4.5 Article

Comparison of air samples, nasal swabs, ear-skin swabs and environmental dust samples for detection of methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA) in pig herds

期刊

EPIDEMIOLOGY AND INFECTION
卷 142, 期 8, 页码 1727-1736

出版社

CAMBRIDGE UNIV PRESS
DOI: 10.1017/S095026881300280X

关键词

Air sampling; diagnostic; methodology; mecA; spa; swine

资金

  1. Danish Ministry of Food, Agriculture and Fisheries [3304-NIFA-11-0561, 3304-FVFP-09-F-002-1]
  2. Danish Veterinary and Food Administration 'centrally coordinated projects'

向作者/读者索取更多资源

To identify a cost-effective and practical method for detection of methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA) in pig herds, the relative sensitivity of four sample types: nasal swabs, ear-skin (skin behind the ears) swabs, environmental dust swabs and air was compared. Moreover, dependency of sensitivity on within-herd prevalence was estimated. spa-typing was applied in order to study strain diversity. The sensitivity of one air sample was equal to the sensitivity of ten pools of five nasal swabs and relatively independent of within-herd prevalence [ predicted to be nearly perfect (99%) for within-herd prevalence >= 25%]. The results indicate that taking swabs of skin behind the ears (ten pools of five) was even more sensitive than taking nasal swabs (ten pools of five) at the herd level and detected significantly more positive samples. spa types t011, t034 and t4208 were observed. In conclusion, MRSA detection by air sampling is easy to perform, reduces costs and analytical time compared to existing methods, and is recommended for initial testing of herds. Ear-skin swab sampling may be more sensitive for MRSA detection than air sampling or nasal swab sampling.

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

4.5
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