Landlocked developing countries (LLDCs) vs Laos: Percentage of bloodstream infection due … methicillin-resistant

Landlocked developing countries (LLDCs)
53.8%
in 2022
Laos
55.9%
in 2022
Landlocked developing countries (LLDCs) rank
4th
Laos rank
6th

Percentage of bloodstream infection due … methicillin-resistant over time

  • Landlocked developing countries (LLDCs)
  • Laos
020406080201620192022

How they compare

Laos currently reports 55.9% against 53.8% in Landlocked developing countries (LLDCs), a difference of 2.1%.

The two have swapped places 4 times across 6 shared years of data; in 2017 it was Laos ahead.

Landlocked developing countries (LLDCs) ranks 4th and Laos ranks 6th of 15 groups.

Landlocked developing countries (LLDCs) has averaged higher in every one of the 2 decades both report.

Head to head by decade

Decade Landlocked developing countries (LLDCs) Laos Difference Ahead
2010s 17.2% 9.0% 8.2% Landlocked developing countries (LLDCs)
2020s 62.2% 45.3% 17.0% Landlocked developing countries (LLDCs)

Averages of every year both report within each decade.

Frequently asked questions

Which has higher percentage of bloodstream infection due to methicillin-resistant, Landlocked developing countries (LLDCs) or Laos?
Laos, at 55.9% against 53.8% in Landlocked developing countries (LLDCs) as of 2022.
What is the difference in percentage of bloodstream infection due to methicillin-resistant between Landlocked developing countries (LLDCs) and Laos?
2.1%, with Laos ahead.
How many years of comparable data are there for Landlocked developing countries (LLDCs) and Laos?
6 years are reported by both, from 2017 to 2022.
How do Landlocked developing countries (LLDCs) and Laos rank globally for percentage of bloodstream infection due to methicillin-resistant?
Landlocked developing countries (LLDCs) ranks 4th and Laos ranks 6th of 15 groups.
Where does this data come from?
United Nations Statistics Division, SDG Global Database, published as Percentage of bloodstream infection due to methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA) among patients seeking care and whose blood sample is taken and tested (%). Statizoid refreshes it automatically from the source and publishes the full history for both places.

Individual pages

Share, cite or embed this page

Cite this page

Landlocked developing countries (LLDCs) vs Laos: Percentage of bloodstream infection due to methicillin-resistant. Statizoid, drawing on United Nations Statistics Division, SDG Global Database. Retrieved 08 November 2026, from https://development-goals.statizoid.com/compare/percentage-of-bloodstream-infection-due-to-methicillin-resistant-staphylococcus-aureus/landlocked-developing-countries-lldcs/lao-pdr/

Embed or link this data

Paste this into a page to link back to these figures. The data itself is free to reuse under UN SDG Global Database (open, attribution requested); please keep the attribution.

<a href="https://development-goals.statizoid.com/compare/percentage-of-bloodstream-infection-due-to-methicillin-resistant-staphylococcus-aureus/landlocked-developing-countries-lldcs/lao-pdr/">Landlocked developing countries (LLDCs) vs Laos: Percentage of bloodstream infection due to methicillin-resistant</a> — Statizoid

About this data

Indicator
Percentage of bloodstream infection due to methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA) among patients seeking care and whose blood sample is taken and tested (%)
Unit
%
Source
United Nations Statistics Division, SDG Global Database
Licence
UN SDG Global Database (open, attribution requested)
Coverage
65 places, 396 data points, 2016–2022
Last refreshed