ArticleJournal of clinical microbiology2010
Detection of methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA) in specimens from various body sites: performance characteristics of the BD GeneOhm MRSA assay, the Xpert MRSA assay, and broth-enriched culture in an area with a low prevalence of MRSA infections.
Article in Journal of clinical microbiology, 2010. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 24 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled 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.
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.
Who cites it
24 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 65 citations in OpenAlex.
- Transmission rates, screening methods and costs of MRSA--a systematic literature review related to the prevalence in Germany.European journal of clinical microbiology & infectious diseases : official publication of the European Society of Clinical Microbiology · 2012Pooled it
- Clinical effectiveness of rapid tests for methicillin resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA) in hospitalized patients: a systematic review.BMC infectious diseases · 2011Pooled it
- Discontinuation of contact precautions for methicillin-resistant staphylococcus aureus: a randomized controlled trial comparing passive and active screening with culture and polymerase chain reaction.Clinical infectious diseases : an official publication of the Infectious Diseases Society of America · 2013Trial
- Clinical Relevance of Xpert MRSA/SA in Guiding Therapeutic Decisions for Staphylococcal Infections: A Diagnostic Test Accuracy Analysis.Infectious diseases and therapy · 2022Article
- Accurate Detection of Methicillin-Resistant Staphylococcus aureus in Mixtures by Use of Single-Bacterium Duplex Droplet Digital PCR.Journal of clinical microbiology · 2017Article
- Evaluation of sampling locations in pregnant women and newborns for the detection of colonisation with antibiotic-resistant bacteria.European journal of clinical microbiology & infectious diseases : official publication of the European Society of Clinical Microbiology · 2017Article
- Prevalence and correlates of MRSA and MSSA nasal carriage at a Ugandan regional referral hospital.The Journal of antimicrobial chemotherapy · 2017Article
- Certified reference materials for testing of the presence/absence of Staphylococcus aureus enterotoxin A (SEA) in cheese.Analytical and bioanalytical chemistry · 2016Article
- Impact of rapid screening for discontinuation of methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus contact precautions.American journal of infection control · 2016Article
- Methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus multiple sites surveillance: a systemic review of the literature.Infection and drug resistance · 2016Review
- Evaluation of BD Max StaphSR and BD Max MRSAXT Assays Using ESwab-Collected Specimens.Journal of clinical microbiology · 2015Article
- Simultaneous Identification and Susceptibility Determination to Multiple Antibiotics of Staphylococcus aureus by Bacteriophage Amplification Detection Combined with Mass Spectrometry.Analytical chemistry · 2015Article
- Comparative Evaluation of Two PCR-Based Methods for Detection of Methicillin-Resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA): Xpert MRSA Gen 3 and BD-Max MRSA XT.Journal of clinical microbiology · 2015Article
- Capturing the cloud of diversity reveals complexity and heterogeneity of MRSA carriage, infection and transmission.Nature communications · 2015Article
- Laboratory evaluation of the BD MAX MRSA assay.Journal of clinical microbiology · 2014Article
- Comparison of ESwab with traditional swabs for detection of methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus using two different walk-away commercial real-time PCR methods.Journal of clinical microbiology · 2014Article
- Predictive value of methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA) nasal swab PCR assay for MRSA pneumonia.Antimicrobial agents and chemotherapy · 2014Article
- Comparison of Xpert MRSA/SA Nasal and MRSA/SA ELITe MGB assays for detection of the mecA gene with susceptibility testing methods for determination of methicillin resistance in Staphylococcus aureus isolates.Journal of clinical microbiology · 2013Article
- Analysis of Staphylococcal cassette chromosome mec in BD GeneOhm MRSA assay-negative strains.Antimicrobial agents and chemotherapy · 2013Article
- MRSA screening by the Xpert MRSA PCR assay: pooling samples of the nose, throat, and groin increases the sensitivity of detection without increasing the laboratory costs.European journal of clinical microbiology & infectious diseases : official publication of the European Society of Clinical Microbiology · 2013Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Universal surveillance upon patient admission is important in reducing the transmission of methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA) and associated disease in hospitals. High costs for the health care system in conjunction with MRSA have promoted the development of rapid screening methods to detect MRSA carriers. This study compared two real-time PCR methods, the BD GeneOhm MRSA assay (BDGO) and the Xpert MRSA assay, with broth-enriched culture to define their performance characteristics and rapidity in an area with low MRSA prevalence. In total, 414 swabs from the nose and 389 swabs from the groin from 425 patients were tested. Of those 425 patients, 378 had swabs from both the nose and groin in parallel. Two hundred thirty-one and 194 patients were randomly assigned to the BDGO group and the Xpert MRSA group, respectively. In general, sensitivity, specificity, and negative predictive value (NPV) were high for the BDGO (100%, 98.5%, and 100%, respectively) and the Xpert MRSA (100%, 98.2%, and 100%, respectively), irrespective of whether or not nasal and inguinal specimens were considered alone or combined. In contrast, the positive predictive value (PPV) was lower: before the resolution of discrepant results, the PPVs for nasal and inguinal specimens alone and combined were 87.5%, 86.7%, and 82.4% for the BDGO and 91.7%, 66.7%, and 92.9% for the Xpert MRSA, respectively. After the resolution of discrepant results, PPVs were 93.8%, 93.3% and 94.1% for the BDGO and 91.7%, 88.9% and 92.9% for the Xpert MRSA, respectively. With the BDGO, 4 of 16 carriers were each identified by nasal or inguinal swabs alone, whereas in the Xpert MRSA group, 4 of 13 carriers were exclusively identified by nasal swabs and 2 of 13 were identified by inguinal swabs alone. Both PCR methods showed no significant difference in the number of discrepant results (odds ratio, 0.70 [P = 0.789]), but specimens from wounds and other body sites (axilla, vagina, and throat) produced discrepancies more often than nasal and groin specimens (odds ratios, 4.724 [P = 0.058] and 12.163 [P < 0.001], respectively). The facts that no false-negative PCR results were detected and increased PPVs were found after the resolution of discrepant results point to PCR as the actual gold standard. Since both sensitivity and NPV were exceptionally high for PCR, backup cultures may, therefore, be unnecessary in an area with low prevalence and with a preemptive isolation strategy but may still be useful for PCR-positive specimens because of the lower PPV for both methods and the possibility of susceptibility testing. The median time for analysis, including extraction, hands-on time, and actual PCR was 2 h 20 min for the Xpert MRSA versus 5 h 40 min for the BDGO. Concerning reporting time, including administration and specimen collection, the Xpert MRSA was faster than the BDGO (7 h 50 min versus 17 h).
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.