Evidence map›Paper›PMID 19675746›Full record

ReviewGerman medical science : GMS e-journal2009

Rapid detection of methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus directly from clinical samples: methods, effectiveness and cost considerations.

Enno Stürenburg

Open access · greenAbstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in German medical science : GMS e-journal, 2009. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 23 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
23citing papers in PubMed
2.1field-weighted citation impact, top 15% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

23 citing papers in PubMed, 59 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Methicillin-ResistantInfectious diseases · 2021
    Article
  6. Characteristics ofMicrobiology insights · 2020
    Article
  7. Article
  8. Prediction of methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus bloodstream infection: do we need rapid diagnostic tests?European journal of clinical microbiology & infectious diseases : official publication of the European Society of Clinical Microbiology · 2019
    Article
  9. Review
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Comparative evaluation of two fully-automated real-time PCR methods for MRSA admission screening in a tertiary-care hospital.European journal of clinical microbiology & infectious diseases : official publication of the European Society of Clinical Microbiology · 2016
    Article
  13. [Molecular diagnosis of methicillin-resistent Staphylococcus aureus: Methods and efficacy].Der Hautarzt; Zeitschrift fur Dermatologie, Venerologie, und verwandte Gebiete · 2016
    Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. [Pitfalls in determining resistance].Medizinische Klinik, Intensivmedizin und Notfallmedizin · 2014
    Review
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

1 author at 1 institution in 1 country.

Enno StürenburgLADR GmbH, MVZ Dr. Kramer & Colleagues, Geesthacht, Germany. stuerenburg@ladr.de
Medizinisches Versorgungszentrum Prof. Mathey, Prof. Schofer · DE

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA) isolates is a serious public health problem whose ever-increasing rate is commensurate with the pressure it is exerting on the healthcare system. At present, more than 20% of clinical S. aureus isolates in German hospitals are methicillin resistant. Strategies from low-prevalence countries show that this development is not necessarily inevitable. In the Scandinavian countries and the Netherlands, thanks to a rigorous prevention programme, MRSA prevalence has been kept at an acceptably low level (<1-3%). Central to these 'search and destroy' control strategies is an admission screening using several MRSA swabs taken from mucocutaneous colonisation sites of high-risk patients ('MRSA surveillance').It has also been reported that the speed with which MRSA carriage is detected has an important role to play, as it is a key component of any effective strategy to prevent the pathogen from spreading. Since MRSA culturing involves a 2-3 day delay before the final results are available, rapid detection techniques (commonly referred to as 'MRSA rapid tests') using PCR methods and, most recently, rapid culturing methods have been developed. The implementation of rapid tests reduces the time of detection of MRSA carriers from 48-72 to 2-5 h. Clinical evaluation data have shown that MRSA can thus be detected with very high sensitivity. Specificity however is sometimes impaired due to false-positive PCR signals occurring in mixed flora specimens. In order to rule out any false-positive PCR results, a culture screen must always be carried out simultaneously. The data provide preliminary evidence that a PCR assay can reduce nosocomial MRSA transmission in high-risk patients or high-risk areas, whereas an approach that screens all patients admitted to the hospital is probably not effective. Information concerning the cost-effectiveness of rapid MRSA tests is still sparse and thus the issue remains debated.

Indexed as

Methicillin ResistanceCost-Benefit AnalysisDNA, BacterialHumansMethicillin-Resistant Staphylococcus aureusMicrobial Sensitivity TestsPolymerase Chain ReactionStaphylococcal InfectionsDNA, BacterialmecAmethicillin resistancemolecular detectionMRSAnucPBP-2aPCRrapid culturerapid testS. aureusSCCmec-orfXsingle-locus PCR

Identifiers

PMID19675746
PMCPMC2716550
OpenAlexW1570762967

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.