4.5 Article

Success rates of MRSA decolonization and factors associated with failure

Journal

Publisher

BMC
DOI: 10.1186/s13756-022-01177-w

Keywords

Colonization; Decolonization; MRSA; Treatment success

Ask authors/readers for more resources

This study evaluated the success rate of MRSA decolonization and identified contributing factors to treatment success and failure. Patients with refugee status and children treated at the pediatric clinic were found to have a higher risk of MRSA decolonization treatment failure.
Background We evaluated the success rate of MRSA decolonization directly after treatment and after one year in patients who were treated at the outpatient MRSA clinic of a large university medical centre to identify potential contributing factors to treatment success and failure. Methods Data from November 1, 2013 to August 1, 2020 were used. Only patients who had undergone complete MRSA decolonization were included. Risk factors for MRSA treatment failure were identified using a multivariable logistic regression model. Results In total, 127 MRSA carriers were included: 7 had uncomplicated carriage, 91 had complicated carriage, and 29 patients had complicated carriage in combination with an infection. In complicated carriers and complicated carriers with an infection final treatment was successful in 75.0%. Risk factors for initial treatment failure included having one or more comorbidities and not testing the household members. Risk factors for final treatment failure were living in a refugee centre, being of younger age (0-17 years), and having one or more comorbidities. Conclusions The results of this study indicate that patients with a refugee status and children treated at the paediatric clinic have a higher risk of MRSA decolonisation treatment failure. For this reason, it might be useful to revise decolonization strategies for these subgroups and to refer these patients to specialized outpatient clinics in order to achieve higher treatment success rates.

Authors

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

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.5
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available