This is a PDF file of a peer-reviewed paper that has been accepted for publication. Although unedited, the content has been subjected to preliminary formatting. Nature is providing this early version of the typeset paper as a service to our authors and readers. The text and figures will undergo copyediting and a proof review before the paper is published in its final form. Please note that during the production process errors may be discovered which could affect the content, and all legal disclaimers apply.

Low-resource settings are disproportionately burdened by infectious diseases and antimicrobial resistance. Good quality clinical bacteriology through a well functioning reference laboratory network is necessary for effective resistance control, but low-resource settings face infrastructural, technical, and behavioural challenges in the implementation of clinical bacteriology. In this Personal View, we explore what constitutes successful implementation of clinical bacteriology in low-resource settings and describe a framework for implementation that is suitable for general referral hospitals in low-income and middle-income countries with a moderate infrastructure. Most microbiological techniques and equipment are not developed for the specific needs of such settings. Pending the arrival of a new generation diagnostics for these settings, we suggest focus on improving, adapting, and implementing conventional, culture-based techniques. Priorities in low-resource settings include harmonised, quality assured, and tropicalised equipment, consumables, and techniques, and rationalised bacterial identification and testing for antimicrobial resistance. Diagnostics should be integrated into clinical care and patient management; clinically relevant specimens must be appropriately selected and prioritised. Open-access training materials and information management tools should be developed. Also important is the need for onsite validation and field adoption of diagnostics in low-resource settings, with considerable shortening of the time between development and implementation of diagnostics. We argue that the implementation of clinical bacteriology in low-resource settings improves patient management, provides valuable surveillance for local antibiotic treatment guidelines and national policies, and supports containment of antimicrobial resistance and the prevention and control of hospital-acquired infections.

Abstract. Antimicrobial resistance (AMR) is a serious public health threat in both developed and developing countries. Many developing countries, including Rwanda, lack adequate surveillance systems, and therefore, the prevalence of AMR is not well-known. We conducted a prospective observational study to assess the prevalence of AMR among common bacterial isolates from clinical specimens obtained from patients on the medical wards of Kigali University Teaching Hospital (KUTH). We evaluated the antibiotic sensitivity patterns of bacterial pathogens cultured from urine, blood, sputum, and wound swab specimens obtained over a 6-month period (July 1 to December 30, 2013). There were 154 positive cultures from specimens obtained from 141 unique patients over the study period. Urine, blood, wound swab, and sputum cultures comprised 55.2%, 25.3%, 16.2%, and 3.3% of the total specimens evaluated; 31.4% and 58.7% of Escherichia coli and Klebsiella isolates, respectively, were resistant to at least one of the third generation cephalosporins. Eight percent of E. coli isolates were resistant to imipenem; 82% and 6% of Staphylococcus aureus strains were oxacillin-and vancomycin-resistant respectively. Antimicrobial resistance rates are high in Rwanda and pose a serious therapeutic challenge to the management of common infections.

No abstract