ArticleBioMed research international2014
Performance of quantification of Modified Hodge Test: an evaluation with Klebsiella pneumoniae carbapenemase-producing Enterobacteriaceae isolates.
Article in BioMed research international, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers.
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
6 citing papers in PubMed.
- Analysis of carbapenemases genes of carbapenem-resistantIranian journal of microbiology · 2022Article
- Phenotypic and genotypic characterization of carbapenem-resistantAntimicrobial resistance and infection control · 2019Article
- Phenotypic Tests for the Detection of β-Lactamase-Producing Enterobacteriaceae Isolated from Different Environments.Current microbiology · 2016Article
- Boronic acid disk diffusion for the phenotypic detection of polymerase chain reaction-confirmed, carbapenem-resistant, gram-negative bacilli isolates.BMC microbiology · 2016Article
- Triton Hodge Test: Improved Protocol for Modified Hodge Test for Enhanced Detection of NDM and Other Carbapenemase Producers.Journal of clinical microbiology · 2016Article
- Carbapenem-Resistant Bacteria Recovered from Faeces of Dairy Cattle in the High Plains Region of the USA.PloS one · 2016Article
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.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Modified Hodge Test (MHT) has been suggested as screening tests for carbapenemases, but concerns regarding its difficult interpretation and common false-positive results obtained in the presence of other β -lactamases have been noted. This study aimed to quantify the enhanced growth formed by the indicator strain and thus evaluate the performance of a quantitative interpretation of MHT for KPC screening. MHT was performed in 50 KPC-producing isolates and 334 non-carbapenemase-producing isolates, using ertapenem (ETP) and meropenem (MEM) as substrates. The size of enhanced growth of indicator strain was measured for each isolate tested and for the positive control used, and a ratio was calculated. Our results revealed 17 different ETP and MEM ratios, with distinct sensitivity (SN) and specificity (SP). Higher SN combined to higher SP was achieved when ETP and MEM ratios were 0.45, with a SN value of 96% for both substrates and SP values of 99.4% and 100% for ETP and MEM, respectively. The quantification with both substrates increased SP of the test for KPC detection. Considering that MHT is the unique phenotypic test that is referred to by CLSI, a more accurate approach for its interpretation could be applied to make it a more useful tool.
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.