Identification and Antimicrobial Susceptibility Pattern of Clinically Significant Coagulase-negative Staphylococci


  • A Nazir Government Medical College, Srinagar
  • A Shah Department of Pathology and Microbiology, SKIMS, Srinagar
  • D Kakru SKIMS, Srinagar
  • S M Kadri Directorate of Health Services, Srinagar, Kashmir


antimicrobial susceptibility testing, coagulase-negative staphylococci (ConS), nosocomial pathogens


Aims: This study was undertaken to determine the prevalence and pathogenicity of coagulase-negative staphylococci in clinical samples and to study the antibiotic-sensitivity pattern of the coagulase-negative isolates.

Methods: A prospective study was conducted over a period of two years on patients admitted in the Sher-i-Kashmir Institute of Medical Sciences. Blood, urine, pus, catheter tips, cerebrospinal fluid and peritoneal fluid samples of patients who fulfilled the criteria for being labeled as nosocomial were cultured.

Results: One hundred and six strains of coagulase negative staphylococci were isolated from the samples and among them 90 isolates were identified as Staphylococcus epidermidis (84.90%). Most of the coagulase-negative staphylococci isolates were resistant to penicillin, cephalosporins and fluoroquinolones. Methicillin resistance was found in a significant number of coagulase-negative isolates. All the isolates were found to be sensitive to vancomycin.

Conclusions:  The results of the study emphasized that isolation of coagulase-negative staphylococci should be viewed with serious concern and accurate species identification and antimicrobial susceptibility testing should be performed in all cases.



Download data is not yet available.

Author Biographies

A Nazir, Government Medical College, Srinagar

Department of Microbiology

D Kakru, SKIMS, Srinagar

Department of Microbiology




How to Cite

Nazir, A., Shah, A., Kakru, D., & Kadri, S. M. (2014). Identification and Antimicrobial Susceptibility Pattern of Clinically Significant Coagulase-negative Staphylococci. Nepal Journal of Obstetrics and Gynaecology, 9(2), 73–78. Retrieved from



Brief Communication