4.7 Article

Reporting antimicrobial susceptibilities and resistance phenotypes in Staphylococcus spp.: a nationwide proficiency study

Journal

JOURNAL OF ANTIMICROBIAL CHEMOTHERAPY
Volume 76, Issue 5, Pages 1187-1196

Publisher

OXFORD UNIV PRESS
DOI: 10.1093/jac/dkab017

Keywords

-

Funding

  1. Instituto de Salud Carlos III, Subdireccion General de Redes y Centros de Investigacion Cooperativa, Ministerio de Economia y Competitividad
  2. Spanish Network for Research in Infectious Diseases [REIPI RD 16/0016]
  3. European Development Regional Fund (ERDF)
  4. Programa integral de prevencion, control de las infecciones relacionadas con la asistencia sanitaria y uso apropiado de los antimicrobianos (PIRASOA
  5. Junta de Andalucia, Consejeria de Salud, Junta de Andalucia)

Ask authors/readers for more resources

The study evaluated the proficiency of microbiology laboratories in Spain in antimicrobial susceptibility testing of Staphylococcus spp. It found discrepancies and errors, particularly with gradient diffusion, EUCAST breakpoints, and certain antimicrobials, highlighting the need for improvement.
Objectives: To evaluate the proficiency of microbiology laboratories in Spain in antimicrobial susceptibility testing (AST) of Staphylococcus spp. Materials and methods: Eight Staphylococcus spp. with different resistance mechanisms were selected: six Staphylococcus aureus (CC-01/mecA, CC-02/mecC, CC-03/BORSA, CC-04/MLSBi, CC-06/blaZ and CC-07/linezolid resistant, cfr); one Staphylococcus epidermidis (CC-05/linezolid resistant, 23S rRNA mutation); and one Staphylococcus capitis (CC-08/daptomycin non-susceptible). Fifty-one laboratories were asked to report: (i) AST system used; (ii) antimicrobial MICs; (iii) breakpoints used (CLSI or EUCAST); and (iv) clinical category. Minor, major and very major errors (mEs, MEs and VMEs, respectively) were determined. Results: The greatest MIC discrepancies found were: (i) by AST method: 19.4% (gradient diffusion); (ii) by antimicrobial agent: daptomycin (21.3%) and oxacillin (20.6%); and (iii) by isolate: CC-07/cfr (48.0%). The greatest error rates were: (i) by AST method: gradient diffusion (4.3% and 5.1% VMEs, using EUCAST and CLSI, respectively); (ii) by breakpoint: 3.8% EUCAST and 2.3% CLSI; (iii) by error type: mEs (0.8% EUCAST and 1.0% CLSI), MEs (1.8% EUCAST and 0.7% CLSI) and VMEs (1.2% EUCAST and 0.6% CLSI); (iii) by antimicrobial agent: VMEs (4.7% linezolid and 4.3% oxacillin using EUCAST); MEs (14.3% fosfomycin, 9.1% tobramycin and 5.7% gentamicin using EUCAST); and mEs (22.6% amikacin using EUCAST). Conclusions: Clinical microbiology laboratories should improve their ability to determine the susceptibility of Staphylococcus spp. to some antimicrobial agents to avoid reporting false-susceptible or false-resistant results. The greatest discrepancies and errors were associated with gradient diffusion, EUCAST breakpoints and some antimicrobials (mEs for aminoglycosides; MEs for fosfomycin, aminoglycosides and oxacillin; and VMEs for linezolid and oxacillin).

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.7
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available