A modified 1-min iodometric paper strip test for penicillinase activity was developed for detection of beta-lactamase-producing isolates of Haemophilus influenzae and Neisseria gonorrhoeae. The test is simple to perform and uses reagent-impregnated strips that may be stored for 1 year or more prior to use.

The in vitro activities of moxalactam (LY127935 [6059S]) and cefotaxime were compared with those of cefoxitin, cefamandole, cefuroxime, carbenicillin, and penicillin by agar dilution susceptibility testing of a variety of anaerobic bacteria. Moxalactam proved to be the most active agent tested against Bacteroides fragilis and other species of the B. fragilis group. Moxalactam and cefotaxime showed activity similar to the other drugs against the remaining species of Bacteroides, Fusobacterium, Actinomyces, Propionibacterium, and Veillonella. Penicillin was the most effective drug tested against most species of Clostridium, the anaerobic gram-positive cocci, and Eubacterium lentum.

The in vitro activities of two new beta-lactam antibiotics, moxalactam disodium (LY 127935) and cefotaxime (HR-756), were compared with cefoxitin, cefamandole, cefuroxime, cephalothin, and, in some instances, carbenicillin, gentamicin, and amikacin against aerobic gram-negative bacilli. Test isolates included normally cephalosporin-resistant members of the Enterobacteriaceae and Pseudomonas spp. and a variety of nonfermentative or oxidase-positive bacteria. Both moxalactam and cefotaxime demonstrated impressive in vitro activities against both groups of microorganisms. The two new drugs were clearly more active than any of the other beta-lactam antibiotics against species of Escherichia, Citrobacter, Enterobacter, Klebsiella, Proteus, Providencia, Pseudomonas, and Serratia. An additive or synergistic effect could also be demonstrated with the majority of Pseudomonas and Serratia isolates when either moxalactam or defotaxime was combined with amikacin.

The Vitek AMS automated instrument method for identification of Enterobacteriaceae was compared with two rapid manual methods intended for the same purpose, the Micro ID System and the API 20E Same-Day procedure, on a series of 400 consecutive fresh clinical isolates. Results were compared with identifications obtained using the API 20E System with overnight incubation and supplemental tube biochemicals (when needed). Both the final (8-hour) and a manually requested, presumptive 5-hour result from the AMS were compared with the 4-hour results provided by the Micro ID and the 5-hour results provided by the API. The Micro ID system proved to be the most rapid and accurate of the three test systems by correctly identifying 96.8% (387/400) of isolates. The API 20E using 5-hour readings identified 90.7% (363/400) of isolates, although 96.8% (387/400) could be identified if supplemental overnight tests were employed to separate profile codes with "good likelihood, but low selectivity." The AMS correctly identified 88.8% (355/400) isolates after 5 hours, and 95.0% (380/400) following 8 hours incubation.