@article{jephh20241221,
author={{Samuel, Eheth Jean and Djaouda, Moussa and Pulch¨¦rie, Tamatcho Kweyang Blandine and Vivien, Noah Ewoti Olive and R¨¦n¨¦, Fotsing Kwetche Pierre and Antoine, Tamsa Arfao and Marlyse, Moungang Luciane and Mo?se, Nola},
title={Vulnerability of Groundwater to Hospital Wastewater Driving Antimicrobial-resistant <i>Pseudomonas</i><i> </i><i>aeruginosa</i>, in Cameroon Central Africa},
journal={Journal of Environment Pollution and Human Health},
volume={12},
number={2},
pages={10--23},
year={2024},
url={https://pubs.sciepub.com/jephh/12/2/1},
issn={2334-3494},
abstract={In Cameroon, the dissemination of antibiotic-resistant bacteria in groundwater via hospital wastewater has not been sufficiently explored, despite the growing volume of lesstreated wastewater generated. This study aimed at assessing the impact of hospital wastewaters on the prevalence of antimicrobial-resistant <i>P.</i><i> </i><i>aeruginosa</i> in the groundwater, in two urban areas, Douala and Yaounde (Cameroon, Central Africa). In each urban area, 12 wells water and 2 hospitals effluents were sampled for water analysis. The wells water were then divided into two groups. Those close to hospitals (WCH) and those far from hospitals (WFH). The level of resistance among <i>P.</i><i> </i><i>aeruginosa</i> strains was assessed against 16 antimicrobial agents belonging to the ¦Â-Lactam, Aminoglycosid, Quinolone, and Polymyxin groups. <i>P.</i><i> </i><i>aeruginosa</i> resistance rate was significantly higher in WCH than WFH (<i>p</i>&lt;0.05). This result was observed in Douala with seven antibiotics: ticarcillin/clavulanic acid (31.3% vs 9.86%), ticarcillin (47.3% vs 4.93%), piperacillin (35.9% vs 4.32%), ceftazidime (44.3% vs 7.04%), gentamicin (37.4% vs 9.15%), ofloxacin (24.4% vs 4.22%), and ciprofloxacin (14.5% vs 0%); and in Yaounde with six drugs: ticarcillin/clavulanic acid, ticarcillin, piperacillin, cefepime, gentamicin, and ofloxacin, (30% vs 8.63%; 44.4% vs 8.63%; 21.8% vs 10.79%; 39.1% vs 7.91%; 21.1% vs 2.88%; 56.4% vs 15.11%, respectively). The WCH are vulnerable to the hospital effluents.},
doi={10.12691/jephh-12-2-1}
publisher={Science and Education Publishing}
}