We have located links that may give you full text access.
COMPARATIVE STUDY
JOURNAL ARTICLE
RESEARCH SUPPORT, N.I.H., EXTRAMURAL
Community-associated methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus prevalence: how common is it? A methodological comparison of prevalence ascertainment.
American Journal of Infection Control 2007 August
BACKGROUND: Community-associated methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (CA-MRSA) infections are becoming increasingly prevalent. There is geographic variation in their reported prevalence across the United States; however, studies reporting on CA-MRSA prevalence also demonstrate great variability in their case-finding methodology. We conducted a study to see how three different methods to ascertain CA-MRSA prevalence would lead to different estimates.
METHODS: Different methods were used to identify cases of CA-MRSA colonization and/or infection in New York City. Method 1: retrospective review of clinical and surveillance cultures identified through a hospital computer database. Method 2: prospective collection of surveillance cultures in the same hospital's emergency department. Method 3: prospective collection of surveillance cultures in a community setting.
RESULTS: Differing values for CA-MRSA prevalence resulted depending on the method and denominator used. All nares cultures as the denominator led to prevalence estimates of 0.3%-0.6%; all S. aureus as the denominator led to rates of 1.2%-5%; all MRSA as the denominator led to estimates of 5.5%-50%.
CONCLUSIONS: A comparison of three methods revealed that variability in case-finding methodologies can lead to different prevalence estimates. Key factors to consider when comparing CA-MRSA rates include the definition of CA-MRSA, choice of denominator, and method and setting of sample collection.
METHODS: Different methods were used to identify cases of CA-MRSA colonization and/or infection in New York City. Method 1: retrospective review of clinical and surveillance cultures identified through a hospital computer database. Method 2: prospective collection of surveillance cultures in the same hospital's emergency department. Method 3: prospective collection of surveillance cultures in a community setting.
RESULTS: Differing values for CA-MRSA prevalence resulted depending on the method and denominator used. All nares cultures as the denominator led to prevalence estimates of 0.3%-0.6%; all S. aureus as the denominator led to rates of 1.2%-5%; all MRSA as the denominator led to estimates of 5.5%-50%.
CONCLUSIONS: A comparison of three methods revealed that variability in case-finding methodologies can lead to different prevalence estimates. Key factors to consider when comparing CA-MRSA rates include the definition of CA-MRSA, choice of denominator, and method and setting of sample collection.
Full text links
Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university
For the best experience, use the Read mobile app
Read by QxMD is copyright © 2021 QxMD Software Inc. All rights reserved. By using this service, you agree to our terms of use and privacy policy.
You can now claim free CME credits for this literature searchClaim now
Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university
For the best experience, use the Read mobile app