (SPSS package version 19, Chicago, USA).\u00a0 The data were analyzed and interpreted. Smirnov test was used to test the distribution of data.\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0 Univariate analyses including ( Mann Whitney test and t-test) were used to test the significance of the quantitative variables results.\u00a0 Monte Carlo test, Chi-Square test, and Fisher’s Exact test were used to testing the significance of the qualitative variables results.<\/p>\n

Results<\/strong><\/p>\n

Out of 303 pregnant women, 162 women (53.5 % )\u00a0 were positive for urinary tract pathogens. E. coli were the most frequent organism (37%) isolated from a positive pregnant women urine culture, followed by Klebsiella pneumonia (27%) while the lowest was staphylococcus saprophytic (3.7%). The study presented that amoxicillin and cefoxitin (40.1% &21.6%, respectively) are the most used antibiotics by infected women for the treatment of UTI, while the lowest used is the fusidic acid (5.6%) figure 1,2). Table (1): shows that there are statistically significant differences among negative and positive culture women concerning the age, occupation, family income, and previous treatment for UTI during current pregnancy at P\u22640.05.\u00a0 And there were no differences with the number of pregnancies, number of deliveries, abortion and the number of living children.<\/p>\n

Table (2) Reveals that there is a statistically significant difference between the presence of pathogens in urine culture in relation to regular bladder voiding, diabetes mellitus, previous urinary tract infection and \u00a0regarding clinical manifestation among the pregnant women<\/p>\n\n\n\n
\u00a0\"Figure<\/td>\nFigure 1: The bacteria isolated from the urine culture.<\/strong><\/p>\n

Click here to View figure<\/a><\/p>\n<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n<\/tbody>\n<\/table>\n

 <\/p>\n\n\n\n
\u00a0\"Figure<\/td>\n\n

Figure 2: Antibiotics used by infected pregnant women(n= 162)<\/strong><\/p>\n

Click here to View figure<\/a><\/p>\n<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n<\/tbody>\n<\/table>\n

 <\/p>\n

Table 1:<\/strong> The Socio-demographic characteristics and \u00a0the obstetric history \u00a0of the studied \u00a0pregnant women \u00a0\u00a0\u00a0(n=303)<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n
Socio-demographic characteristics<\/strong><\/td>\nWomen with a negative culture<\/strong><\/p>\n

(n=141)<\/strong><\/td>\n

Women with a positive culture<\/strong><\/p>\n

(n=162)<\/strong><\/td>\n

Significance<\/strong><\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
No.<\/strong><\/td>\n%<\/strong><\/td>\nNo.<\/strong><\/td>\n%<\/strong><\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
Age (years)<\/strong><\/td>\n<\/td>\n<\/td>\n<\/td>\n<\/td>\n<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
Less than 25<\/td>\n30<\/td>\n21.3<\/td>\n33<\/td>\n20.4<\/td>\n<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
25-<35<\/td>\n81<\/td>\n57.4<\/td>\n63<\/td>\n38.9<\/td>\n<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
35-\u226445<\/td>\n30<\/td>\n21.3<\/td>\n66<\/td>\n40.7<\/td>\n<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
Min-Max<\/td>\n18.0-42.0<\/td>\n20.0-45.0<\/td>\nt=2.082<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
Mean\u00b1SD<\/td>\n29.3\u00b15.9<\/td>\n32.0\u00b16.7<\/td>\nP=0.040*<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
Level of education <\/strong><\/td>\n<\/td>\n<\/td>\n<\/td>\n<\/td>\n<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
Illiterate<\/td>\n9<\/td>\n6.4<\/td>\n15<\/td>\n9.3<\/td>\n<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
Read and write<\/td>\n18<\/td>\n12.8<\/td>\n30<\/td>\n18.5<\/td>\nX2<\/sup>=5.145<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
Secondary school<\/td>\n54<\/td>\n38.3<\/td>\n39<\/td>\n24.1<\/td>\nMC<\/sup>P=0.280<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
University<\/td>\n48<\/td>\n34.0<\/td>\n45<\/td>\n27.8<\/td>\n<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
Postgraduate studies<\/td>\n12<\/td>\n8.5<\/td>\n33<\/td>\n20.3<\/td>\n<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
Occupation<\/strong><\/td>\n<\/td>\n<\/td>\n<\/td>\n<\/td>\n<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
Work<\/td>\n42<\/td>\n29.8<\/td>\n93<\/td>\n57.4<\/td>\nX2<\/sup>=7.760<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
Housewife<\/td>\n99<\/td>\n70.2<\/td>\n69<\/td>\n42.6<\/td>\nP=0.005* com<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
Family income<\/strong><\/td>\n<\/td>\n<\/td>\n<\/td>\n<\/td>\n<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
Insufficient<\/td>\n21<\/td>\n14.9<\/td>\n30<\/td>\n55.6<\/td>\nX2<\/sup>=18.314<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
Moderate<\/td>\n111<\/td>\n78.7<\/td>\n63<\/td>\n38.8<\/td>\nMC<\/sup>P<0.0001*<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
Enough<\/td>\n<\/td>\n9<\/td>\n5.6<\/td>\n<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
NO of pregnancies<\/strong><\/td>\n<\/td>\n<\/td>\n<\/td>\n<\/td>\n<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
1-2<\/td>\n51<\/td>\n36.2<\/td>\n51<\/td>\n31.5<\/td>\n<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
3-4<\/td>\n48<\/td>\n34.0<\/td>\n48<\/td>\n44.4<\/td>\n<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
5 or more<\/td>\n42<\/td>\n29.8<\/td>\n39<\/td>\n24.1<\/td>\n<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
Min-Max<\/td>\n1-9<\/td>\n1-12<\/td>\nZ=0.618<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
Median (Q1-Q3)<\/td>\n3 (2-5)<\/td>\n4 (2-4)<\/td>\nP=0.537<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
Number of deliveries. <\/strong><\/td>\n<\/td>\n<\/td>\n<\/td>\n<\/td>\n<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
None<\/td>\n39<\/td>\n27.7<\/td>\n24<\/td>\n14.8<\/td>\n<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
1-2<\/td>\n66<\/td>\n46.8<\/td>\n75<\/td>\n46.3<\/td>\n<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
3-4<\/td>\n24<\/td>\n17.0<\/td>\n39<\/td>\n24.1<\/td>\n<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
5 or more<\/td>\n12<\/td>\n8.5<\/td>\n24<\/td>\n14.8<\/td>\n<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
Min-Max<\/td>\n0-8<\/td>\n0-8<\/td>\nZ=1.431<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
Median (Q1-Q3)<\/td>\n2 (0-3)<\/td>\n2 (1-3)<\/td>\nP=0.152<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
Abortions<\/strong><\/td>\n<\/td>\n<\/td>\n<\/td>\n<\/td>\n<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
None<\/td>\n87<\/td>\n61.7<\/td>\n123<\/td>\n75.9<\/td>\n<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
1-2<\/td>\n48<\/td>\n34.0<\/td>\n30<\/td>\n18.5<\/td>\n<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
3-4<\/td>\n6<\/td>\n4.3<\/td>\n9<\/td>\n5.6<\/td>\n<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
Min-Max<\/td>\n0-3<\/td>\n0-4<\/td>\nZ=1.462<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
Median (Q1-Q3)<\/td>\n0 (0-1)<\/td>\n0 (0-0.5)<\/td>\nP=0.144<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
Previous treatment for UTI during current pregnancy<\/strong><\/td>\n<\/td>\n<\/td>\n<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
Yes<\/td>\n39<\/td>\n27.7<\/td>\n108<\/td>\n66.7<\/td>\nX2<\/sup>=15.310<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
No<\/td>\n102<\/td>\n72.3<\/td>\n54<\/td>\n33.3<\/td>\nP<0.0001*<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n<\/tbody>\n<\/table>\n

Q1-Q3: Interquartile range,\u00a0 Z: Mann Whitney test, X2: Chi-Square test, *significant at P\u22640.05, t: Student t-test, MCP: Monte Carlo corrected, P-value, *significant at P\u22640.05<\/p>\n

Table 2: the \u00a0predisposing \u00a0factors \u00a0and clinical manifestations of the studied pregnant \u00a0women (n =303)<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n
Predisposing factors <\/strong><\/td>\nWomen with <\/strong><\/p>\n

NEGATIVE culture<\/strong><\/p>\n

(n=141)<\/strong><\/td>\n

Women with POSITIVE culture<\/strong><\/p>\n

(n=162)<\/strong><\/td>\n

Significance<\/strong><\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
No.<\/strong><\/td>\n%<\/strong><\/td>\nNo.<\/strong><\/td>\n%<\/strong><\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
Health-related Habits during pregnancy<\/td>\n<\/td>\n<\/td>\n<\/td>\n<\/td>\n<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
Vitamin C intake<\/td>\n84<\/td>\n59.6<\/td>\n75<\/td>\n46.3<\/td>\nX2<\/sup>=1.777\u00a0\u00a0 P=0.183<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
Regular bladder voiding<\/td>\n123<\/td>\n87.2<\/td>\n99<\/td>\n61.1<\/td>\nX2<\/sup>=8.755\u00a0\u00a0 P=0.003*<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
Frequent soft drinks consumption<\/td>\n69<\/td>\n48.9<\/td>\n99<\/td>\n61.1<\/td>\nX2<\/sup>=1.508\u00a0\u00a0 P=0.219<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
Frequent tea consumption<\/td>\n57<\/td>\n40.4<\/td>\n93<\/td>\n57.4<\/td>\nX2<\/sup>=2.899\u00a0\u00a0 P=0.089<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
Frequent coffee consumption<\/td>\n57<\/td>\n40.4<\/td>\n93<\/td>\n57.4<\/td>\nX2<\/sup>=2.899\u00a0\u00a0 P=0.089<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
Drinking enough water<\/td>\n111<\/td>\n78.7<\/td>\n102<\/td>\n63.0<\/td>\nX2<\/sup>=2.989\u00a0\u00a0 P=0.084<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
Medical history<\/td>\n<\/td>\n<\/td>\n<\/td>\n<\/td>\n<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
Genital tract infection<\/td>\n45<\/td>\n31.9<\/td>\n54<\/td>\n33.3<\/td>\nX2<\/sup>=0.023\u00a0\u00a0 P=0.880<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
Hypertension<\/td>\n36<\/td>\n25.5<\/td>\n57<\/td>\n35.2<\/td>\nX2<\/sup>=1.101\u00a0\u00a0 P=0.294<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
Kidney stones<\/td>\n15<\/td>\n10.6<\/td>\n24<\/td>\n14.8<\/td>\nX2<\/sup>=0.391\u00a0\u00a0 P=0.532<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
Diabetes Mellitus<\/td>\n12<\/td>\n8.5<\/td>\n57<\/td>\n35.2<\/td>\nX2<\/sup>=10.147\u00a0\u00a0 P=0.001*<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
Previous urinary tract infection<\/td>\n33<\/td>\n23.4<\/td>\n108<\/td>\n66.7<\/td>\nX2<\/sup>=18.904\u00a0 P<0.0001*<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
Anemia<\/td>\n66<\/td>\n46.8<\/td>\n57<\/td>\n35.2<\/td>\nX2<\/sup>=1.408\u00a0\u00a0 P=0.235<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
Clinical manifestation<\/td>\n<\/td>\n<\/td>\n<\/td>\n<\/td>\n<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
Painful burning sensation<\/td>\n54<\/td>\n38.3<\/td>\n117<\/td>\n72.2<\/td>\nX2<\/sup>=11.763\u00a0 P=0.001*<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
Incomplete bladder\u00a0 voiding<\/td>\n39<\/td>\n27.7<\/td>\n105<\/td>\n64.8<\/td>\nX2<\/sup>=13.910\u00a0\u00a0 P<0.0001*<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
Frequency of urination<\/td>\n66<\/td>\n46.8<\/td>\n147<\/td>\n90.7<\/td>\nX2<\/sup>=23.227\u00a0 P<0.0001*<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
Fever<\/td>\n27<\/td>\n19.1<\/td>\n66<\/td>\n40.7<\/td>\nX2<\/sup>=5.507\u00a0\u00a0 P=0.019*<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
Strangury<\/td>\n30<\/td>\n21.3<\/td>\n90<\/td>\n55.6<\/td>\nX2<\/sup>=12.345\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0 P<0.0001*<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
Dysuria<\/td>\n33<\/td>\n23.4<\/td>\n129<\/td>\n79.6<\/td>\nX2<\/sup>=31.292\u00a0\u00a0 P<0.0001*<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
Shaking chills<\/td>\n21<\/td>\n14.9<\/td>\n57<\/td>\n35.2<\/td>\nX2<\/sup>=5.413\u00a0\u00a0 P=0.02*<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
Flank pain<\/td>\n48<\/td>\n34.0<\/td>\n96<\/td>\n59.3<\/td>\nX2<\/sup>=6.407\u00a0\u00a0 P=0.011*<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
Change urine color<\/td>\n36<\/td>\n25.5<\/td>\n120<\/td>\n74.1<\/td>\nX2<\/sup>=23.706\u00a0\u00a0 P<0.0001*<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
Lower abdominal pain<\/td>\n69<\/td>\n48.9<\/td>\n120<\/td>\n74.1<\/td>\nX2<\/sup>=6.766\u00a0\u00a0 P=0.009*<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
Laboratory results<\/td>\n<\/td>\n<\/td>\n<\/td>\n<\/td>\n<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
Hematuria<\/td>\n3<\/td>\n2.1<\/td>\n48<\/td>\n29.6<\/td>\nX2<\/sup>=13.577\u00a0\u00a0 P<0.0001*<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
Pyuria<\/td>\n18<\/td>\n12.8<\/td>\n123<\/td>\n75.9<\/td>\nX2<\/sup>=40.291\u00a0\u00a0 P<0.0001*<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n<\/tbody>\n<\/table>\n

X2<\/sup>: Chi-Square test, *significant at P\u22640.05<\/p>\n

Discussion<\/strong><\/p>\n

The result of the present study revealed the overall prevalence of urinary trcat infection among pregnant women was (53.5%), which is abviousely higher than what was documented earlier in Saudi Arabia (20%). 9<\/sup><\/p>\n

In spite of the\u00a0 advances in medical and health care nowadys . This contrast in prevalence may be due to change in the studied sample and place of data collection. This result is \u00a0\u00a0nearly\u00a0 similar\u00a0 with\u00a0 the result of Worie &<\/em> Eze., 2010 <\/em>14<\/sup> but it was lower than the result from Niger (75%) 15<\/sup><\/p>\n

Regarding bacteria isolated from the urine culture among pregnant women, the present results showed that the highest isolated organisms were E. coli<\/em> (37%) and Klebsiella pneumonia (27%) while the lowest was staphylococcus saprophytic (3.7%). The previously mentioned result can be explained by the fact that the acidity of urine during pregnancy reaches the percentage that helps E. coli<\/em> to grow.<\/em>16<\/sup>. This finding is most consistent with many of the previous studies which determined that E. coli<\/em> are the most common urinary tract associated \u00a0bacteria.9,15,17-21<\/sup>. <\/em>In another study, Staphylococcus aureus<\/em> is the most prevalent pathogens among asymptomatic pregnant women. 22<\/sup><\/p>\n

In the current study,\u00a0 amoxicillin and cefoxitin (40.1% &21.6%, respectively) are the most used antibiotics by infected women for the treatment of UTI, while the lowest used is the fusidic acid (5.6%). In this respect, Faidah et al., 2013 <\/em>9 <\/sup>reported that amoxicillin, cefoxitin, celtaxidime, norfloxacin, penicillin, and fusidic acid are the highest beneficial antibiotics for treatment of UTI during pregnancy. The effect of these antibiotics lies in these highly expensive drugs and had controlled their attaining and indiscriminate use, therefore facilitating the pathogens susceptible to them.<\/p>\n

In this study, there is a statistically significant differences among negative and positive culture women concerning the age, occupation, family income and\u00a0 previous treatment for UTI during current pregnancy at P\u22640.05. In this context, \u00a0Eriksson, 2011<\/em>23<\/sup> and Rahiman et al., <\/em>201516<\/sup> reported that Urinary tract infection (UTI) is a common in women of all ages but the incidence and prevalence increase with age. Kolawole et al., 2009<\/em> 14<\/sup>stated that socioeconomic rank is a predictor for the presence of bathogens in urine and this result from shortage in housing and drainage system, improper environmental and personal hygiene. From the researcher’s point of view, \u00a0this could be attribute to \u00a0the association of low socioeconomic status with Improper nutrition and low \u00a0immunity especially during pregnancy. This study result is in line with the outcome of Tamalli et al., 2013<\/em> 17<\/sup> study which revealed that prevalence of bacteriuria in healthy women is found to be 9% and 21% in case of poor pregnant women. It is noticeable that the infection of the urinary system is widespread among working women, and this can be explained that working women do not drink enough water during working hours. Moreover, 66.7% of positive culture women have previous UTI during current pregnancy with P\u22640.05. Kearney<\/em>, 2011 \u00a025<\/sup> mentioned that during pregnancy, there is a modification in the immune system of the pregnant woman to help implant the egg and the development of the fetus. So, the response of the immune system is modified from a cell-intermediated to a humoral reaction which results in fewer responses to bacterial cell surface proteins and probably facilitate pathogenicity. These modifications allow bacteria \u00a0to penetrate, multiply and Settles in the urinary system<\/p>\n

The current study results showed that the difference between the presence of bacteria in urine culture in relation to regular bladder voiding, diabetes mellitus, previous urinary tract infection was statistically significant.\u00a0 Rahiman et al., 2015<\/em> 16<\/sup> \u00a0stated that emptying of the bladder is the dominant defense against urinary tract infection so,\u00a0 complete emptying the bladder during urinating and not ignoring the desire to urinate can help women to be away from urinary tract infections in most cases. Also, \u00a0urinary tract infection was significantly associated with pregnant women who have diabetes mellitus and previous UTI. This is maybe attributable to elevate the glucosuria and decrease the immune system host factors prejudice to infection during pregnancy. \u00a0Increase blood glucose during pregnancy causes a neutrophil disturbance by excessing calcium inside the levels of the cell and restrict with actin, also diapedesis and phagocytosis. The vaginal candidiasis and vascular disease also have a role in recurrent of infections.\u00a0 Also, this is due to the stoppage of the urine during pregnancy caused by physiological and anatomical changes in the urinary system, such as uterus compression on the ureters and the effect of the relaxation of progesterone on the urinary tract muscle.26 <\/sup>\u00a0Moreover, Emiru et al.., 2013<\/em> 27<\/sup> proved that recurrent urinary tract infection and diabetes mellitus are risk factors for UTI, so the frequency and the severity of UTI rise in pregnancy.<\/p>\n

The current study results revealed that, a statistically significant difference between presences of bacteria in urine culture in relation to clinical symptoms related to urination. The clinical symptoms such as frequency of micturition, dysuria, lower abdominal pain, urine color change, painful burning sensation, incomplete bladder evacuation. This result consistent with the results of \u00a0Almushait et al., 2013<\/em> 28<\/sup> \u00a0study which found nearly the same results. There is a statistically significant difference between the presence of pathogens in urine in relation to laboratory findings such as pyuria and hematuria P\u22640.05 in the present findings. This result is in line with Michelim et al.., 2016 29<\/sup>, who stated that Pyuria is found in a majority of women with pyelonephritis.<\/p>\n

Conclusion<\/strong><\/p>\n

Out of 303 pregnant women, 162 women were positive for utinary tract pathogens. E. coli were the most frequent organism isolated from a positive pregnant women urine culture, followed by Klebsiella pneumonia while the lowest was staphylococcus saprophytic. Amoxicillin and cefoxitin are the most used antibiotics by infected women for the treatment of UTI, while the lowest used is fusidic acid. There was a statistically significant difference between the presence of pathogens in urine culture in relation to regular bladder voiding, diabetes mellitus, previous urinary tract infection, and regarding clinical manifestation among pregnant women. Since the symptoms are a good predictor for urinary tract infection during pregnancy, so early screening for pathogens and proper treatment for infected cases should be applied.<\/p>\n

References<\/strong><\/p>\n

    \n
  1. Matuszkiewicz-Rowi\u00b4nska J, Ma\u0142yszko J,\u00a0 and Wieliczko M. Urinary tract infections in pregnancy: old and new unresolved diagnostic and therapeutic problems,\u00a0 Archives of Medical Science, vol. 11, no. 1, pp. 67\u201377, 2015.<\/li>\n
  2. Ipe D.S, Sundac\u00a0 L, Benjamin Jr.\u00a0\u00a0 L.W. H, Moore K. H, and Ulett\u00a0 G. C.\u00a0 Asymptomatic bacteriuria: prevalence rates of causal microorganisms, etiology of infection in different patient populations, and recent advances in molecular detection.\u00a0 FEMS Microbiology Letters, vol. 346, no. 1, pp. 1\u201310, 2013.<\/li>\n
  3. Masinde A, Gumodoka\u00a0 B, Kilonzo\u00a0 A, & \u00a0Mshana S.E. Prevalence of urinary tract infection among pregnant women at Bugando Medical Centre, Mwanza, Tanzania. Tanzania Journal of Health Research, vol. 11, no. 3, pp. 154\u2013159, 2009.<\/li>\n
  4. Giraldo P.C, Ara\u00fajo E.D, Junior JE, Amaral R.L.G.D, Passos M.R.L, Gon\u00e7alves A.K. The prevalence of urogenital infections in pregnant women experiencing preterm and full-term labor. Infect Dis Obstetrics Gynecol. 2012;2012:1\u20134.<\/li>\n
  5. Raza S., Pandey S., Bhatt C.P. Microbiological analysis of isolates in Kathmandu medical college teaching hospital, Kathmandu, Nepal. Kathmandu Univ Med J (KUMJ). 2011;9(36):295\u20137.<\/li>\n
  6. Glaser A.P, Schaeffer A.J. Urinary Tract Infection and Bacteriuria in Pregnancy. Urol Clin North Am. 2015;42(4):547\u201360. https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1016\/j.ucl.2015.05. 004. Epub 2015 Aug 1.<\/li>\n
  7. Izadi B, Rostami-Far Z, Jalilian N, Khazaei S, Amiri A, Madani S.H, Rostami-Far M. Urinary Tract Infection (UTI) as a risk factor of severe preeclampsia. Glob J Health Sci. 2016;8(11):54364.<\/li>\n
  8. Smaill F, & Vazquez J.C. Antibiotics for asymptomatic bacteriuria in pregnancy. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2015;8:CD000490.<\/li>\n
  9. Faidah H, Ashshi A, Hada A, Al-ghamdi G, & Amr M. Urinary Tract Infections among pregnant women in Makkah, Saudi Arabia \u00a0Biomedical & Pharmacology Journal. .(2013): Vol. 6(1), 01-07.<\/li>\n
  10. Anuli S, Clement I, Basseye A. Review on the prevalence and predisposing factors responsible for urinary tract infection among adults. Eur J Exp Biol 2016; 6(4): 7-11.<\/li>\n
  11. Hannan T.J, Totsika M, Mansfield K.J, Moore K.H, Schembri M.A, Hultgren S.J. Host-pathogen Checkpoints and Population Bottlenecks in persistent and intracellular uropathogenic Escherichia coli bladder infection. FEMS Microbiol Rev 2012; 36(3): 616-48.<\/li>\n
  12. Prakash P, Krishan V, Hlufong L, \u00a0AgrimaS, and Mahendra. \u00a0Predisposing factors and etiology of urinary tract infections in pregnant women<\/em>\u00a0 . DOAJ.Volume 3, Number 45. \u00a02016: pp. 2244-2248(5)<\/li>\n
  13. Cheesbrough M. Microbiological Tests. District Laboratory Practice in Tropical Countries,<\/em> Part 2, 2nd<\/sup>\u00a0 \u00a0ed., (Cambridge, Cambridge University Press,). 2006: \u00a0105 114,157159,156, 178179, 187189, 194195.<\/li>\n
  14. Worie N, & Eze, U. A. Prevalence and Aetiologic Agents of Urinary Tract Infection in Pregnancy in Abakaliki Metropolis.<\/em> Continental J. Medical Research. 2010: \u00a04, 18 -23.<\/li>\n
  15. Ebido L, Toluope A, and Deborah O. Urinary tract infection amongst pregnant in Amassoma, southern Nigeria.<\/em>\u00a0 AJMR. 2015: \u00a0Vol .9 (6), PP ,355-359.<\/li>\n
  16. Rahiman F. O. M, Balasubramanian T, Shejina \u00a0M, \u00a0and Musambil \u00a0M. A Review on Urinary Tract Infection in Pregnancy.<\/em> International Journal of Pharma Research & Review, Feb; 2015:\u00a0 \u00a04(2):26-33.<\/li>\n
  17. Tamalli M, Sangar B, & Alghaza M. A. \u00a0Urinary tract infection in pregnancy at Al-khoms, Libya. International Journal of Medicine and Medical Sciences. 2013: 3 (5), 455-459.<\/li>\n
  18. Sharifa A.A. Asymptomatic Bacteriuria in Pregnant Women in Jeddah, Western Region of Saudi Arabia: Call for Assessment.<\/em> JKAU: Med. Sci., 2010: 17 (1): 29-42.<\/li>\n
  19. El-Sokkary M. \u00a0Prevalence of Asymptomatic Bacteriuria in Antenatal Women with Preterm Labor at an Egyptian Tertiary Center<\/em>. J. Am. Sci. 2011: 7(4): 605-610<\/li>\n
  20. Alemu A, Moges \u00a0F, \u00a0Shiferaw \u00a0Y, \u00a0et al. Bacterial profile and drug susceptibility pattern of urinary tract infection in pregnant women at University of Gondar teaching hospital<\/em>, in Northwest Ethiopia. BMC Res Notes. 2012: 5:197.<\/li>\n
  21. Onuoha S.C, & Fatokun \u00a0K. Prevalence and antimicrobial susceptibility pattern of urinary tract infection (UTI) among pregnant women in Afikpo, Ebonyi State, Nigeria.<\/em> Am J Life Sci. 2014: 2(2):46\u201352.<\/li>\n
  22. Jalali M, Shamsi M, \u00a0Roozbehani N, \u00a0and Kabir \u00a0K. \u00a0Prevalence of Urinary Tract Infection and Some Factors Affected in Pregnant Women in Iran Karaj City,\u00a0 2013.<\/em>\u00a0 Middle-East Journal of Scientific Research. ( 2014): \u00a020 (7): 781-785, ISSN 1990-9233.<\/li>\n
  23. Eriksson I. Urinary Tract Infection \u2010 a serious health problem in old women: <\/em>Electronic version available at http:\/\/umu.diva\u2010portal.org\/ Printed by Print & Media, Ume\u00e5 University, Ume\u00e5, Sweden 2011.<\/li>\n
  24. Kolawole A.S, rowade \u00a0K.A. C.F.\u00a0\u00a0 Prevalence of urinary tract infection (UTI) among patients attending Dalhatu Arf specialist Hospital,<\/em> Aafia, Nasarawa state, Nigeria IN?t. J . Med. Med. Sci. 2009: 1(5) ” 163-167.<\/li>\n
  25. Kearney P.\u00a0 \u00a0Urinary tract infection in pregnancy. ARTICLE in THE OBSTETRICIAN & GYNAECOLOGIST \u00b7 JANUARY 2011: https:\/\/www.researchgate.net\/publication\/229442600, Retrieved on 21 March 2016.<\/li>\n
  26. Chandel L.R, Kanga \u00a0A, \u00a0Thakur\u00a0 K,\u00a0\u00a0 Mokta\u00a0 \u00a0K. K,\u00a0 \u00a0Sood\u00a0 \u00a0A, Chauhan\u00a0 \u00a0S.\u00a0 Prevalence of Pregnancy-associated Asymptomatic bacteriuria: A study was done in a tertiary care hospital.<\/em> J Obstet Gynecol India. 2012: \u00a062:511-4.<\/li>\n
  27. Emiru T. G, \u00a0Beyene\u00a0 W, Tsegaye and Melaku, S.\u00a0\u00a0 Associated\u00a0 Risk Factors of Urinary Tract Infection among Pregnant Women at Felege Hiwot Referral Hospital, Bahir Dar<\/em>, North West Ethiopia. 2013: \u00a0BMC Res Notes, 25(6): 292.<\/li>\n
  28. Almushait M, \u00a0Mohammed \u00a0H,\u00a0 Al-Harthy D, Abdullah \u00a0A. Prevalence and Predisposing Factors of Urinary Tract Infections among Pregnant Women in Abha General Hospital<\/em> International Journal of Sciences: Basic and Applied Research (IJSBARV. 2013:volume 11, No 1, pp 18-29 ISSN 2307-4531.<\/li>\n
  29. Michelim L, \u00a0Bosi \u00a0G.R, \u00a0& Comparsi \u00a0E. \u00a0Urinary Tract Infection in Pregnancy: Review of Clinical Management. <\/em>2016: J Clin Nephrol Res 3(1):\u00a0 1030.<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

    Introduction Pregnancy is associated with, structural, physiological and functional \u00a0changes […]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":8,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[73],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-29393","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-vol12no4"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/biomedpharmajournal.org\/staging\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/29393","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/biomedpharmajournal.org\/staging\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/biomedpharmajournal.org\/staging\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/biomedpharmajournal.org\/staging\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/8"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/biomedpharmajournal.org\/staging\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=29393"}],"version-history":[{"count":5,"href":"https:\/\/biomedpharmajournal.org\/staging\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/29393\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":33842,"href":"https:\/\/biomedpharmajournal.org\/staging\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/29393\/revisions\/33842"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/biomedpharmajournal.org\/staging\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=29393"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/biomedpharmajournal.org\/staging\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=29393"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/biomedpharmajournal.org\/staging\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=29393"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}