English (United Kingdom)

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/featured_content/oa?rat=en

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/highlighted_journal/

Global: Zendy Plus annual

Presents the access of premium content as premium feature

Premium Content

Presents the keyphrase highlighting as premium feature

Keyphrase Highlighting

Presents the summarisation as premium feature

Summarisation

Insights

Presents the pdf analysis as premium feature

PDF Analysis

Presents the zaia usage as premium feature

ZAIA

Global: Zendy Tools annual

Global: Zendy Free Plan

Global: Zendy Tools monthly

Global: Zendy Plus monthly

Twenty-eight phenotypically separate strains of clinically isolated vancomycin-resistant enterococci have been investigated with two API identification kit systems (20 Strep and Rapid ID 32 Strep) and two BBL Crystal kits (Gram Positive and Rapid Gram Positive). All strains were identified as Enterococcus faecium by a reference laboratory. The Rapid ID 32 kit positively identified 15 of 28 strains (54%), but only two (7%) were identified correctly: 11 were identified as 'doubtful' or 'to genus level' and two gave 'unacceptable' profiles. The API 20 Strep kit identified 27 strains (96%), but only 16 (57%) were identified correctly as E. faecium. The Rapid ID 32 kit erred by either positively misidentifying vancomycin-resistant E. faecium as E. casseliflavus or E. gallinarum, or indicated that this was the most likely identification, while the API 20 Strep kit more commonly produced a misidentification as E. casseliflavus. The Crystal Gram Positive and Rapid Gram Positive kits correctly identified 26 (93%) and 27 (96%) of the strains, respectively.

Identification of clinically isolated vancomycin-resistant enterococci:comparison of API and BBL Crystal systems