COMPARATIVE STUDY
JOURNAL ARTICLE
RESEARCH SUPPORT, N.I.H., EXTRAMURAL
Add like
Add dislike
Add to saved papers

Community-associated methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus prevalence: how common is it? A methodological comparison of prevalence ascertainment.

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.

Full text links

We have located links that may give you full text access.
Can't access the paper?
Try logging in through your university/institutional subscription. For a smoother one-click institutional access experience, please use our mobile app.

For the best experience, use the Read mobile app

Group 7SearchHeart failure treatmentPapersTopicsCollectionsEffects of Sodium-Glucose Cotransporter 2 Inhibitors for the Treatment of Patients With Heart Failure Importance: Only 1 class of glucose-lowering agents-sodium-glucose cotransporter 2 (SGLT2) inhibitors-has been reported to decrease the risk of cardiovascular events primarily by reducingSeptember 1, 2017: JAMA CardiologyAssociations of albuminuria in patients with chronic heart failure: findings in the ALiskiren Observation of heart Failure Treatment study.CONCLUSIONS: Increased UACR is common in patients with heart failure, including non-diabetics. Urinary albumin creatininineJul, 2011: European Journal of Heart FailureRandomized Controlled TrialEffects of Liraglutide on Clinical Stability Among Patients With Advanced Heart Failure and Reduced Ejection Fraction: A Randomized Clinical Trial.Review

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