4.7 Article

Replacement of healthcare-associated MRSA by community-associated MRSA in Queensland: Confirmation by genotyping

期刊

JOURNAL OF INFECTION
卷 67, 期 5, 页码 439-447

出版社

W B SAUNDERS CO LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.jinf.2013.07.020

关键词

Staphylococcus aureus; MRSA; Community-associated; Healthcare-associated; Epidemiology; Genotyping; Australia

资金

  1. Scientific, Educational and Research Trust Fund of Pathology Queensland

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Objective: To describe the changing prevalence of healthcare-and communityassociated MRSA. Methods: Susceptibility phenotypes of MRSA were observed from 2000 to 2012 using routine susceptibility data. Phenotypic definitions of major clones were validated by genotyping isolates from a nested period prevalence survey in 2011. Results: The predominant healthcare-associated (AUS-2/3 like) MRSA phenotype decreased from 42 to 14 isolates per million occasions of service in outpatients (P < 0.0001) and from 650 to 75 isolates per million accrued patient days in inpatients (P 0.0005), while the respective rates of the healthcare-related EMRSA-15 like phenotype increased from 1 to 19 in outpatients (P < 0.0001) and from 11 to 83 in inpatients (P < 0.0001) and those of the communityassociated MRSA phenotype increased from 17 to 296 in outpatients (P < 0.0001) and from 71 to 486 in inpatients (P < 0.0001). When compared with single nucleotide polymorphism genotyping the AUS-2/3 like phenotype had a sensitivity and positive predictive value (PPV) for CC239 of 1 and 0.791 respectively, while the EMRSA-15 like phenotype had a sensitivity and PPV for CC22 of 0.903 and 0.774. PVL-positive CA-MRSA, predominantly ST93 and CC30, accounted for 60.8% of MRSA, while PVL-negative CA-MRSA, mainly CC5 and CC1, accounted for 21.4%. Conclusions: The initially dominant healthcare-associated MRSA clone has been progressively replaced, mainly by four community-associated lineages. CrownCopyright (C) 2013 Published by Elsevier Ltd on behalf of The British Infection Association. All rights reserved.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.7
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据