Review Reports

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

This is an excellent paper, self-reflective and highly critical. Not much I can add, no mention of Staph, but that aside. The structure and analysis are fully comprehensive. The use of standardised methods (e.g., Vitek Compact 2, CLSI guidelines) enhances the reliability and reproducibility of the findings.

Clear and consistent usage of heat maps and tables, easy to read. The manuscript offers a detailed characterisation of key pathogens such as Pseudomonas aeruginosa, E. coli, A. baumannii, and K. pneumoniae. The integration of: ESBL, MIC and MDR/XDR

The only grammar issue is line 10, which should read: Failure of wounds to heal can be due to mixed infections, with a huge impact on global healthcare finances.

Overall: This is a well-executed study that advances our understanding of antimicrobial resistance in wound infections

Author Response

The author thanks the reviewer for all the recommendations. Kindly see the attached with responses to the recommendations

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 2 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

In this manuscript, the distribution characteristics of Gram-negative bacteria in wound infections and the evolution of their antimicrobial resistance were investigated. Based on clinical isolates collected from a single healthcare facility between 2014 and 2019, the major pathogenic bacterial species, their resistance phenotypes, and the temporal trends of these resistance patterns were systematically analyzed. This work holds significant implications for clinical surveillance and public health. However, prior to being recommended for acceptance, the following revisions should be considered:

 

1. It is suggested that the number of keywords be increased to five.

 

2. The causes of antimicrobial resistance may be associated with biofilm. Therefore, it is recommended that relevant biofilm studies be incorporated.

 

3. It is suggested that scanning electron microscopy be employed to observe whether morphological changes in bacteria have occurred across different years.

 

4. Currently, numerous nanoformulations, particularly hydrogel dressings, have been used for the treatment of bacterial wounds. It is recommended that a more thorough discussion be added regarding the therapeutic aspect of bacterial wound infections using nanoformulations.

Author Response

The author thanks the reviewer for the recommendations. Kindly see the attached detailed responses please

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Round 2

Reviewer 2 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

The author has completed the corresponding revisions. The manuscript can be accepted.