4.4 Article

Rates of carriage of methicillin-resistant and methicillin-susceptible Staphylococcus aureus in an outpatient population

期刊

INFECTION CONTROL AND HOSPITAL EPIDEMIOLOGY
卷 24, 期 6, 页码 439-444

出版社

SLACK INC
DOI: 10.1086/502229

关键词

-

向作者/读者索取更多资源

OBJECTIVES: To assess the prevalence of and the clinical features associated with asymptomatic Staphylococcus aureus colonization in a healthy outpatient population, and to compare the characteristics of colonizing methicillin-resistant S. aureus (MRSA) strains with those of strains causing infection in our community and hospital. SETTING: Outpatient military clinics. METHODS: Specimens were obtained from the nares, pharynx, and axillae of 404 outpatients, and a questionnaire was administered to obtain demographic and risk factor information. MRSA strains were typed by pulsed-field gel electrophoresis (PFGE) and evaluated for antibiotic susceptibility. Antibiograms of study MRSA strains were compared with those of MRSA strains causing clinical illness during the same time period. RESULTS: Methicillin-susceptible S. aureus (MSSA) colonization was present in 153 (38%) of the 404 asymptomatic out-patients, and MRSA colonization was present in 8 (2%). Detection of colonization was highest from the nares. No clinical risk factor was significantly associated with MRSA colonization; however, a tendency was noted for MRSA to be more common in men and in those who were older or who had been recently hospitalized. All colonizing MRSA strains had unique patterns on PFGE. In contrast to strains responsible for hospital infections, most colonizing isolates of MRSA were susceptible to oral antibiotics. CONCLUSIONS: MRSA and MSSA colonization is common in our outpatient population. Colonization is best detected by nares cultures and most carriers of MRSA are without apparent predisposing risk factors for acquisition. Colonizing isolates of MRSA are heterogeneous and, unlike nosocomial isolates, often retain susceptibility to other non-beta-lactam antibiotics.

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

4.4
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