Cross-sectional study finds 7.5% prevalence of group A streptococcus pharyngitis in children, indicating antibiotic susceptibility to penicillin.
Background Group A β‐haemolytic Streptococcus, also known as Streptococcus pyogenes , commonly causes childhood pharyngitis and can lead to severe complications like acute rheumatic fever and rheumatic heart disease. Timely penicillin treatment is vital in preventing these issues. However, data on the prevalence of Group A β‐haemolytic Streptococcus pharyngitis in Botswana are limited, and there is no national surveillance for Group A β‐haemolytic Streptococcus infections. Objectives This study aimed to determine the prevalence of Group A β‐haemolytic Streptococcus pharyngitis among children aged 8 and 18 years presenting with sore throats in selected Gaborone clinics and assess the antibiotic sensitivity patterns of Group A β‐haemolytic Streptococcus isolates. Methods A cross‐sectional study was conducted among children aged 8–18 years suspected of pharyngitis at Nkoyaphiri and Mafitlhakgosi clinics in Gaborone. Participants were selected based on a modified Centor score of 2 or higher. Throat swabs were processed for culture, identification, and antibiotic sensitivity testing. Results The prevalence of Group A β‐haemolytic Streptococcus pharyngitis was 7.5% (24/322; 95% CI: 0.50%–0.11%). The mean age of the participants was approximately 12 years. Group A β‐haemolytic Streptococcus isolates remained fully susceptible to penicillin, the treatment of choice, but concerns about macrolide resistance were observed in some strains. Conclusions Group A streptococcal pharyngitis was found in 7.5% of children with sore throats in Gaborone, Botswana. All Group A β‐haemolytic Streptococcus strains were susceptible to penicillin, affirming its continued use as the preferred treatment. These results emphasize the need for accurate diagnosis and targeted antibiotic therapy to prevent complications like acute rheumatic fever and rheumatic heart disease.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Mwita et al. (2025) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: