Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 209

The DOI matches its Crossref record.

Prevalence of antibiotic-resistant propionibacteria on the skin of acne patients: 10-year surveillance data and snapshot distribution study

Coates, P., Vyakrnam, S., Eady, E.A., Jones, C.E., Cove, J.H., Cunliffe, W.J.·2002·British Journal of Dermatology

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Cutaneous propionibacteria are implicated in acne pathogenesis, although their exact role in the genesis of inflammation is still poorly understood. Agents, including antibiotics, that reduce the numbers of propionibacteria on skin are therapeutic. Resistance in the target organism is a well-recognized consequence of antibiotic therapy for acne but formal prevalence and distribution data are lacking. OBJECTIVES: To monitor the prevalence of skin colonization by antibiotic-resistant propionibacteria in acne patients attending the dermatology out-patient clinic at Leeds General Infirmary over a 10-year period beginning in 1991, and to examine the distribution of resistant strains on acne-prone skin and in the nares. METHODS: Propionibacterial samples were obtained from the skin surface of the worst affected site (usually the face) of 4274 acne patients using a moistened swab. The swab was used to inoculate agar plates with and without selective antibiotics. After anaerobic incubation at 37 degrees C for 7 days, the amount of growth in the presence of each antibiotic was scored on a scale from 0 to 5+. A small number of patients (72) were selected for more detailed quantitative sampling at six different sites to examine the distribution of resistant propionibacteria on acne-prone skin and in the anterior nares. RESULTS: The proportion of patients carrying strains resistant to one or more commonly used antiacne antibiotics rose steadily from 34.5% in 1991 to a peak of 64% in 1997. The prevalence dropped to 50.5% during 1999 and then rose again to 55.5% in 2000. Resistance to erythromycin was the most common and the majority of erythromycin-resistant strains were cross-resistant to clindamycin. Resistance to tetracyclines was less common in all years and with little increase over time. The more detailed quantitative study in 72 patients showed that population densities of resistant propionibacteria varied considerably between sites and between individuals. Almost invariably, patients were colonized with resistant strains at multiple sites, including the nares. CONCLUSIONS: Skin colonization with antibiotic-resistant propionibacteria is much more common now than a decade ago. Resistant propionibacteria are widely distributed on acne-prone skin and in the nares. This suggests that they will be very difficult to eradicate using existing therapeutic regimens, especially from the nasal reservoir.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1046/j.1365-2133.2002.04690.x

Cites

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cited by

See all 209

Metadata

Authors
Coates, P., Vyakrnam, S., Eady, E. A., Jones, C. E., Cove, J. H., & Cunliffe, W. J.
Venue
British Journal of Dermatology
Published
2002-05
Volume
146
Issue
5
Pages
840-848
ISSN
  • 0007-0963 (ISSN-L)
  • 1365-2133
OpenAlex
W2025802417
Cited by
209
References
0
FWCI
11.27
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Prevalence of antibiotic-resistant propionibacteria on the skin of acne patients: 10-year surveillance data and snapshot distribution study. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1046/j.1365-2133.2002.04690.x
The paper
Coates, P., Vyakrnam, S., Eady, E. A., Jones, C. E., Cove, J. H., & Cunliffe, W. J. (2002). Prevalence of antibiotic-resistant propionibacteria on the skin of acne patients: 10-year surveillance data and snapshot distribution study. British Journal of Dermatology. https://doi.org/10.1046/j.1365-2133.2002.04690.x

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.